JonB1975: Want, want, want....... My first dream camera since the 1Ds MkII! As for those people saying Ansel Adams would never touch something like this - How the hell would you know???
He wouldn't. It did not exist when he was alive. Those self-righteous purists need to go smoke one and relax.
I'm gonna buy this and wear it around my neck. I'll use it to take pictures of ramen bowls and bearded dudes at SOMA food trucks. it The other hipsters with the puny iPhones will be forced to worship me as a god.
That's some aggressive noise reduction in low light.
I have named my massive tool Casey Junior.
OK idea. I won't accept the implicit premise that the flatness of the shots indicates that they are documentary images that won't dilute their message with esthetic effect. These are essentially just dull pics of prisons.
jaygeephoto: Some here get it, most do not. It's clearly an understanding of the history and aesthetics of photography and an appreciation of the techniques and methods. This comes through educating one's self. The derisive and boorish comments are clearly from those who seek pleasure at criticizing the efforts of others.
"Getting it" and liking it are different things.
You know who pushed the technological envelope and did something simultaneously interesting and beautiful? Harold Edgerton. To me, this is half forensic, half Chuck Close (though less attractive), and half disgusting. But, you know, YMMV.
There's some element of the barnyard about these...I can almost smell it.
In reconstitituted Soviet Russia, Photoshop tricks use YOU!
The Chinese government will shut you down in a heartbeat for not following proper business practice. Proper business practice consists of showing the proper financial consideration to the officials of the government.
I'm an easily bored gadget-loving idiot with money to burn. Will I like this, or should I just buy something with an Apple logo? I mostly care about impressing dumb girls and dudes with handlebar moustaches and ideas about what app is cool.
peevee1: DPR, you have a mistake in your spec table for AW110, it starts from f/2.8, not f/3.9 like AW110.
Mine's been good. Rapid changes in temp, pressure, and moisture levels are challenging. Occasionally a little condensation, but nothing outside of the realm of ordinary physics.
Solution in search of a problem.
Are these taken with exposure on auto? Every one of them looks significantly underexposed to me. Fine on screen maybe, but they'll print awfully dark. If that's auto, I'd be using +2 compensation all the time.
CaseyComo: Having seen some samples, I now fully understand why this design died out. In plain language, these images look like sh1t. Blurry (not soft) and the bokeh is HIDEOUS. People who buy this in a quest for something different...well, I think you'll regret it once the novelty wears off.
The Wright Flyer was a groundbreaking aircraft in its day. I sure as heck would not fly one.
Having seen some samples, I now fully understand why this design died out. In plain language, these images look like sh1t. Blurry (not soft) and the bokeh is HIDEOUS. People who buy this in a quest for something different...well, I think you'll regret it once the novelty wears off.
CaseyComo: Why not just be modern and crapify your photos with a computer like everyone else?
Hating is fun.
Danny: Darn, I like it. All the negative comments, I don't get it. This is a resurrection of an authentic lens that takes images with that 19th century nostalgic 'look'. It gives me wet collodion dreams.
It's because people are dicks. BTW, I think this thing is idiotic, and ridiculous-looking, too. So, um, that makes me...look, at least I am aware of it. That's the first step.
Why not just be modern and crapify your photos with a computer like everyone else?
To me, a world where Google controls _everything_ is not a great thing.