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.
David Jacobowitz: Important article, but that no credit or mention given to Joseph James is sincerely Not Cool.
He was arguing and explaining equivalence on these very forums years ago, and has had a very comprehensive essay on the subject (more so than this piece) for as long.
I find it highly unlikely that Richard Butler did not even look at that piece:
@Richard, it's difficult to persuasively argue that your article isn't at least in part based on Joseph's work, esp. when the article's title is a term Joseph himself appears to have coined. While you may not have consulted his work directly in your immediate research, it's clear to anyone who has followed the subject that a significant portion of the information available online both here and elsewhere has a provenance which leads directly to Joseph. Prudence dictates that his work is deserving of attribution in your article.
Many times my FF photos are equivalent to my m4/3's photos - poorly conceived, poorly composed, and poorly executed :)
Interesting development when you consider that Microsoft is rumored to earn upwards of $2B/year in patent royalties from companies in the Android ecosystem. Cameras represent a sizable chunk of the utility in smartphones/tablets and so I imagine this licensing deal is of strategic defensive interest to Microsoft.
These niche cameras are the last bastion of high-margin profitability and even they are coming under competitive price pressure. Tough industry.
The FZ is sharper than the RX10 @ 200mm but looks significantly softer at the wide end.
" I was surprised by how many images were in focus considering I was shooting fast moving, unpredictable subjects on a mirrorless camera."
Can you please quantify this more precisely? Each of us probably has different expectations regarding the in-focus rate.
jackf00: Strange that small upgrades makes 4 articles in 2 days for Nikon, when huge changes on Panasonic GH3 to GH4 (including 4K video) made only a short half-page quick summary article at annoucement and then NOTHING more after 5 month !
Shame on DPR for being so partial, that's NOT PROFESSIONAL at all !
@snooked123, rational logic has no place in this comment section.
"With the introduction of the new Photos app and iCloud Photo Library, enabling you to safely store all of your photos in iCloud and access them from anywhere, there will be no new development of Aperture"
I don't see how these two statements are even remotely related or causal. Companies like Apple and Adobe must think people turn off their brains whenever the word 'cloud' is used.
viking79: Go price how much OLPF glass costs, and quickly see Nikon is saving tons of money not including any AA filter at all. Rough guess is a full frame filter is going to cost $100 US +/-.
Seems like a small upgrade, Nikon must be feeling a lot of pressure from the competition to push it out so soon.
The D800 is a much more mature and feature-rich camera than the A7r. And I own an A7r.