GothamMutt: Umm ... just upgraded to 7.5 I don't see this "format icon" Instagram speaks of. What did I miss?
Probably a staggered rollout, just in case something goes wrong. Standard operating procedure when you're rolling features out to hundreds of millions of users.
jkrumm: New format works great on a large computer. Could be a little better on an iPad.
I downloaded a few raws and my general impression is that they look like the lenses used are not so great. Either that or I'm just used to the super sharp shots I get with my EM1. The 25mm shots especially looked soft and a little weird.
Oh, my mistake. I see what you're talking about now. I'll bring it up with the team.
We discussed whether to attach them to both the OOC JPEG and the Raw converted JPEG or just the latter, but decided on both to increase visibility of the Raw file available for download.
chocobanana: Great job with the new samples gallery, thank you.
Here's some feedback:
- Missing keyboard shortcuts for navigating gallery (at least left & right keys for previous & next image, respectively)- I'd prefer the Loupe to be embedded in the right side panel and then use the mouse cursor on the main image view to point the center of the loupe view. This way the reference image is always unobstructed and gives a better view of the context - When the comment count indicator on the thumbnail inside the bottom filmstrip is clicked, switch to that image AND switch to the respective comment tab on the side panel. If I click the comment count now, I have to manually switch to the comment tab after that :(
Edit - One more feedback point:
- Navigating the 1:1 view of those A7R II images is quite the job ;-) How about adding a navigator view in the side pane, similar to the navigator view panel you have in Photoshop?
Which browser are you using? Left / right keyboard shortcuts are definitely there. :)
We're gathering feedback on the loupe and will make changes shortly. Your feedback about the 1:1 view sounds very much like it is the same as your feedback about the loupe? Unless I'm misinterpreting.
re: clicking on the comment icon. Good idea.
ThePhilips: In FireFox, the list/scroll bar on the left is "truncated": it spans beyond the bottom margin of the window. (Only top of the last entry is visible. The bottom arrow of the scroll bar is not visible.)
You can try to reproduce it: in A7R2 gallery expand Apertures and ISOs, in browser activate the "Zoom Text Only" (View > Zoom) and then press Ctrl-+ few times.
You mean on the sidebar? Thanks for catching that. Will look into it.
John Bean (UK): Looks good :-)
Couple of issues though:
On my Win7 desktop PC it works fine with a mouse but completely ignores touchscreen input that works with everything else (Chrome browser).
On my Android tablet (a Lenovo with 4.4.2 and Chrome browser) the loupe misbehaves badly. It centres its "box" on the touched point but displays an enlarged image from somewhere well below and to the right. If I drag the box right towards the edge the displayed area corrupts into a horizontal smear.
It's a good effort though, certainly good enough to persude me to log in for the first time in years just to leave the bug feedback ;-)
Thanks for the feedback. Will look into the touch issues.
nicoboston: I like this new gallery a lot. It is a great improvement over the previous system.One minor point: the loupe. It seems to be controlled by artificial intelligence, or something else I cannot domesticate :-)))Or it might be a compatibility issue with the browser (I'm on a Mac, Yosemite, Safari). For instance, I could not determine how to enlarge the borders and corners of an image with the loupe.Thank you, though!
Thanks for the feedback. Currently taming some demons with the loupe, and I'll look at adding resizing.
fotojoaobritespt: I preferred the focal length to 35mm equivalent
Heard! We're working on it.
spidermoon: Please make Gallery working on phone. Only Chrome on my Android can display the gallery, Firefox and Dolphin show the exif panel full screen, with no drag avaible. On chrome, you can hide this huge panel by dragging it to the right. And the "X" button close the selected gallery, not the info panel.
@spidermoon Can you check if you're viewing the desktop site on your phone? We're using a different gallery layout for phones (tablet gets the desktop view). You won't be able to look at 100% images on your phone in this system, but we figured you wouldn't want to be downloading 20MB JPEGs on your phone either.
belle100: I got a bit confused with the ''All" select in the filter section. Shouldn't it be checked by default when we start entering the filter section.In addition, the filter by lens, apertures, etc are colored yellow even if the "All" is checked. That seems a little bit odd to me. Don't get me wrong. it just a tiny problem and I don't mean nitpicking. Just feel it's a bit illogical that's all. No hard feeling. It's a great improvement over the old one. Well done DPR for giving us this.
You're right. "All" should be selected by default and that is in fact the result when you expand a filter option.
It's <i>not selected</i> by default because it would be overwhelming if all the checkboxes were in the yellow styling. A more subtle checked styling could be used, but then an even more subtle unchecked style would be needed. And with the grey on grey, I felt that only using the checkbox to indicate checked vs unchecked was not enough visual impact.
Horshack: Very nice interface. I like how it remembers that you're viewing 1:1 so that if you click another photo in the gallery it'll load the full-sized version of that one too. Have you considered using progressive JPEGs for the 1:1?
@Buhl213 Which browser? I'll try to reproduce on a Mac.
rfsIII: Given the predilections of the various DPR editors, you also need a tab that lets you sort by breed of cat; vintage, make, and model of car (with sub category racing or street); national cuisine; genre of musical group; and nose ring vs. no nose ring.
Beard vs no beard.Bald vs hair.Thick-rimmed vs thin-rimmed glasses.
Mike5076: Nifty, I thought I saw another application/function for taking multiple pics of the same scene (stationary camera) and the software would remove any transient objects (tourists). Similar but now with a moving camera?
I believe Samsung and / or Sony have features like that. Those implementations are rather rudimentary though. They work with multiple images of the same scene and just masking out the objects.
pkosewski: This camera simply confirms that all Chinese-made sport cameras most likely come from the same company.We might have believed that dozens of GoPro-like models are just cheap imitations of the popular original. But this new camera looks just like the Polaroid Cube and is somehow similar to SJCAM M10 (both cameras have been available for a while). Of course they are all weather sealed without any additional housing.
@Mister Roboto: Sure, put a GoPro side-by-side against an a7R II and you would be able to tell which is worse and which is better, but on its own, put in the hands of a skilled professional, it would produce [pretty good results](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTcNtgA6gHs).
Looks are one thing, but the two you mentioned don't do 1080p60 let alone 1440p30. Also, the Session's dimensions are ~38mm cubed, while the Polaroid's is 35mm cubed. That's a lot of waterproofing that's fit in the extra 1.5mm on each side? There's gotta be some additional engineering going on.
DStudio: How are they going to distinguish between live streaming and video recording? They'd have to look closely at your phone while recording.
Or if they're still banning video, how will they know whether a smartphone is in photo or video mode? The screen looks nearly identical in most cases.
In practice they won't be able to tell the difference.
mpgxsvcd: Great now I can get cell phone quality pictures from 1-2 miles away. I honestly never understood the allure of these super zoom cameras. When zoomed all the way in atmospheric conditions start to become the biggest factor. Really how often do you need to take a picture of something that you can’t see with your naked eye?
Just look at the quality all of these cameras produce. Yup the subject fills the frame but there is no detail at all. Everything is mush because of poor optics and diffraction limitations.
I really wish they would just stick with 25x or less instead of the ridiculous 80x+ that these cameras do.
My 8 inch telescope is F4.0 but they can only get 800mm focal length with it. How can you expect these super small sensor cameras to do the job better than a large diameter telescope can?
This category is just a marketing gimmick. The sample images that Dpreview was able to take are terrible. It is impossible to take a decent picture at 2000mm with these cameras.
>You would be so much better off with a bigger aperture medium sized sensor camera than with these small sensor super zooms. I really think that the 24mm-400mm focal length range is just about ideal. F2.8-F4.0 would work just fine with that as well.
So... you mean the FZ-1000, essentially (25mm wide end vs. your requested 24mm).
Deorum: Seems funny how when he takes the camera out of the advertised bag, lens cap is already off.
Nice bag though, nice design
From the Kickstarter: "Front “Thermo-forming” lens protector. Ultra rigid from outside – soft and padded from inside."
David 247: Saw those before. Thinking about ordering one for my FZ1000 since I'll be retiring to the Philippines soon with its 6 month Monsoon season, frequent tropical storms and periodic typhoons. Need to figure out what size.
Probably an Agua 35, just to be safe, but you'll want to double check their measurements / contact them to be sure.
InTheMist: I've been down on mirrorless because my first was an x100s which is a slow piece of junk.
Two years later, I tried a Nikon 1. All I can say is that if Nikon was able to use the same technology in a camera with a large sensor, that's not dog-ugly, they would be on to something special. It's QUICK!
Nikon's definitely made strides since the J1. Even the J1 was a fast camera, but you could definitely tell it was a v1 (no pun intended) product; very rough around its edges.