RichRMA: You can't bend the laws of physics. Sensors can be made any which way, but the small ones will never, ever match the larger ones. Back illuminated, electron-multiplying, it doesn't matter. They are modest enhancements that produce a slightly better product, but a 1/2.3" sensor will never be a m4/3, APS, etc.
Most people just want good enough. Does it matter if it isn't the best?
I hate it because it is different.
mpgxsvcd: Hey Canon. “Imagine” This!
Sony - "Imagine Profits"
mpgxsvcd: I can’t think of two fundamentally different devices than a phone and a camera. Yet we still find a way to make them one and the same.
Do you lament that phones have calculators and web browsers, too? I mean a phone is not a calculator and yet you can perform calculations on a phone. That's totally messed up. And we also know that phones are not computers, and yet I can surf the internet and send email with mine! And if I wanted to music on the go, I would have bought an ipod! Thanks for cluttering up my phone with this terrible itunes and pandora!
sebiruns: This is just silly. The details will be smeared. Any 8 megapixel DSLR from ten years ago will out resolve this crappy sensor. Adding more megapixels is just a bad idea. But sure, people will still buy it and think it is the best thing since sliced bread.
I tend to agree, any DSLR from the past 10 years will beat any smartphone. However, I don't typically keep my DSLR in my pocket and carry it literally everywhere I go. So the comparison means about as much as saying a banana tastes better than a phone.
Why wouldn't this just be made a regular challenge instead of crammed in a 150 post maximum thread?
Dan Wagner: Well, this sucks -- tried to submit my photos -- and although there seems to be a post made less than one hour ago I get the following message: "An error has occurred The requested thread has reached the maximum number of allowed posts. Please contact us if you have any questions.?"
Of course there is no link to contacted them. Anyone know what's up?
max thread size is 150. It's full.
phazelag: The Bokeh on this one at the top looks harsh and weird.
I don't think so, but "harsh" bokeh has as much to do with the scene as it does the lens.
Samsung deserves to have a lot of success with this camera and the 16-50 and 50-150mm f2.8 zooms. I'm not sure they will given the other established players, but they certainly seem to have released some capable and noteworthy equipment here. These images meet or beat anything on the market with a crop sensor.
Lot's of "pop" on this one. That 50-150 f2.8 is going to be a killer portrait lens.
Erick L: "...the move to a rotating zoom design should resolve problems associated with dust being sucked in during operation."
That's a myth. Any non-internal zoom is more prone to dust. The dust settles on the inner barrel and makes its way inside the lens.
The push pull was bad, though. It was a very loose design.
JoEick: Funny how Canon always gets the heat from gear enthusiasts for not innovating. If there is any percieved flaw, then it is the doomed end of Canon, and there will be 2,000 comments about their lack of innovation.
Then when Canon comes out with possibly the latest and greatest lens designs and technology ever put into a consumer camera lens, there is crickets.
It was true 30 years ago and it is still true today. Lenses trump all else in what is truly important for a camera system.
But what if you want to shoot your wildlife pictures 5 stops underexposed?
DVT80111: About time Canon but I won't cancel my Tamron 150-600 order.
400mm is no quite long enough for birds.
It always was before.
The mythical white unicorn!!
Seriously this lens has been rumored to be "coming out next year" for 10 years now!
ranalli: I don't get why I would want or need this. What's wrong with Flickr?
And Sony shouldn't exist because Panasonic does?
Not a good way to use this for ongoing photo backup as it doesn't have a tool for automated or scheduled sync or backups from the desktop. All you get is a drag and drop target. Also no way to sort very well.
It does work well for automated iOS and Android backups as well as creating specific albums to share with your mobile devices. It feels like a service created mainly for mobile photo sharing and backup.
Johannes Zander: I have 240 GB of photos on my home server.So this service is to little for me.
@steelhead3: I think you've discovered their ulterior motives. Once you have your whole collection in the cloud, the work involved moving them to another service and the expense paid for pure icloud space means many people will just keep renewing prime. Still, with the streaming videos, music, photo storage, borrowed books, free shipping, prime is shaping up to be a very good value at less than $10 a month.
I was about to get an icloud membership for my wife's iphone/ipad photo sync and backup which would be about $4 a month. With this just announced, as a prime member, I just saved $48 a year and have another reason to renew.
My sigma 30mm is 48mm equivalent with a 1.6x crop factor, so I'm going to call that close enough.
tkbslc: With such excellent classic 50mm lens options available for use with an adapter, I don't know why anyone would spend $360 on junky knockoffs.
Sorry, based on the brand and past results, I'm calling it a "junky knockoff" until proven otherwise. Not trying to be "cool", but practical.
With such excellent classic 50mm lens options available for use with an adapter, I don't know why anyone would spend $360 on junky knockoffs.