andywhoa: So DPR is where all the people who never grew up go to present their opinions? Most of the comments here are embarrassing. Would you act this way in front of your parents?
Where do you think they learned such behaviour?
pdelux: How to take a photo of a blood moon.
Step 1. - Go outside and take a photo of the the moonStep 2. - In Lightroom or Photo editing software of your choice change the colour of the moon to "blood" colour. (In newer Olympus cameras you may use the inbuilt colour function in the camera)Step 3. - Tell all your friends.
All great responses!! Lots of ways to skin a cat...
My point being, no one would be able to tell if you took a photo of a blood moon, or just took a photo of a moon and changed the colour.
How to take a photo of a blood moon.
m43 growing in industry acceptance. Its versatility cannot be ignored anymore.
Zigadiboom: Hmmm...wonder if Nikon will sue me if I develop a sensor which requires rubbing oil on its surface.
That would only sue you if you invent a shutter mechanism that grinds itself onto the sensor as well.
Nikon trying to recoup losses on compacts, turns to litigation...
Donnie G: Here are my crystal ball predictions, (for 2014 thru 2016), that I've come up with for my fellow Gear Heads to attack:
1. Camera sales will continue to shrink in the U.S. and Europe due to weak economies and even more widespread adoption of cellphone camera usage by the traditional P&S user.
2. Mirrorless interchangeable lens compact cameras (sensors sized APS-C or smaller) will continue to make up less than 15% of camera sales.
3. Fujifilm's X series will become the dominate MILC camera brand.
4. Canon and Nikon will continue to adapt to these new market conditions and will collectively own better than 80% of all camera sales regardless of type.
5. One or more of the current camera makers will quit the business or will be bought by another company.
Yeah, I said it!
nobody uses ovf for video
justmeMN: Shame on Canon, for not aggressively rushing into the money-losing mirrorless sector. :-)
Only a few years ago blackberry dominated the mobile/tablet/messaging space, but they became complacent. It only took a few years and they are almost bust.
The mighty can fall, it only takes a single product like the iphone.
If you fail to innovate, you are a sitting duck, I think canons shareholders should be very worried,
lacikuss: I used to own Olympus in the film era. It was great to have a Japanese manufacturer caring about size and IQ at the same time.
Nowadays, I think of IQ and I ask myself why should we trade camera size for IQ? Why is Olympus is not pushing for FF and smaller size? Is Sony the old Olympus?
By the way, I don't own neither but do use FF.
Myabe they see a market for smaller cameras. You cant compare sizes of digital cameras to Film analog cameras with hardly any electronics at all. Of course the original OM was small and FF, but there more in a camera than ever before. They did not have IBIS, image processors, memory, LCDs, rechargable batteries?, AUto Focus motors?
Plus the Boat anchor market is cornered by Two big companies, maybe olympus sees elsewhere.
vadims: "DSLRs can capture the moment better than mirrorless, because you're viewing directly, not through an LCD."
This reminds me those medieval scientists who refused to follow Galileo and use telescope because they believed that lenses were "distorting reality" and therefore insisted on observing with naked eye.
and yet the final image, is viewed through the LCD monitor or printed media...
veroman: Save for the very best of the full frames, the M10 images look no better and no worse than the countless thousands of other images that have been posted on dpreview in the course of their most recent (past 2 to 3 years) camera reviews.
Seems to me that camera choices these days have much, much more to do with price point, ergonomics, features and intended uses than image quality or anything having to do with image quality. They're all very good. The OM-D E-M10 is good. A Leica is good. The Fuji X Trans cameras are good. My old Canon 40D is good. Take your pick.
Well said. All cameras are good if used within the limits of their technology. Only in the extremes eg High ISO's will the little guys fall behind.
_P: I consider myself a long term and loyal Olympus customer. I starter with them back in 2005 with E-1 + 14-54 and 40-150/3.5-4.5 double kit. What a wonderful piece of photographic equipment! Especially the lenses. Then, to be honest, I could hardly find a candidate for upgrade… I got E-PL5 meanwhile for my wife and 25/1.4 and 75/1.8 primes for myself waiting for something like E-M1. Then, when it came out I was hoping to put my 14-54 back to work again…
If you need to lift shadows +4 EV you are probably not Exposing correctly. Change your technique, try ETTR and pull back highlights instead.
bobbarber: Given: Sensor technology gets better every year.
A. Therefore, people will need larger sensor cameras in the future.
B. Therefore, people will need smaller sensor cameras in the future.
Looking back to the history of large format, medium format, and 35mm film cameras is cheating. The logic behind your choice must come from your own ideas.
the most recent being 2001. well 13 years is a long time in technology years. 13 years ago there was no IPAD, IPHONE, Tablets. Wifi was barely invented.
retro76: Wow that was a very honest interview, something you don't see very often. I am impressed and will definitely take a strong second look at Olympus in the future.
Olympus is a Very honest company, just ask former CEO michael woodford. He was soo honest, he got the sack for it!
RStyga: The 16MP MFT sensors have been refined since first announced but I remain skeptical of the MFT as a system. I own and use MFT cameras and find this system very flexible and efficient. However, I'm not sure that Olympus and Panasonic will manage to keep a steady progress indefinitely given the physical limitations of the MFT sensor.
All sensors of all sizes have physical limitations. e.g. FF sensors are limited in the size of lenses that must accommodate the FF sensor. Improvement in sensors is improvement across the board, not just one format. There will always be an IQ gap, but there will always be a physical size gap of body and lenses.
Kund: Can someone plz explain what does "push the envelope" mean, for the non native English speakers?
"pushing the envelope" doesn't just mean improving. It means to push the limits, challenge the "status quo", come up with new and original ideas, a paradigm shift of ideas and innovation.
Jogger: I still shoot my D700 from late 2007.. the problem for Nikon is that i dont need to buy a new DSLR every year the way people do with mirrorless cameras. That is what is driving that market and why companies are trying to get in.
Consumers in the mirorrless segment of the market will buy lackluster cameras only to upgrade then annually (just read the m43 forum)... whereas a DSLR will last you a decade or more. Nothing glamourous here, nothing to show-off.. just a rock solid DSLR that does its job and lasts.
HFLM, No arguments there, but that is what I am saying, DSLR have not changed, because they are the leader and have no reason to innovate. But one might say that Mirrorless is the Evolution of the SLR. Even in nature some things are left behind because they become redundant - e.g. Bats are blind because they live in darkness no need for eye sight.
Maybe they don't buy new DSLR's because DSLR vendors keep releasing the same crap over and over, without innovation?
Plastek: " We have done some studies where we presented consumers with a DSLR and a mirrorless camera and ask them if the image quality was the same, which one they would chose, and generally they chose the DSLR." - I would answer in exactly the same way. Simply because DSLRs offer by far wider choice of lenses many of which are superior to mirrorless glass. And then there are whole systems of accessories, flashes, and well: everything else that in the end creates a photograph.
So: Yes, DSLRs DO offer better final image quality, but reasons for that go beyond body itself.
Im sure they print them out and put them up on their walls!
LFLee: I have an explanation why north American mirrorless market is weak: all those burgers make our hand so fat we can't press one button on mirrorless without touching other buttons... the camera is too small for our fat fingers and hands.
America has ingrained a bigger is better mentality (in most areas, not all). Look at the size of their cars, omg HUMMERS, Ford pickups, the size of 2 small european or Japanese cars, 25 inch Rims, BLING BLING, I guess cameras are rationalised the same.