b craw: It is nice to see this at $400, but in my opinion the poor fixed LCD and (to my eye) too sparse button/dial set-up on the back might be problematic. The Samsung NX20 is APS-C 20MP as well and is WiFi enabled, has an articulating LCD, good controls for $550.
Not paranoid at all, from CNET feb 2010: Sony loses about $18 per PS3 unit they sell.
MrTritium: So Casio can put a 5 axis stabilisation on a 200$ p&s, but Nikon and Canon won't equip ANY of their cameras with one. Why? Same remark for Fuji and sony with their mirrorless cameras.
would have to fit in RX1 or thishttp://www.sony-mea.com/microsite/dslr/09/A900/images/a900/1-1/1-1_10.jpg would have to fit in the NEX
sandy b: Looks good, I'd say the equal of the D7100 IQ, improved in shadows, and a groundbreaking AF. Kudos Canon, lots of happy users updating. Oh, like the D7100, a bigger buffer would be better. How much would a couple of gig of internal memory add?
In 2 years, they will release a firmware update that will increase the buffer size.(for free)
Oh sorry what I m saying is nonsense.
Marek Rucinski: This is an example of an interesting practice: put some hardware in the device, for which the user pays (the cost of the wifi chip was included in the price), and then increase the value proposition of the product (by enabling the feature) *after* the product has been sold (!)... or not.
I think this practice is not only dishonest, but also damaging to the client (who pays for a feature he may never see enabled in the end) and therefore should attract attention of relevant regulating bodies.
Sadly, examples of very similar practices start to pop out regularly (uncompressed hdmi in Canon 5d III, cropped hdmi output in Nikon D600), but this seems to be the boldest example to date. In case of Canon/Nikon it's difficult to prove dishonesty, because they can claim genius, and incompetence of their engineers, respectively. Situation here is different, because there are physical chips that were obviously meant to be there from the beginning, but were intentionally not enabled.
>Marek<I completely agree, but no one forced the customer to buy the camera at the price the company asked.They could just buy something else or keep their money if no equivalent suit them.If given the specs sheets and the price displayed, the consumers still bought it, then maybe that consumer found the camera useful and worth the price asked (for him).
Still, if a company decides the upgrade or unlock features after the product is sold then why not? “If” I had a 7D: I would be glad with the increased raw buffers it got (no matter why they limited it at first). After all, when I bought it for 1500 usd asked by Canon, I knew the 7D had 'only' 15 frames buffers but I bought anyway. It means to me the 7D was worth the price tag, even with 15 frames buffer.
If Lytro sell their device and the consumers thinks it is over expensive (because it has no wifi, or only 6mpx or whatever) then let Lytro fails.
Well that is how I see things, and I apologize for misspelling, grammar,...)
I don't see the problem, as long as the feature was not advertised when it was sold.
massimogori: May I suggest another topic that may be of interest to all of us?
Currently there are two popes in Rome. Why don't we move one of them back to Avignon?
Where is Avigon?
Photoshop wise, If I have to pay 160$ a year, I prefer to give that amount of money to Gimp than to Adobe. If lot of people do that, I bet Gimp development will sky rocket.
Paul_B Midlands UK: So glad I only have the incompatible 5N!
if someone own a Ferrari Enzo, cost of oil change would be the last of his problem.
Ubilam: Why no built-in flash? A BIF is handy when you don't lug a dedicated flash.
And how does nikon manage to put one in d600 and d800?granted the 6D has wifi and gps patches in it, why 5D2 or 5D3 doesn't have built in flash ?
guido v: " and lbs ... how strange !!! Can you translate these local measures to the international meters and kilograms, please?
1.6kg It is in header below the title
always loved benro
Reilly Diefenbach: No built in flash? That is indeed a bummer. Does Canon really expect people to drag around a big honkin' flash unit everywhere they go?
same for the focus assist light. For many reason Canon excluded it from their bodies. But when the canon need a flashlight, the AF assist light on the nikon just works: see it a 8min in this vid: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omTo7UxbJX8
shotslot: Thanks Canon!
I waited and waited, and finally decided to bail and get an m4/3 camera. You've confirmed everything I suspected about your strategy of de-featuring your kit to protect your high-end sales. I'd have been really hacked off if you'd brought out a game-changer. I'm sure this will be a great camera, perfectly servicable, if a little pricey compared with the competition. It's just your cynical attitude that I couldn't stand any longer!
I would have expected at least the autofocus of the rebel 650d (9 cross type). The 40D has it since 2007. However I want to see what this 20Mp can do
John: This translates dollars to pounds as £1303.00 body only. If this priced at £2000 in the UK, then Nikon will have shot themselves in the head big time! No-one can justify a £700 price hike in the UK over the US price! Even at £1599 they would be pushing the boat out!
Don't wait too long... hint: UK nikon system error :/
welshwizard: Think I'll stick with what I've got, scene and idiot modes on a £2000 camera?
5dmk2 dial don't have scene mode, however it does have a emergency mode.
mcm49: A spanking new camera at this price point in 2012, why doesn't it have USB 3.0? Another question; is the Sony 35mm format sensor a Bayer-type cmos sensor? If so, that means it requires an anti-aliasing filter on the sensor to counteract the undesireable effects of that type sensor. And who makes this sensor? Is it a Sony product or one they purchased from someone else? Those are things that can make a difference to know.
what you mean by first iteration? a900 doesn't count?
jj74e: well the merge of phone and compacts is finally happening this year.
too bad they still will have to rely on being at a wireless hotspot, will have much worse battery life than most phones (140 shots on this one? I don't know how that translates to call time, but I'm guessing your camera won't last very long if you're shooting, editing, downloading and playing games on it).
Honestly, I don't think going Android is the answer. It's nice to see companies finally doing something to try to revive the compact market (instead of perpetually adding on more crappy scene modes and zoom), but honestly, people have their phones on them all the time now. You don't need the whole Android market on your camera. You just need to develop a UI that offers customization, connectivity, and photo-centric abilities. Why don't camera companies develop these themselves?
Make the camera more personal, more open, and quick-edit capable/fun; don't try to make it a clunkycell
But at least Google is happy ;)
"too bad they still will have to rely on being at a wireless hotspot"
Don't you have another Android phone that you can turrn to be hot spot (Mobile access point)?
CameraLabTester: The colours certainly look very much like those bars...
it has been penny calibrated, what would you expect? :)
Henry Falkner: Some thoughts on the use of a physically large 2 MP sensor - Mars is more than twice as far from the sun as the earth is, so it gets less than 1/4 of the light. The 16 MP BSI CMOS sensor and the processor in my P&S camera do create artifacts, which reduces the effective resolution as well as the reliability of the information content. The failure rate of new consumer cameras has been quoted as 2 to 4% - clearly not acceptable when you cannot exchange the camera once it leaves the ground. They use prime lenses of different focal lengths, which reduces the need for cropping. The lead time for curiosity was a number of years, not six months.
p5freak: I suppose rocks don't move that fast on Mars. They can hold the shutter longer.
peweuk: I wonder if Sigma have done a deal with the Olympic Organisers to allow this.
The Olympics committee has special legal 'powers' to insist that any photographic or video content of anything that involves the games is removed from public view. This definately includes imagery taken at the games, but the 'grey' area is how far beyond that it goes.For example the two words 'London' and '2012' whilst OK individually, cannot be used together as 'London 2012' in anything that can be deemed 'commecially beneficial'. This competiton is 'commercially beneficial to Sigma.
Private individuals have been warned that to put images of the games on social networking sites is prohibited - so how are Sigma going to publish the results??
Unless of course they have paid vast licensing fees to the Organisers.
THE vALUES OF SPORT AND OLyMPISM
ENCOURAGE EFFORT-> STRIVING FOREXCELLENCEDEvELOP HARMONy -> CELEBRATING FRIENDSHIPPRESERvE HUMAN DIGNITy -> DEMONSTRATING RESPECT
well, it is all about money money money