Marty4650: Is there something this thing can do that I can't do with my Panasonic GM1 and my smartphone?
Wait... I think I just figured it out. It is a lot cheaper. You pay only $299 for it, and since you are using your smartphone as the viewfinder and controller, you don't need those things built into the "camera."
Yes but the ergonomics will be awful for "normal" shooting. Might be OK for special projects, but I would take a "real" camera any day. I did use the Sony module on a smartphone, and it was a real PITA.
baloo_buc: Until mirrorless will have full PDAF they will have a huge handicap even for static scenes.I have both mirrorless and dSLR cameras and I seldom regret I don't have the other with me (especially true for mirrorless).So the gap is narrowing. Still the mirroless is too small for me.
That has nothing to do with the focusing technology. If the focus point is not on the subject or is too big, the camera can't know where you want it to focus. Did you use the small focus points? Panasonic cameras also have spot focus option, which uses a focus point that is even much smaller than a dslr phase detection sensor.
Yes, AF speed on static subjects is very fast and almost always spot on, which is far from true with a dslr!
ttran88: If PDAF works well with metabones adapters, Canon has officially become Sony's third party lens maker.
Haha, good one :D
VERY nice upgrade ! Now where did I put my Visa? Oh yes, I can't afford it :(
rubank: How interesting to see what the G7 can do at f/16-22.... (maybe not)
Well, I guess there are neutral density filters for those occasions.
forpetessake: Last time I shot with Panasonic was 4 years ago. I didn't like it because of poor colors. Now 4 models later Panasonic still has the same poor colors... On the other hand they make very good rice cookers... Maybe they should stick with that.
And if you can't shoot raw to tailor colors to your own taste, maybe you should get back to the kitchen and prepare some rice.
Would make a nice standard lens on my OMD :D
I think it might be to show the diffraction correction feature. You can notice a mush stronger sharpening in the picture.
Electronic first curtain shutter?
Ah, you get what you pay for :D
photofan1986: Images look good, for sure, but I see that as an amateur photographer, I really don't want a über-high megapixel camera.
@ FodgeandDurnCertainly, but what can be considered as "acceptable" within the DOF limits is subjective, and the higher the resolution, the lower the threshold of tolerance would be, imo.
@ DaveE1I understand that, and I really enjoyed getting to 16 megapixels, up from the first 6 megapixel serious camera I had, but seeing those samples, I realize how difficult it is getting a meaningfully usable image with a full frame high resolution camera. The samples taken at high apertures display way too shallow DOF, and once you stop down too much, you get into diffraction territory. What I mean is that to enjoy the resolution advantage, you really have to shoot carefully, i.e.: excellent lens, stopped down, not too much, no camera movement, perfect focus... In everyday use, I don't need that.
Images look good, for sure, but I see that as an amateur photographer, I really don't want a über-high megapixel camera.
nikkornikon: They Need to, Like Fuji...to Step away from 16mp. It is time to move on. When 24mp is truly old...16 seems freaking ancient.
Why, you print billboards of your cat?
No autofocus, but out-of-focus :)
Ok, now we have cameras with great dynamic range and huge resololution, we can finally use lenses like this one.