Where do you attach the EVF? The bloody tripod socket?
JakeB: f3.5 to f5.6.
These lenses are designed for people taking pics on vacation in bright sunlight and very limiting in most other photographic situations.
If constant f2.8 is overkill in terms of weight and price, at least go for constant f4.
Here is some of that new math for you. The Sigma is full frame so it only covers a 27-52mm FOV and cost $200.00 more. It's only 88mm short on the long end, no big deal?
There are at least 3 24-70mm f2.8's out there for Nikon. The cheapest @ Sigma cost $899.00, a Tamron @ $1299.00 and the Nikon @ $1900.00. Still with me?
zanypoet: I hope Nikon didn't cheap out and put that wretched plastic lens mount like they did with 18-105mm, which was too heavy for it. Plastic mount was OK on 18-55mm lens, not 18-105mm. I suspect this is replacement for 18-105mm , which had OK IQ, crap mount. Typical Nikon's way of correcting problem w/o admitting anything.
The picture above sure looks like a metal mount to me.
SushiEater: Die, smart phones, die!!!!!!!
And this is just the beginning." - NSA
KL Matt: This really surprises me -- I thought they were dropping the K-01 like a bad habit. Does releasing a new K-01 edition and all the effort that entails mean that Ricoh is commited to maintaining a K-mount mirrorless body in the lineup going forward? The plot thickens. I have no idea what they're up to, but I like it!
If Adorama sells the body for $249.00 like they did in April, I'll get another one.
Same sensor as that "brick" the MX-1? Speaking of Pentax "bricks" which I own both the MX-1 and K-01, if I did it right here is a size comparison.
Peiasdf: More form and less function = piece of crap. For a body twice the volume of RX100, they couldn't fit anything more than a 1/1.7?
Nokia, SONY and Apple are coming out with big sensor smartphones, pretty soon any sensor smaller than 1" will be outdated. Why aren't more company copying SONY I have no idea.
B&H sells the RX100 for $648.00 After spending $399. on the MX-1 I still have enough left over to fly round trip to the Bahamas! I'll take some pictures on the beach in Nassau.
Ordered mine in black from B&H this afternoon as it is @ $399.00
From the artical:■Excellent image quality in JPEG and Raw■Fast autofocus■10fps full-res burst mode■1cm Macro mode allows extreme closeups■Raw files contain a lot of extra detail in both highlights and shadows■Dedicated Movie record button■Built-in sensor-shift and pixel-track shake reduction
But still just a "74"?
Must of been the missing hot shoe. :-(
Since the camera is a full-frame Sony, I should like to try it out with the 70-200mm f/2.8 G Alpha, or the wonderful Sony/Zeiss 24-70mm f/2.8. Any reviews around the net using either of these lenses? Is it available without the kit lens?, I have not much need for the 35mm. One other thing, does the 2700 Quid include the bloody VAT?
Thanks so much.
Punch me, I'm a geek!
yabokkie: the weather or visibility is the most important factor. but no matter how good is the condition I don't think there is anywhere on earth one can shoot the moon so clearly on the horizon.
so image synthesis may be more important.
P.S., shooting the moon setting on a mountain (better over 10 deg from the horizon) may be a good idea. one that I'd like to recommend is Mt.Damavand: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Damavand
Probably not the first choice of most Americans. ;-)
Kuturgan: NO, Samsung, NO!!!!IT is not the right way for development! Do like Sony! Give us a range-finder with EVF!This ugly galaxy camera is a total disaster! Ergonomics is a total sh*t. And it is too big for mirrorless system.
And everybody thought the K-01 was big. Next to my Panny G5 and K-01 this thing is pretty big.
rb59020: That's 1,265.00 US Dollars, or 1,987.00 Euros or 6,421.00 Quid ;-)
No Sony E-Mount? NEX users can't catch a break.
Duh, I thought that was what the ";-)" was for? You guys are a barrel of laughs.
SunnyFlorida: Simply Awesome! an OMD-5 with this lens will be a sweet combo
That's what that big wide focus ring is for. Heaven forbid you should have to actually touch it.
That's 1,265.00 US Dollars, or 1,987.00 Euros or 6,421.00 Quid ;-)
I'll forgive the slow lens and even the pathetic 1.9fps, but no articulated screen or EVF? Give me at least one of them! Next.....
Blimey! Sir George Carlin, if he was still with us :-(, would have to modify his "Seven Dirty Words" to include: the "N" word, the three letter "F" word, Dick Cheney, Sara Palin and Adobe!
I don't know if George was ever "knighted", but he should have been.
Henrik Herranen: They lost me at the line where they said:"Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM (equivalent to a 40mm f/2.8)"(followed by many other lines of similar, ahem, data).
They really should know better. 40/2.8 on FF is _NOT_ the equivalent of 24 f/2.8 on crop. If it was, both systems would have the same DoF and blurring capabilities, but they don't.
Different images = no equivalence.
"And good writers should always aim to write using concepts their audience can realistically be expected to understand."
Duh, does that mean dumbed down? ;-)
alan over 80: Price is $799 dollars which I make is £509. Even if you add our 20% VAT still dont understand the price in England
Geez alan, you're really starting to sound like my ex. ;-(
No one reads the stories, that go straight to the comment section and whine and cry about features, lack of features, quality control (apparently) and prices. It's funner!