arrow501: F3.0-6.9 *sigh*No EVF *sigh*
Confused about what category camera is in *sigh*
Wow, it is just like a PEN except totally different in every way.
Josh SZ: A picture is worth a thousand words...
And spawns 10000 more? :)
Wow! Go Tamron!!
tkbslc: It would be nice to see more Chinese companies that are actually creators rather than cloners.
I was criticizing the actions of companies and the inaction of a specific government. I also wished for MORE companies to be innovative in China, meaning that I feel some are and that more could be.
I certainly didn't use statements like "White America".
I missed the debate here, but I won't stand for being called "racist". There was ZERO racism in the statement above.
samhain: Good job Sony, nice to see a f1.4. I didn't think they had it in em. That's the kind of lens that grabs other brand shooters attention. Hopefully more fast 1.4's to come.
But- putting out a 90mm macro before an 85mm or 90mm portrait lens? Seriously? That just doesn't make sense to me. Just like when Fuji's intial lens launch included a 60mm macro and no portrait lens. Widely considered a 'wtf' move. Even Fuji later admitted that was a mistake.
No way to treat the Leica 45mm f2.8 as a portrait lens? I think the many users with nice portraits from that lens would disagree.
Panasonic launched a 45mm f2.8 Macro in the first year. Sure it was expensive, but certainly it existed. Claiming there was no portrait lens until the 3rd year is false.
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.