Great idea. If someone is going to 'mine' public resources for their own personal financial gain, they SHOULD pay to do that. Even the 5 painted Victorians along Alamo Square in San Francisco copyrighted their homes to stop people from profiting from making postcards of their property.
I am curious to how long one might expect the cameras electrical/mechanical lens to function? I think the Nikon V1 was thoughtful in this regard as it uses attachable manual lenses. I didn't mind having such a lens on a cheap point and shoot but the Rx100 is not a cheap point and shoot. Does anyone have any data on the reliability of RX100 lens or comparable mechanical lenses?
Chris. Thank you for the article on the external battery pack. I am a city planner and we do a lot of field recordings of project sites and also pedestrian interviews. This is exactly what we need (and hence we ordered the materials) to help us with long field recording sessions.
I went to your web page and I like your inquisitive nature and they way you are trying to solve problems and innovate. Keep it up! This board is notoriously grumpy so take their feedback with a grain of salt.
brn: Nothing against the Chirs, but why is this worthy of posting on DPReview? It's using a DC Coupler for what a DC Coupler is designed for. Where's the news here?All Chris did was mount the battery in a very inconvenient location. I can see my head hitting the battery or the cable. Not to mention, losing the ability to attach a flash or even the ability to use the built-in flash.
Actually, I was glad to see the article about the battery and hope that DP Review keeps a diversity of articles coming. A narrow focus makes for a boring web site. Thanks DP- I for one appreciate the work you do !
ryansholl: ANOTHER BODY?!
JESUS SONY CAN YOU NOT DO ANYTHING RIGHT?!!
Did I about cover it?
I like Sony and appreciate their constant innovation. I like this camera and will probably buy it. I use older manual Zeiss and Nikon lenses and don't really care about Sony lenses.
Empies: There are no bad cameras, there are bad photographers
In the 80's MOMA in NYC gave out cheap little point and shoot film cameras to a bunch of famous painters and asked them to submit a photo or two for an exhibition. The photo's were all wonderful as one would expect from a group of great painters. The camera made absolutely no difference to the composition, etc of the photographs. I see people on this site arguing about whether a certain camera has x number of pixels or a certain dial in a certain place on the camera. What most of you should be thinking about is composition, an interesting subject, etc and not camera specs.
M Hamilton: Ricoh is awesome, adding features to a 3 year old camera. Still love my GRD IV
herebefore: I have several good C/Y lenses that I used to shoot with (with adapters) on the 350D (last Canon camera I bought), and several Canon Lenses that weren't bad at all.
I might be tempted to add this camera to give me something more up-to-date to use those lenses on.
It wouldn't replace my m43 cameras or my 4/3 cameras, but it would get used when I feel the need to shoot with those lenses.
I was thinking the same thing.
For me it all comes down to image quality. I am axious to see some sample images. This could be intesting with the low-pass filter eliminated.
I have read through comments on this board several times before and it is alway so negative, grumpy and not too helpful. I get the feeling that everyone who posts on this site is a grear head and is stuck on tech specs and not on the actual art creating part of photography.
I happen to like the Sony RX100 as I am someone who always has a camera with me but can't stand DSLR's (too big, heavy,). The Sony IQ is great and is helped along by using DXO software that corrects for lens deficiencies.
I know, I know, you all hate DXO , Sony, blah blah blah.
fakuryu: Even if Pentax-Ricoh's offerings are a bit lack luster or attention grabber (except for that DA 560mm f5.6) compared to what the other brands are offering, it is undeniable that the K5/K5II/K5IIs with those Limited primes are a beautyand has class leading IQ
I agree with you. All these people citing DXO numbers as if they mean anything. The only thing that means anything is the quality of the actual images the camera produces. I am not a Pentax owner but am going to spring to the K-5 II s. After looking at hundreds of images the K-5 has superior results....much better than the Nikon 5100/7000 (that i have), etc. So I agree with your statement re: IQ. We need more artist on this board and fewer tech spec followers.
I am most interested in seeing the images this camera produces and look forward to DPR's continuing review.
I like the DX option-that is a clever way to get people to upgrade without having to give up all of their lenses if they are currently DX users.
The Pentax 5 IIS without the AA filter still seems like the most interesting camera announcement of the week to me. I think the image quality of that camera could be sensational. Couple that with a smaller camera size (dragging these FF Nikon's around all day is not an option for me) and full weatherproofing and I believe that camera offers a good value and maybe better image quality-which is what it's all about to me.
I like what Pentax is doing. I know a lot of photographers are into tech metrics but I am more interested in the image. Not the quality as usually quantified but simply the way it looks (aesthetics). Although I don't own a K5 I have felt that the images created by that camera are sensational.
I also believe not having an AA filter will dramatically increase the quality of the final image--more so than going to a 24mp camera.
Small size, weather sealed, great images, etc makes me a buyer for the "S" model.
Finally, I siimply don't understand why everyone is complaining at this time without first seeing the new camera's output/images.