IZO100: Why would anyone need something else on a MFT camera ?
If you are fine with the IQ of this lens then you are better off getting an advanced P&S camera which will provide similar IQ in a smaller package and with a much faster lens.
brendon1000: I am curious. Does this enhanced movie AF mode require STM lenses only or will they work with the regular Canon lenses ? Also is 3rd party lens compatibility compromised with this new tech I wonder.
Oh neat ! Good to know. :)
I am curious. Does this enhanced movie AF mode require STM lenses only or will they work with the regular Canon lenses ? Also is 3rd party lens compatibility compromised with this new tech I wonder.
Daro31: Great, fantastic technolovy, and excuse me for being cynical, all this so that someone can see a 2x2 inch photo on their I phone for .5 seconds. It really makes me wonder?
^^ Or an advanced amateur with BIG pockets. :P
Combatmedic870: Im disappointed.... I really feel they could have done more with it. Heck I could have improved it more then this(front dial, 1/4000 SS, Improved the lens)!
Well....Im sure its a good camera.
f4.9 is the long end. Its f1.8 at the small end.
Even the Canon G1X has a f2.8 - 5.8 lens albiet with a slightly larger sensor. However the G1X has a rather distinct size disadvantage over the R100.
guamy: Hmmm.. not a good substitute for my canon small and cute pocketable 24-120mm canon s100 with ND filter built in.
Not a direct comparison. One has a large sensor while the other has much smaller sensor in comparison while keeping the same body size. The RX100 MK I is still available though for those who want to save a few bucks.
For those who are willing to spend so much on a lens will probably be more than a casual arm chair photographer.
Just have a look at what is possible with this lens to get an idea. Tell me which of those photos is not sharp enough to be published in any reputed magazine.
Macx: I'm sure it has its select niche, but for me, a tele-converter seems like an anachronism with modern high-resolution digital photography where it is so easy to crop without losing any practical resolution for the output medium.
I am willing to bet that you aren't a birding or wildlife photographer or else you would never make such a statement.
People who shoot with 800mm lenses for birding still find the reach insignificant at times and those who care for max IQ crop as little as possible.
Thanatham Piriyakarnjanakul: Nikon 200-400 not just a half price but all body that match a 200-400 have and built-in tele-converter that call 'high-speed crop'.
@Ash - I don't disagree that it does speed up things but you are also loosing pixels at the start that you cannot get back.
Using a 1.4x TC degrades the IQ only slightly AND also allows you to crop further in post process.
That high speed crop that Nikon calls it can be easily done with any camera in post process.
The Canon built in TC is NOT something that can be easily replicated. And lets face it, attaching a TC to a Nikon 200-400mm is not an easy task considering the sheer weight and size of the Nikon.
Not saying the price of the Canon is justified but there are clear advantages for the Canon.
Mr Blah: This lens plus the upcoming EF-to-MFT Metabones Speed Booster on the GH3 equals quite the amazing package. $1400 for a 37-49mm f/1.3 equivalent sounds pretty nice.
If you use it with an Olympus system you will get 5 axis IBIS to boot !
Airless: LOL no U.S. price, Canon is a joke that hasn't made a relevant camera in years, DSLRs are dead and long live M4/3.
What matters if the shutter speed of the m43 camera is 1/60 seconds @ISO 100 at 12mm f2.8 then the Canon 24-70mm f4 (mounted on FF cam) will be only 1/30 at 24mm f4. Both FOV will be approximately equal.
Really shocking how people pick up facts from thin air. :P
The Panasonic 12-35mm collects 1 stop more light than the 24-70mm f4 but has less DOF for the same equivalent FOV on FF and about the same DOF as the 24-70mm f4 when paired with an APS-C body.
However its still one stop faster regardless of what camera you use the 24-70mm f4 on.
And the OMD sensor has shown to be better than the 18 MP sensor by practically every website which has tested the OMD against the Canon.
nguyenhm16: These lenses are autofocus. Also, Zeiss seems to have no problem selling manual focus ZF.2 and ZE lenses.
Zeiss doesn't make AF lenses for Canon or Nikon DSLRs since they would have to reverse engineer the AF routines which is not something Zeiss wishes to get into.
In this case Sony and Fuji have given Zeiss all the info they need to make their lenses so its fully compatible.
If they want to make m43 lenses they also will have all info so they can make m43 AF lenses as well if they wish.
Babka08: I'm sticking with my DA35 Limited Macro. Half the price. Less than a third the weight. Focusses closer ;-)
And then I'll wait for the 30mm DC 1.4 from Sigma. It will eventually be made for Pentax.
Pentax full-frame is years, not months, off in the distance, and they really don't have much in terms of modern lenses for full-frame.
Ha ha, it was an outdoor wedding ceremony in India and for sure it wasn't lit by candles but the area was large (so flash would have very limited coverage) and there were smaller lights placed around the area.
I would show a sample but since it was a wedding there were many people in the photo.
It happened again at a party with friends. Lighting in the restaurant was poor but with ISO 12800 I could get 1/80 shutter speeds and get good enough shots with only the ambient lighting. Thank goodness for the amazing high ISO capababilites of my friends 5D MK III. The photos would have looked like crap if I used my Sony A55. :P
ulfie: WHOA! 94mm (3.7 in.) long and nearly US $900. Rich guy's toy blunderbuss.
Actually Pentax had a body without IBIS (K110) though now all Pentax bodies support IBIS.
All Sony bodies have it and there wasn't an exception to that.
However IMO the best use of this lens is on FF bodies. Sony has a 35mm f1.8 which is an optical gem for $199 but only for ASP-C bodies.
morepix: Ha-ha? 2.7
If you don't like it thats fine. Everyone has different tastes and preferences which makes the world a much miore interesting place to live in.
However from what I can tell a lot many people like the strip (including me) so if you don't like it you are free to ignore this page and look at something else. Dpreview is not forcing anyone to read the comic strip.
Peiasdf: Lend more weight to the Pentax FF rumor.
The chances of Pentax informing Sigma that they are making a FF camera is extremely remote if downright impossible considering Pentax doesn't share anything about their lens mount with Sigma and Sigma has to reverse engineer their lenses for all DSLR mounts except their own and for mirror-less mounts.
IMHO its not correct to compare a 2 stops slower lens to a f1.4 lens.
Hardly anyone 'needs' a f1.4 lens but many people 'like' to have a f1.4 lens and many pros really 'want' a f1.4 lens as it makes life easier for them.
I tried shooting a wedding with a f2.8 zoom lens and trust me I ran out of shooting juice very quickly in certain scenarios.
At one event I was shooting at ISO 12800 with a 50mm f1.8 lens @ f1.8 and shutter speeds was barely 1/50 or so.
IBIS is nice of course but its useless for shooting things that move.
If I had a f2.8 lens I would have been forced to use a flash and make do with the flat lighting.
RichRMA: I can't really understand why the RX1 would win that prize. The whole idea, someone finally releases a FF mirrorless (no, not Leica) camera...and you can't change the lens. Why, why, WHY???! Sony blew a tremendous chance to get one up on Nikon and Canon and instead invented an expensive curiosity.
I will never buy an RX1 EVER. But I tried it out and was amazed at the sheer compactness of the darn FF camera. The IQ was superb and frankly I can see that it was an extraordinary feat for Sony to come up with such a small compact FF camera.
Sure I would have loved for it to be an ILC but I am sure Sony had some reason for not launching such a camera.