slncezgsi: The Sigma is a little surprise to me, but why not. It shows how highly regarded (overhyped maybe?) is lens speed today - in spite of the huge advancement in high ISO performance. But I must give it to Signa that it went to direction other did not dare (or bother).
Pentax must have done something right if they managed to beat Nikon and Canon by such a large margin. But maybe it is that Nikon and Canon users care less ;)
Maybe because many are in the same position as I am: "Want it but can't buy it." In my case, I have big expenses coming up, but even if my finances could allow it, I'd still have to wait as the local stores are always out of the lens in Nikon mount and still not available for Pentax last I checked.
Felix E Klee: To me, the photos in the article on wired.com have a look which I remember seeing in the print edition of National Geographic about twenty years ago. (We stopped subscribing.) What's the secret of this look? Grading? Composition? Are photos with people staged?
Well, it is film. :D
"All the work is shot on film with either 4×5 or 8×10 camera."
kevin_r: So here we have a team of highly intelligent engineers work together, using the latest equipment and techniques in technology to create a very complex piece of equipment - which just so happens falls far short of the capabilities of the eye of the dragonfly.
The eye in the dragonfly is connected to an unbelievable control system which allows it to keep track of parallel flying insects and keep itself perfectly synchronized in order to fool the prey that it is not pursuing it.
So how does the dragonfly get to get it's eyes and control system together, all by the mindless, random machinations of biological mutations?
Me thinks it's a bridge too far. But then, your mileage may vary.
About the tech itself- great stuff! The possibilities for applications are almost endless.
No, the OP is actually making a statement to support his point of view as a creationist. He's not saying "same old same old."
LarryK: Looks like another potentially great, albeit very expensive, camera hamstrung by poor autofocus performance.
The sharpest lens and biggest sensor won't help if the shot's out of focus.
And what kind of street photography would need fast focusing at a distance of 14cm?
Marty4650: What does this poll really mean?
Well... it doesn't mean "I want to buy this camera" because the OM-D got 12 times as many votes as the Canon T4i. And we all know the T4i will sell 20 times as many copies as the OM-D sells.
And it doesn't mean "this camera has the best IQ" because all of the FF cameras on the list will do better, and a few of the APSC cameras will do as well.
And it doesn't mean "this is the most expensive camera" because 7 of the 14 listed cameras cost more.
What I think this poll means is.... that when 15,000 die hard camera enthusiasts are asked "which camera released this year is the most significant" then a slim plurality picked the OM-D. This means that the largest group of them thought the OM-D was the most interesting and most innovative.
And that is quite an accomplishment for Olympus, considering how stiff the competition was in 2012.
This is significant, but it isn't a landslide victory. After all, 77% of them selected "something else."
Well, it refelects what I've seen during my last visits to a major local camera store. I saw the OM-D come out from behind the counter much more often than any other cameras but it didn't reflect the lineup at the cash register, which is sad. People like to go with brands they're familiar with.
onlooker: "The bad news, according to the guys at iFixit is that unsurprisingly, most of the rest of the camera is very very hard to repair due to the huge number of soldered joins and screws holding everything together. The D600's LCD screen, too, is fused to the rear case and cannot be removed without replacing the entire rear plate of the camera."
This may be one of the ways to minimize production cost. Something for something. Although it would be interesting to see similar teardowns of D800, 5D III, and A99. Is it coming?
Nobody bases their purchase decisions on iFixit teardowns. If they exist, they're really few. These exist mostly as advertising for the tools they're selling (it also serves as a quick guide). On a camera, there are mechanicals problems which can be fixed without exotic replacement parts too.
manakiin: Why didn't they include a cable lock (clamp) for full-sized HDMI out??? Cable can still get pulled out by accident and converters port can still get damaged...
This is ridiculous.
This thing was created to protect the camera. Something needs to give if you don't want the camera to be pulled with the cable.
Is it my eyes? I do see some banding. It is subtle though, and this being ISO 51200, I'm not going to complain.
ProfHankD: I think this means I should complete tweaking my free software that fixes orbs:
It currently has some trouble identifying orbs, but I'm collecting training cases, and should have a fairly reliable version ready for full source code release soon.
Fujifilm offers a fix that's coming soon and people complain. You provide a software fix for pictures already shot and people complain...
Sdaniella: D4 = ExpSim LV (maybe; most likely for stills and video); more MP than past 12Mp but only a bit; allows for fast fps still; but not fastest; video now 1080p, but DR poor, too contrasty, blowouts hard to control, not good for cinematography.D3s = ExpSim LV (stills; video, but only 720p); resolved less than 5D2, a given; but had better hi-ISO IQ; good AFD3x = ExpSim LV (stills); hi-MP (but IQ iffy; resolves less than 5D2 at higher ISOs); AF iffy.D3 = ExpSim LV (stills); lo-MP (but IQ superb at higher ISOs; but resolves less; a given; offers higher fps (for lo-MP; this is a given)); AF good.
D800 = NO ExpSim LV (for neither stills or videos; like D700, but D700 only lacked video); but now has very hi-Mp; IQ will only be good at lower ISOs; lesson learned from D3x, and best left for studio. video only as good as D4 or less; also too contrasty and hard to control DR unremarkable for cinematography. AF be similar to what D3x faced for hi-MP. Much cheaper than non-ExpSim LV 645D or any MF
You're really becoming hard to ignore with your ExpSim LV. I don't know what kind of photography you're doing (there must not be a lot of it since you're always here) but LV is useless for some types of shooting on many DSLR's including your belove EOS cameras thanks to the low AF speeds. So, ExpSim LV is easy to ignore for many. Also, even at my non-professional level, it is very easy to ballpark exposure and the intended output without feedback from the LCD screen. So, I sure hope that those who will be using these expensive cameras can do at least that.
IcyVeins: I'm glad you gave an additional award to the photo with the highest LEGITIMATE score. Did you choose this as the "editor's choice" winner for that reason, or because you liked it the best and the vote score was just a coincidence? Either way great contest and hopefully the next one has something in plae to prevent people from riggint the results.
I prefer the editor's choice by a long shot too. I'm always doubtful of contests where the public's vote determines the result but I won't accuse anyone of cheating without having any proof. Thank you for having an Editor's Choice.
DVDmike: I have no problem with a company making as much money as it can. Greed has everything to do with why we have better products and to say that Adobe is just greedy is ridiculous. If any of the profit haters want to give me some of their cash to help even things out, I will take it. But I certainly don't expect them or Adobe to do so.
That being said, I think that it is a stupid decision by Adobe. I think that they are getting desperate and are willing to make some bold moves. Steve Jobs' war against Adobe is obviously hitting hard on Adobe and Adobe is taking this opportunity to try a new business model. Perhaps they will succeed. But it just a matter of time before someone hires a few key engineers away from Adobe and starts their own outfit, or Apple steps up in a big way or the open source road may start to open. Either way, this does not bode well for those with Adobe stock. I have help Apple stock since the early 1980's, I guess I should wait a few more years to sell it.
If you think Pixelmator has the vast majority of Photoshop's features, you didn't dig enough. It might cover almost all of your needs, so I won't tell you not to use it when the price is so low.
That being said, I think Adobe is just jumping on that cloud bandwagon. All the software companies are salivating at the thought of computing as a service because it means recurring payments from their customers. Same thing is happening right now with movies and music. Why sell DVD's that people will own for years when you can bill them every month or every time they want to watch something?
Plakanina: if Olympus is/was so successful with it's medical and camera divisions like everyone thinks why did they have to hide their losses? it seems they were not making a profit at all !!!
The losses weren't in these two businesses.
I know this case is about fraud but it just reminds me that private companies have it much easier than ones that go public. Somehow, it feels wrong for a company to go down so easily on the whim of investors when its camera sales have gone up in recent years and its medical division isn't doing worse. Maybe it's me and my old-fashioned view on what a company can actually produce and sell.
Jogger: most likely the mao firm is gonna dice up the sensor business and sell to the highest bidder. that is really the only way to maximise THEIR shareholder value.
I think he meant to emphasize "shareholder." It's all about shareholders and short term profits now anyway.
acktown: I hear the video just fine. Thanks for the preview! Since I work in a retail camera store, I got an early sneak peak and absolutely love the V1 compared to my D700 and D90
There are so many things you can compare a V1 to a D700 on. They don't need to share the same sensor format. For each occasion, you choose the best tool available to you by comparing them while having in mind all the variables specific to that need/occasion.
michaelrz: Good looking images at base ISO. ISO 3200 looks awful compared to the competition. I think Samsung should have kept the resolution at 14-15 MP and improve IQ instead.
Maybe they weren't able to improve their image quality at 14 MP and decided to go for just increased resolution instead?
mr_ewok: the new dpreview standard hahahahaha. jpg with FAT compression hahahaah. so baaaad!!!
What's FAT compression?
pixel_colorado: It's a shame they made it bigger than the A33, A35 and the A55.
"Bigger" sells. It's more professional, don't you know?