This seems to have true value.However, I cannot but notice Lytro becoming side-tracked before delivering on their promises. It can't take long before they close.
JohnEwing: It's only a toy helicopter, you know. Let's not go daft.
I wouldn't say so for the $4000 DJI Spreading Wings S1000+ ;)
falconeyes: No moving parts ... ?I've read Hasselblad claiming this for the A5D, but it still seems to have moving parts: shutter and aperture!My own experience is that flight vibrations with a drone are crucial in combination with a rolling shutter. The A5D better has a very fast leaf shutter for high-resolution and more importantly, distortion-free aerial photogrammetry.
A camera always has body AND lens. I never saw a camera w/o lens, maybe except for pinhole cameras ...
No moving parts ... ?I've read Hasselblad claiming this for the A5D, but it still seems to have moving parts: shutter and aperture!My own experience is that flight vibrations with a drone are crucial in combination with a rolling shutter. The A5D better has a very fast leaf shutter for high-resolution and more importantly, distortion-free aerial photogrammetry.
That's a decent summary of the situation.
I feel tempted to add that with a pro lens (like a 70-200/2.8) the images would look more interesting but probably less sharp too.
JEROME NOLAS: NO wonder, Sony didn't get my money! Idiotic company.
Just because of this thread, I took my RX100m3 out today to shoot bikers (cyclists) coming at me. Something I normally would use my Nikon for. Actually, it worked better than expected, even by myself.
Most impressive was the Af Lock-on focus field with AF.C focussing and a single shot. It does kind of 3D tracking really well and nailed the focus spot on with the bikers really close (i.e., sharp and close enough I can see the eye lashes to be in focus). Of course, I tried with the only mode being of value in such a test, i.e., 25.7mm/2.8 (or 70mm/7.6 in equiv. terms)).
It worked ok in burst mode, with subsequent focus good enough to yield usable photos but not at the same level as the first one (the focus rectangle then switches from green to white).
With a static subject, focus pulsates a little but I Sony may have changed the algorithm in a firmware update. I remember much more pulsation and a wide focus rectangle with no focus point. No more, it seems. Or it is mode-depended.
That's how an RX100 is designed to work. It is the compromise Sony engineers went between odd feeling camera behaviour and decent AF performance in burst mode. For a review of the feature, read here:http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/camerareview/sony-cyber-shot-dsc-rx100-review-simply-amazing/2/Pretty good for a contrast AF camera with unlike A6000, no phase sensels.And it reverts to a slower, more conventional AFC behaviour in video. Works rather decent too.
P.S. To detect movements in the Z direction and with no phase detect module or sensels, you have no choice but probe constantly. That's what the RX100 does. A few other pure contrast AF cameras don't and therefore, don't track well.
davev8: t costs $£$£$£$£ to develop a camera ..what Sony are doing is developing anther before the development cost is payd for by the 1st camera now canon who have maybe the only profitable camera division takes a sensible route for long term stability ...how much development cost is left in every 5Dmkiii sold?...i think Canikon will have the last laff
Not a direct reply, just adding facts for the thead's audience:
I've read both Canon's and Sony's Q3 reports.1. Canon Imaging is 60% larger than Sony Imaging.2. Profitability is exactly the same: almost 14% which is good.3. Profitability was increasing at Sony, decreasing at Canon.
Sony has several sectors not very profitable, like computers, TVs etc. But here we talk about their Imaging division (cameras). Different story as the article explains, btw.
Did you read the DPR article at all?Canon is NOT the only profitable camera division. That's what the article was all about ...P.S. You reposted your comment, so did I for my reply.
Joe Ogiba: Since Sony is on a roll with full frame mirrorless cameras and 4K video cameras along with their camera sensor division they should not have financial problems like some other companies in the industry.
Did you read the DPR article at all?Canon is NOT the only profitable camera division. That's what the article was all about ...
GlobalGuyUSA: The biggest losers in Sony buying up the scandal-ridden Toshiba's sensors division will be us -- the consumers. Toshiba was a pressure against Sony getting a monopoly on advancement. You can already see Sony is implementing its sensors in its own cameras first, more than a year before other companies have access to it. It didn't used to be this way -- previously, they gave them to competitors first and only later implemented them in Sony cameras. Nikon, etc, could have had the option to use a Toshiba sensor instead.... but now that option doesn't exist.
I really wish Nikon & Canon had bought Toshiba's sensor business, instead of Sony. It doesn't seem that this is good for consumers. Especially now that Samsung is exiting the camera market, there will be no Samsung surprise. Instead, we're going to feel a Sony monopoly.
Right now, Sony is incredibly innovative, though. So let's see if that holds up. No criticism unless they drop the ball. But they have a responsibility now.
A clear market leader in sensors can be a good thing, we'll see.The amount in R&D necessary for true innovation is huge, as is investing in new fabs. A certain market shake out with a healthy margin for the leader can actually help here.
E.g., I'd rather like to see a global shutter or faster readout than a cheaper mobile sensor.
OTOH, we may wonder if Intel has lost its momentum with their slow progress recently and almost no competitor left, except for mobiles. Could happen to Sony sensors too.
falconeyes: Small Sony is making a solid profit year after year - despite their bold effort at innovation and R&D.
Makes me wonder where all that money within much bigger Canon and Nikon is going to ... There must be a staff of lazy/inefficient and wealthy people to be sustained ;)
My initial comment, of course, applied to the respective imaging divisions only. That should have been obvious from this DPR article we all are referring to.And to be clear, sensors aren't part of Sony Imaging.
Small Sony is making a solid profit year after year - despite their bold effort at innovation and R&D.
falconeyes: I cannot see an answer to my biggest question with any tethered live view solution:What is the resolution of the live view feed transmitted to the tethered iPad?
The iPad's screen has ample resolution. Which is of little use if the actual image is a blown-up VGA feed... I see no word in above article. Any info to share?
AFAIK, all tethering solutions use the SDK APIs from Canon or Nikon which assume live view to be VGA. That's an obvious limitation. Or am I wrong?
Moreover, that can give an advantage to field monitors fed from a higher resolution HDMI stream.
cf. http://www.camerarc.jpro51.com/CD_Help/index.htm?context=4970The answer may depend on the camera used, like D810 supporting a higher resolution than D800 etc.
A word of clarification may be in order by article's author.
I cannot see an answer to my biggest question with any tethered live view solution:What is the resolution of the live view feed transmitted to the tethered iPad?
What a bargain!
At that price, I am sure Sony could not resist. And seriously, why should they?
This Pentax FF looks tempting.
I hope for Pentax the D810 successor expected for about Spring too does not ruin the party.
Mike_V: Zeiss 135mm Master Prime is T1.3.
Not sure of the f-stop, but faster than f1.4.
So this lens isn't the fastest 135mm available.
Mike_V, you're right although you find some of the other attributes (parfocal, clickfree aperture) in still lenses too.
Nevertheless, even if still lenses are frequently used in film production, there still is such a thing as cine vs. still lens.
The only model for successful aquisitions I am aware of is corporations buying technological startups. What Apple and to some degree, Microsoft and Google are doing all the time.
This aquisition is none of this. A dying dinosaur buying rather than innovate to delay death. This will not end well, except for current Sandisk shareholders.
BTW, if you compare WD and SD stock, investors seem to think the same.