Brilliant photos.All right, all right, all right!!!
Interval shooting limited to 99 shots?Am I reading it wrong?
What I'm wondering is whether he could have used a Panasonic GM1 with kit lens instead for most of the dry takes, and end up with a video that would be way sharper and clearly the best thing to push in grading south of 700g...
I know they are at a remote location and that autonomy would be noticeably reduced but, well, you get what you get, and you only get it once a trip...
badi: well... disappointing at the highest level (the camera i mean) ...I've searched a bit for samples that show the "bokeh" tool in action, and it's just horrible to tell the least. The edges detection is so poor, that the effect looks just like you made a "quick dirty selection" with some auto-lasso tool in PS, and apply some blur (which doesn't even look good) ...
I believe the problem is two fold:
HW - the depth camera clearly has very low resolution. I'd bet it's about 150x100 if not less.
SW - the focus software tries to interpolate the depth edges, but does it in a completely basic and brute way (simple tiling). This is where HTC can improve and one way to do it would be to combined it with contrast information (edge detection) from the image captured by the main camera.Lets just hope they think of it...
ThePhilips: ".. which allows for the application of bokeh effects to your images. "
You surely mean "shallower DOF".
This is an interesting development.
DPR, please make a short review of the feature!
GSMArena has done it, and believe me, it's not pretty...Clearly the depth camera has a dismal resolution:http://www.gsmarena.com/showpic.php3?sImg=reviewsimg/htc-one-m8/camera/gsmarena_002.jpg&idReview=1062&idPage=8
This is a great example on how a company can let a interesting concept totally dominate and backfire on a basic feature.
Because of the auxiliary depth camera, HTC managed to:
* remove IS from the main camera probably because they haven't sourced a depth camera with stabilization.
* keep resolution at a nearly unacceptable minimum, because the resolution on the depth camera is pretty dismall and it can't keep up with the resolution and stereo separation from the main camera (check this example: http://www.gsmarena.com/showpic.php3?sImg=reviewsimg/htc-one-m8/camera/gsmarena_002.jpg&idReview=1062&idPage=8 )
They would probably have better luck featuring two better resolution cameras and doing the focus tricks by stacking in software.
Right now, either they come up with some killer app that uses the depth camera (like a sound radar for blind people, or a 360 wrap around panorama modeler, etc) or it will be a half baked effect that no one will use outside of Facebook.
Erick L: If they were AF, people would complain about price.
Yeah but, you know, no AF, therefore ... A WITCH!!!
babart: At last! I'm getting in line. I really want a 10 or 12mm lens, but I've put off buying another two-pound zoom that takes up half your camera bag. I was, however, considering the Fuji X 10-24, but at $1000 vs $400 for the Samyang, the latter is a no-brainer. Samyang lenses are excellent optically, and who needs autofocus at 12mm?
At 12mm and F2.0 I think you just might!
Good!Finally some good use for HundreadaCores!
CJ100570: It kinda, sorta takes 50MP pictures....
Well, it stacks much faster than my email@example.comGhz.If that's not an achievement, I don't know what is...
rhlpetrus: The weird thing about the launch is that Samsung has used Nikon 1 images.
I almost thought the mound would be the same. That would have been great for users of the cameras, but no ...
Strange.The post was deleted as I'm writing this reply.The pictures were from the same session. Same model same clothes and same location.
Nikon is forgetting is that in a Compact System Camera you just can't focus (now matter how impressive their focus solution is, pun intended) on one of the words: "Camera" which is exactly what they did, and where they have really excelled.
"Compact" ? This isn't any more compact than an Olympus E-PL5, let alone a Panasonic GM1. And the lenses aren't smaller than equivalent m43 ones...
"System" ? How many lenses are there? 8 (Not counting identical and near repeated FLs) These again not being faster nor smaller and definitely not cheaper than m43 equivalents.
Result? They get trounced by micro43.And we haven't even started discussing price...
Will it do 60fps in RAW capture?If it does, it's got some nearly unique point. You can just open the shutter, capture (and stack) as much of those pictures as you want, and it's like you can decide shutter speed AFTER you took the photo!!!
The interview in a nutshell: Canon and Nikon, you make lousy ILC cameras. Keep doing it!P.S. We make lousy video. We'll keep doing it.
mpgxsvcd: 20 megapixels, 1/2.3" sensor, with a 1200mm lens, at F6.3. Will this madness ever end?
I wish they would just re-badge the Canon G6 with a Mark II version and give us 7 megapixels with an F2.0-F3.0 lens on a 1/1.8" sensor. That would be great with today's processors.
Make that 8MP instead, with 4K video capture.BIG PIXELS!!!
1080/60p? Is this a joke? Do we have to buy their cheaper cameras to get the best of their video? Meanwhile their m43 cameras are still featuring a codec and frame rates from the Middle Ages.
Just a Photographer: I am so glad that there are lots and lots of alternatives to lightroom!
Sure there are and better ones too, just not for mobile.With such powerful mobile chipsets these days, it's hard to understand why there isn't any more mobile raw developers.Adobe is using their name to set a foot on the door.A cloud based editing service makes no sense on top of a mobile on a data plan unless the app is extremely conservative on cloud usage. And if it is conservative on cloud usage it needs to be hungry on local storage thus making no sense to go iOS first.Maybe they need to rely on loyals to get started, maybe they are just testing the market but I don't see the pros going with this app if they are within their senses...
I'd say that by the count of dpreview staff that came out justifying the review and the score, they're both mortally wounded.
darkplace: Great. Now i can change my lenses under water.
And below -9º.
jon404: First impressions... what? You couldn't take it to a beach... or find a nearby swimming pool? Suggest breaking that test budget and rent a motel room... hit that pool... and see how it works in snorkel-depth water. And, while you're at it, why not put a test target on the bottom of the pool... say at the 2-meter depth line... and start a reference standard for future underwater camera tests?
I thin Jon has a point. What's the point of previewing a UW camera if you don't test it UW?Otherwise dpreview might as well put up a link to the J3.