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.
TheWineLake: How is there a zoomy effect in the sky on #3?
Looks like a standard long exposure (probably with a neutral density filter). When clouds are being blown around quite a bit, a long shutter speed will give the zoomy effect.
Alpha Jack: Anyone know if it will be jpeg only or will it accept RAW images?
@sevenfoot: Make sure you've set your settings to "Original". When I did that, and then uploaded a Raw file, I was able to download the original file. Granted, it counted against my 15GB limit.
James Wages: Sounds great. But it's certainly not ground-breaking on mobile until it comes to iOS. Like it or not, iOS commands the lion's share of the mobile space.
Instagram's Hyperlapse is nowhere ubiquitous either. The market for bad sped-up footage is just small.
nitroman: Haven't Instagram been doing this for months ? I have it on my iPhone 6. :D
Microsoft's Hyperlapse was actually announced first and then the same day or very soon thereafter, Instagram announced theirs. Instagram Hyperlapse is currently iOS-only.
Also, the difference between the two is Instagram's uses gyroscope data and you don't have access to your original video, while Microsoft's is a video processor application but doesn't get the gyroscope data (and it can be run on your desktop).
Zenza R: I can't find it in the store???
The third last paragraph lists all relevant download links.
lovEU: Btw, how does 8K translate into storage requirements?
Here's a tidbit from when NHK was showing off its 8K technology.
> At 120 frames per second (UHD allows for 24, 25, 50, 60, and 120 fps), a raw 7680×4320 video feed clocks in at 48 gigabits per second (Gbps). The Super Hi-Vision spec (SMPTE 2036) supports 22.2-channel sound, too, which comes in at around 50Mbps. After compression (NHK has developed a special codec for Super Hi-Vision), the entire stream clocks in at around 500Mbps [62.5MBps].
This is presumably not Raw video though. Considering a 36MP D800 Raw file is ~75MB, you'll probably need multiple multiples of RED's 1TB MINI-MAGs, clocking in at $3,900 a piece.
This is all speculation though. ;)
NameFinder: Deja Vu - MV1 reloaded:
It was 1997, when Canon launched a "hybrid camera" ("convergence camera" it is called here) named OPTURA MV1. Of course, this was not a 4K cam but a dv cam - however, the ergonomics and over-all concept looked quite comparable to the XC10.
The web address below lists 3 recording modes:field movie modeframe movie modephoto mode
To "visit" e.g. here: http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/dvc/data/1997-2001/1997_mv1.html?lang=us&categ=crn&page=1997-2001&p=2
In a news environment it's not always about getting the sharpest shot, but getting a shot. How many times have bad photos made it to the front page of a breaking story until it could be replaced later on by a better shot? There might be motion blur if shot at slower shutter speeds, but within the 30fps you'll probably find one that's acceptably sharp, which is what some photographers found when doing just that with the 1D C: https://vimeo.com/56241602.
princecody: Why would I buy this when the Panasonic FZ1000 is only a fraction of the cost? Someone please enlighten me regarding this outrageous price tag :)
Build quality can't be overstated. Though we can only speculate about the build quality of the XC10, the weight is probably indicative of the materials used.
I've used the FZ1000 and though it's a great camera, it is not something that I would trust to bang around / use in a less than ideal setting.
Dale mentions above that in the past, photographers needing to do prints / fine art work used one set of tools and videographers shooting video used another set of tools, and this is very much the case with the MV1 you mentioned. Not good enough for still imagery, and not up to snuff for professionals (or maybe DV recording was professional back then; I don't know for sure).
When you're able to shoot 4K video and extract an 8MP still which is good enough for most applications, as well as a dedicated 12MP mode for slightly more detail, you start having a truly one device covers both spectrums device.
DenisBBergeron: How Sony Camera sensor can be worst than Nikon or Canon sensors ? Sony make sensors for both !
What Barney said.
I hope I'm answering the right question, but Canon doesn't use Sony sensors. Only Nikon does.
Paul Treacy: No reliable raw support. Just tried it. Not for X100 anyway. Good for tiff files though. At least that's something.
Thumbnails would be nice.
Have you tried converting to DNG and uploading? I know it's not ideal, and I have to do that myself, but that's one option.
Photo_Joe: I try to use this...
Only Microsoft Vista or newer supported (and Mac ):
"Cloud Drive Desktop is only compatible with PC computers running Windows Vista and above."
So, with Microsoft XP and 2003 Server you cannot use this service... you can only use the web interface what is limited and not comfortable...
And about RAW files:
"RAW photo files are proprietary file formats developed by each camera manufacturer. Many RAW photo files are identified by Amazon Cloud Drive as photos and will not count against your storage limit if you're a Prime member. "
Who is a "Prime member"? It's a default Amazon account?
Supported RAW files:
Nikon (NEF files) Nikon D1, Nikon D1X, Nikon D4, Nikon Coolpix A, Nikon E5700, Nikon AW1, Nikon D800, Nikon D50, Nikon D610
Canon (CR2 Files) Canon 5D, Canon 1D, Canon 1D MarkIIN, Canon Rebel SL1, Canon 60D, Canon 5D MarkIII, Canon 1D MarkIV
Sony (ARW files) Sony A7, Sony A7R, Sony A6000, Sony NEX-5T, Sony NEX-3N, Sony NEX-6
Vista was released in 2006 and was a complete under the hood overhaul of XP, released in 2001. Unfortunately, supporting XP and 2003 Server would make developing software much more difficult.
Prime members are not default Amazon accounts. They are members who have paid for Amazon Prime, Amazon's $99 2-day shipping service (in addition to other services).
That list of Raw files formats is not the definitive list unfortunately.