Richard, regarding your comments about the G7 appearing to have better image stabilization than the RX100, is that compared to the RX100M3 or the earlier generations? The RX100 and RX100M2 both had very ineffective stabilization, essentially yielding zero noticeable improvement. However the RX100M3 stabilization is much better and is good for at least 3 stops.
jhendrix: Imaging Resource says the new sensor provides improved "clarity" over the 70D and eats the 1DX for lunch.
The 1DX is much larger and heavier than the 7DM2, so if the 7DM2 ate the 1DX for lunch then it will have the mother of all stomach aches. And a voided warranty, since gluttony is not covered.
Retzius: Nikon went back to the AA filter?
Nikon has never released a 24MP FF body without an AA filter. The pixel density is too low to avoid aliasing.
One-click zoom! The D610 has moved up to a deluxe apartment in the sky.
arhmatic: The iPhone is probably the most used camera mainly because it's in your pocket. I've been using one daily since 2007.
Otherwise, is below average, I have to sadly admit... No exposure compensation, no ISO, interface nowhere near Nokia's....
Camera+ doesn't implement true exposure compensation - it doesn't alter the aperture or shutter speed - it only adjusts the brightness of the resulting JPEG.
iOS 8 is adding exposure control.
P&S cameras, the bell tolls for thee.
Not sure this 85mm has a place like the Otus 55mm does. When the 55mm came out there wasn't any DSLR 50mm lens that was very sharp wide-open; the Sigma 50 ART and Sony 55 FE came after. However there are lots of great 85mm designs, from the very inexpensive Nikon 85G f/1.8 and even the older Canon 85 f/1.8, up to Canon's superlative 85mm f/1.2L II.
cgarrard: Great camera but Sony needs to add lenses to its lineup. Bad. They do that and the camera world is their oyster.
For the general A7 series of cameras I would agree. But the A7s is a primarily a video camera and video is shot almost exclusively with manual focus; with E-Mount nearly any lens ever made can be adapted to it.
It would be neat if cameras used their electronic level circuit to detect the rapid acceleration of a fall and triggered photos in response. Some cameras already use the circuit to detect drops, like the RX100. I suppose that information could be used to void warranties.
They beat published growth and earnings targets but fell short of the whisper revenue growth targets, a necessity to sustain such a richly valued stock. Still I think they sneaked in their IPO just in the nick of time, right at the apex of their lifelong growth and earnings potential. Amazing how anyone would invest in a camera company with the direction the industry is trending, no matter how innovative the individual company.
Bob Meyer: I always get a kick out of the comments at DPR.
There are those from obvious fan-people, unable to even acknowledge that another brand might offer any advantages at all, and come up with a multitude of ways to ignore obvious facts.
Then there are those who think that a camera is defined by one feature or measurement, be it sensor size, low light performance, AF speed, or something else. This group probably overlaps greatly with the fan-people.
And those who seem to understand that a camera is really a system, made up of many parts, but think that what's important to them in a system MUST be what's important to everyone else, so the opinion of anyone who disagrees with them is obviously wrong!
Sadly, the smallest group seems to be those who recognize that no camera system is perfect, all involve trade-offs, and what works best for you might not be best for me. That sort of worldview is in short supply, even among DPR staff, who always have to call one thing or another "the best."
Nearly every camera designed in this class does most things well. If we had to recount those basics every time a new camera were released then we'd have 95% duplication of discussion, hence most tech talk is focused on what's new and exceptional.
Sony must have missed your memo because they put a big "S" on the front of the camera, which Sony says stands for "Sensitivity", as in low-light sensitivity, ie the specific value proposition for this camera.
The GH4 is a great video camera but the A7s's 2EV+ noise advantage has enormous utility for those wanting to shoot in available light or with minimal lighting setups.
Any time a purportedly free site launches a new "initiate" be sure to grab your wallet and don't let go.
It's an interesting concept and I hate to question innovation but is the technology uniquely useful for smartphone-sized sensors, where most images have very deep DOF, and where the selective focus look can easily be achieved with an in-phone PP digital blur filter?
Samuel Dilworth: Paving the path to subscription-only Lightroom, as feared …
I long for the old days of selling something the customer wants at a fair price. Why is this model so untenable?
@Samuel, it's because the pace of innovation has slowed to a crawl but shareholder demands for earnings growth remains. Adobe understands there is no value-based rationalization for users to upgrade PS/LR, outside of support for newer camera models. Their strategy response for this fully-matured software market was to lock people into forced upgrade cycles.
That 4K screen grab looks awesome - I wonder how well the 4K grabs would hold up with interframe compression on moving subjects. Also nice to hear it focuses faster than the RX10, which in my experience focuses a bit slowly. Shame about the plastic-feeling body though.
falconeyes: 18 hours ago, David Jacobowitz made an argument that this article should cite work which helped evolve the concept of equivalence (or how I call it, the equivalence theoreme).
To this end, I observed that the concept was missing in internet discussions dated 2007, Jan 11. At that time, Daniel Buck in http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/544062/ described the Brenizer method on the Fred Miranda forum (actually before Ryan Brenizer "invented" it; he did not). The effect is easily understood using equivalence (stitching effectively creates a larger sensor). Yet, the fredmiranda discussion fails to recognize this relation and does a poor job explaining the effect or compute its effective aperture.
Therefore, I think it is safe to assume that the equivalence theoreme was discovered after 2007 January. Moreover, this is a nice example how useful the equivalence theoreme actually is ...
@JACS, many of the best inventions seem trivial in retrospect but still required a clever mind to discover and elucidate.
This is like apologizing to a child for being out of broccoli at dinner time, out of soap at bath time, and out of toothpaste at night time.