El Chubasco: Nice system, certainly impressive. Would be tempted to buy this camera if its interface did not feel like a playstation.
I switched from Canon since it reminded me of the Fax machine at work.
tkbslc: 112mm long 35mm lens?
Canon 135L is also exactly 112mm longSony 135mm f1.8 is 115mm long
35mm is not even close to retrofocal. There is no reason for a giant lens. Leica's 35mm f1.4 is as small as a 50mm.
It would be nice to see more Chinese companies that are actually creators rather than cloners.
Seems ridiculous that they would be as large 135mm primes.
HeyItsJoel: Are there people who still shoot at 28mm? Maybe it's just me but I prefer to choose between a 24mm and 35mm in that focal range.
When I shot Nikon, I hated that the lenses would start at '18 - XX mm' which translate to '27 - XX mm' in full frame equivalent. It just wasn't wide enough for me.
I shoot 30mm actually. My new favorite m43 lens is the Leica 15mm f1.7.
24mm is too wide for general use. 35mm too close to normal.
112mm long 35mm lens?
aarif: i want to see sample images at 2000mm hand held
Okay, my mistake. Must have been thinking of cameras from different brands.
One has to wonder why they asked dpreview not to show them. Usually they at least allow low-res samples from pre-production units.
koolbreez: I don't really see a reason to upgrade from already owning the D7100. Increased buffer, and built in WiFi, as opposed to the plugin module, don't justify spending $1200 for these minor upgrades. There are no significant improvements to justify the cost IMO.
Well there are people who own D3200 and D5200 cameras as well as new customers to entice. I'm not sure they expect you to upgrade every single cycle of the same line.
Did I win first no 4K comment?
atmospheric distortion + haze + diffraction + camera shake = FANTASTIC PHOTOS!!!
RichRMA: Something I don't get about the Fuji cameras, specifically, the XT-1. Why in tests are the images soft compare to other brands? I'm referring to the studio shots in the review done here and the recent Steve Huff competition. I thought (the reason) might be that Fuji was softening the images in order to show very low noise from the APS sensor, which seemed to be the lowest until the new Samsung came along.
Usually the issues are bad RAW converters for Fujifilm.
AlpCns2: Sympathy, and great respect for the considerable technical capabilities of Fuji. A properly customer-focused company too. Remember, these are the only guys that were good enough to design and fabricate cameras and lenses for, for example, a highly respected medium format brand such as Hasselblad. Not Nikon, not Canon - and I am saying that as a user of both systems.
These are the guys that design and supply world-class optics for all kinds of applications. Many companies do, of course, but few are so well attuned to their customer base these days. Good products is important, but the latter is a very good thing. It forces others (I'm looking at you, Nikon) to listen better.
Are you sure the were the only ones good enough? Perhaps Nikon and Canon were busy filling orders for all their top selling lenses and didn't have time to OEM for others.
Ian: According to Panasonic, "[T]he lens can deliver portraits with a rich stereoscopic effect". Not sure how this is possible with a single photograph. I think something got lost in translation. Other than that, cool news for m4/3.
Image quality compromises? You mean like having to stop your FF 85mm f1.8 lenses down to F3.5 to get them to be as sharp across the frame as the 45mm is wide open?
OortCloud: 42mm portrait lens? LOL!
Trolling is not for amateurs
Your comment actually made me LOL in real life.
Since you want to talk equivalence, can you find me a nice equivalent FF portrait setup that weighs 340g and fits in my jacket pocket? Because a GM5 and a 42.5mm f1.7 gives me that.
Where can I get a tiny FF body and 85mm f3.4 prime?
Tapper123: Always good to see more choices in mft lenses. What a great system.
I personally hope for a 90 or 100mm weather sealed 1:1 macro for long distance to subject shooting. Prefer Olympus since I don't need OIS. Would be amazing for insects and other small, skittish creatures in the field.
Those specific examples you cited are large insects. A telephoto zoom at 1:4-1:5 should have no problem photographing them well.
I didn't say that nobody would have a use for a very long macro. I was just questioning the statement that it is the "main thing" needed for the system.
misolo: Full specs here:http://www.panasonic.com/uk/consumer/cameras-camcorders/lumix-g-lenses.html
30/2.8 -- 180g, 1x magnification (2x equiv.)42.5/1.7 -- 130g
Just barely longer and heavier than the Olympus, but not enough to matter. 50mm vs 46mm and 130g vs 116g.
agaoo: can't wait for 42.5mm F1.7 though expected new weathersealed OIS lenses from panasonic.
It's a portrait lens. You need 1/100 to reliably prevent subject motion blur anyway and then you are about where OIS loses it's relevance.
I guess if you want to shoot landscapes in the dark with it?