Someone had to go and give this neat photo a 1/2 star vote, indicating a photo that is as bad as it could be - which it certainly is not. I like this shot, pretty nifty stuff with a good slightly soft-focused background.
Very good shot - certainly the two people who voted that it was worth just 1/2 star were being mean, or sandbagging to try and help their own chances. No way is this a poor shot justifying a half star.
Johnsonj: I'll never get a desktop or notebook again.
Tablets are here to stay. The cloud, Internet friendly TVs and bluetooth keyboards ensure it.
Yes tablets are here to stay. I use my iPad a lot. But it's no replacement for a good full-fledged computer.
I see the Android phone users are commenting.
peevee1: This is not because of "decline of auto industry" - more cars are now made in the US than in the 50s when Detroit was the richest (per capita) city in the United States, and by extension, in the world. It is about demographics, quality of city management and balance of power, and applicability of democracy to stupid people.
Wow, did you ever hit the nail on the head! Detroit began declining in every way even before the US auto industry went through hard times. The auto industry is not the reason something like half the adults in Detroit are said to be functionally illiterate. Whether someone likes or dislikes the way the photos were taken, they ought to be enough to wake us up to what is happening to our country.
babalu: The single, most important message this camera sends out, is that the era of the optical viewfinder is coming to an end. Adieu mirror. Welcome EVF, preferrably tiltable .
Why are people who have EVF cameras so anxious to see the OVF go away? Because it is the only way they will ever be able to prove that the EVF is better. Which, as a viewfinder, it is not.
I suppose if someone can't see that, they also can't see how homely the E-M1 is. It does look functional. So does a toilet plunger.
Midwest: It should have just been called the 'anything with visible eyes' challenge, because 90% of what was entered had eyes on it but nothing whatever to do with the stated theme of the challenge, that the viewer should 'stop staring at me'. What a waste of time to enter when the theme and entries have nothing to do with each other or the judging.
Well I did take the theme as someone being at least displeased that someone was looking at them. A blank look on an animals face or a bug with what look? is not what I expected to fit the theme. Oh well, I guess you can pretty much enter anything for anything.
This photo deserved better than 62nd place, certainly should have placed far higher than photos of bugs, birds and kittens. Ridiculous.
This is a really good pic and appropriate to the challenge. Like my entry though yours got beat out by photos of birds and bugs having nothing to do with the stated theme of the challenge. What a joke.
It should have just been called the 'anything with visible eyes' challenge, because 90% of what was entered had eyes on it but nothing whatever to do with the stated theme of the challenge, that the viewer should 'stop staring at me'. What a waste of time to enter when the theme and entries have nothing to do with each other or the judging.
CameraLabTester: That bird photo.
That single image just implodes all credibility of the whole article.
Are we sure it was placed there? Birds often end up in places where they don't belong, and then can't get out again.
photosen: That bird shot is haunting, the whole series has a special air... I feel really sorry for the staff. Love the training shot, I'd like to have that in my living room!
Ironic and sad that one of God's (or nature's) perfect inventions for flying should die trapped inside a flying machine that is grounded.
zigi_S: Sorry. The creator of this video didn't give you the permission to....
I can't watch vimeo videos.
Shawn, I meant to reply to the guy who said that "the OVF can start dying now". Improving on-sensor AF still does nothing regarding the whole issue of why so many of us prefer an OVF. I don't care how good Canon's new system is, it doesn't make the OVF unnecessary. I hope it's revolutionary and moves their live view AF from slowest to fastest, but I will gladly keep using my 7D.
What has on sensor AF got to do with fixing the EVFs still- major shortcomings?
Christos Tolis: This debate on whether or not a "serious" photographer needs a DSLR has heated up immensely during the course of the last two or three years for the exact reasons that Barney here points to, in my mind mainly because every photographer's holy grail (regardless of style or use...) has forever been a camera that weights next to nothing and puts out top notch IQ and now we're sort of getting there... (of course one might at this point remind us of the Rollei 35 as well, eh?). BUT... what flagship DSLRs still have going for them is a triptych of viewfinder real estate-focus speed-lens availability that's not quite beaten yet by the mirrorless crowd, not to mention the physical hardship endurance factor. So they remain quite relevant for now. I personally shoot an X-Pro1 cause I'm mainly the fine art - exhibition segment and don't do too much commercial shooting or studio work with strobes and such. If I did (for instance if I shot weddings) I'd get a DSLR pronto...
I agree with most of what you say except that the viewfinder real estate - focus speed - lens availability triptych is a bit further off than 'not quite beaten yet'. The mirrorless folk seem to think that with after AF the mirror is not needed, but the mirror is central to the TTL OVF which many such as I are totally unwilling to give away for an EVF. I'm glad you are more accepting of the idea of different cameras for different uses, than many seem to be.
samhain: Great article! im starting to like you guys more & more these days.
After getting my hands on a Konica Hexar AF(a small film camera with a fixed 35mm/f2) I fell in love with having one focal length. My photography improved and I became faster at street photography. Getting the x100 was a no brainer.
When Zack Arias said "it's the best digital camera ever made", Lots of folks were up in arms. But I knew exactly what he meant. I carried it with me 24/7 and scored shots I would've never gotten with a dslr- because I wouldn't have had my dslr with me.
Street/ impromptus portraiture is my favorite as well. I still prefer a bit longer & faster lens for better bokeh(40-50mm f1.4 is my preferred lens) but i believe a 35mm is truly the most versatile FL ever.
Fine, I doubt that a DSLR would be a good camera to go out taking street shots with. I shoot action sports sometimes. Using my DSLR I (ahem) "scored shots I would've never gotten with an X100", to paraphrase you.
Different cameras for different kinds of shooting! If you can point out that a DSLR would not work well for your kind of photography, it's just as valid for me to point out that your camera would be utterly worthless for much of mine. And I really don't care, I don't have one and do not begrudge you yours.
JackM: First shot is overexposed by about 1 stop. A good example of why in-camera reflective light meters often get it wrong, and why the X100S appeals to people who shoot manually for this reason. Good article though.
Uh, the photos were included in the article to make the point about why the author favors that kind of camera. I think they're fair game. Nobody picked on the content or composition, just the IQ.
ManuelVilardeMacedo: The campaign to convince us we must be content with less quality is gathering momentum...
It's the 'It's good enough for us, therefore it must be good enough for you' movement.
Dimit: Now that's a truly wise article!What I strongly believe over the last couple of years.Let the 1%(or even less) real professionals carry on their bulky gear and rest in peace.There have been tremendous changea in the digital world,why on earth not in the digital camera world,considering the undoubtable convergence between mirorless compact gear and dslrs.Wake up people!!!
Mirrorless compacts can take much better photos than they uses to - so long as the circumstances are not challenging. For those shooting landscapes or family snapshots, they're every bit as good. But I cannot use a mirrorless for some of my favorite kinds of photography, and it is not I who needs to 'wake up' to that.
Lee Jay: So, the main reason is, because you don't shoot a lot of shots in difficult conditions, like the Spitfire shot. Fine for you. I shoot about 80% of my shots in conditions in which none of the cameras mentioned would have any chance of getting the shot.
I use a very basic camera phone for my simple photos that don't much matter - mostly they are IM'd to my wife. I bought a DSLR because I wanted to take photos that are not always so easy to take and require a camera which is more capable, as opposed to pocketable.