(continuing my previous post):Things can get complicated because of the Walmart enormous long-term success. Therefore the original photos could be considered an "historic" document, and the Waltons loose any right to the photos picturing their images. So, in conclusion, only the photographer has rights to the photos.IMO
An analogy1) an architect is hired to do a set of plans for someone who wants to build a building. 2) plans done, the architect gets paid, the plans are given to a contractor who builds the building.3) ten years later the owner of the building, tells the contractor to build another building based on the same plans paid for ten years earlier.4) But the architect wants to be paid to allow them to use again the same plans .Law suit and counter law suit. Who do you think will win?THE ARCHITECT will win, because the plans are HIS/HER intellectual property.
Now, back to the photograps issue.the photographer was originallly paid, but still holds intellectual property of the photos.The Waltons do not have property of the photos, however, their consent to commercialize their image in the photos was only temporary, for the original occasion.Now, use of the photos must be negotiated by two groups, each having some rights, none of them having the whole right of use.
could this camera replace the need for a 12mm-35mm lens (for a m4/3)?
Maybe the point of MIT algorithm is not to measure how worthy is a photo: just how easy are people to be fooled
Well, in my modest gallery here I have a couple of cats and some birds. I don't know what that means, but my cats have been viewed an average of 2x times more than the birds... (the record is a black cat by night: 439 times). Instead, my favorite picture (moonlight over the ocean) was viewed fewer times than even the birds...wonder if a bikini would beat the cat...
J Parker: Leica gets a disproportionate share of animosity that I'm still trying to figure out.
Leica introduces an $8,000 monochrome camera and many of us are outraged.But Phase One introduces a monochrome camera that costs 5x the price ($40,000!) and the forums here are silent -- no outrage -- nothing.
It must be a Leica thing...
My auto fanatic friends look forward to the next model by Ferrari, Lamborghini, or Spyker, etc. None of them will ever buy a car that costs $500,000, but they don't whine and complain because Ferrari prices it how they choose. And these vehicles have a several month waiting list if you can get one at all. This is the same crowd that buys Leica. Exotic cars and exotic cameras are marketed to individuals who often do not have the same budget considerations as most of us. Leica has the same right to cater to this market as Ferrari does.
My auto fanatic friends don't stop enjoying their Mustangs when Ferrari puts out a new model. Enjoy the camera you have.
maybe you are exaggerating a little? I know a retired high school math professor who, in the days past bough a Leica M 7. Now, one day he sadly told me that in this digital era his Leica is museum item (but he has no intention of selling it, and he does have a Nikon with Zeiss lenses).So, you see, there are people passionate for photography and willing to do financial sacrifices to buy a high quality camera.So the question is, how does this Leica T fit in the Leica high quality tradition?
Nigel45: For that price I'd want some kind a viewfinder. Thats why I've got an E2.
if you can afford $ 7,000 plus for T and some lenses, what would be the problem to add $ 400 for the EVF ?besides, in a couple of years a more stellar EVF will be avaible....
Nukunukoo: Nice camera, but, can anyone explain to me WHY would I buy one?
yes, why should you buy it when someone should give it to you for your birthday...
Mirrorless Crusader: $1750 for a kit lens, what a joke
Hopefully this lens doesn't need in-camera or PP corrections for distortions, CA etc....
With the focusing speed, accuracy and focus point choice that m4/3 cameras are getting, isn't the Lithro technology on a dead end? why focus after taking a picture , when you can focus before ? what am I missing?
abortabort: Rangefinder coupled?
except that for an "anonymus" made in Russia remake of an old lens (no research needed - just use the old drawings) it should cost 1/4 of what is listed for....
peevee1: 20/5.6? For $650? Really? All mirrorless systems (except FE which does not have anything) have 20 or so mm, much faster and with autofocus. Pana 20/1.7, Fuji 18/2 and 23/1.4, Samsung 20/2.8, even Canon has 22/2, and Sigma has 19/2.8 for everybody.So the market for this is... drumrolls... Sony A7s. A moronic lens for underdeveloped camera.
Yeah.... and today I am expecting the arrival of a Rokinon 10mm/f2.8 which I bought at B&H for $529....wonder who would put this soviet era lens on a Leica?!?! if you can't afford a Leica lens, then get a Voigtlander... much, much better and costs less than this reborn soviet era lens...
chillgreg: "Sony announces full-frame A7s camera that can practically shoot 4K video in the dark"
Regardless of what you or I think, this is what the rest of the world perceives.
actually I shot a black cat -no moon- long ago with E M-5 http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/9470548483/photos/2391273/black-cat-by-night-no-flashIf I were interested in-and could afford- the Sony A7s I would not waste it with black cats at night.... I think that pro videos can be done nicely with this FF camera...
SteveNunez: These April Fools posts are foolish and undermine the site's integrity to a point- we come here for information not trickery.
It is serious. if you didn't understand after ... let's say 20 seconds - top- that it was an April fool joke, then at least it tells you need to work on your sense of humour (or lack of it).... come -on ... a digital FF sensor for legacy lenses with adaptor for m4/3 lenses and with insertable cartridges.... ha ha ha... well done DPreview !
with 20/1.7 or 17/1.8 or 15/1.7 can't complain that m4/3 doesn't have choice in moderate fast wide angle lens... (but I guess somebody will still do)
alffastar: Oly never made a micro 4/3 lens with 24-120mm equivalent and 2.8-4.0. Even if Oly makes such a lens it will cost more than this camera and will be both bigger and havier, so I am definitely buying this Canon to use it as everyday camera and also travel camera and will use only my primes with my OM-D!
Questions (waiting for Jan 28 for answers):is AF better than E M-5 ?is EVF better than E M-5 ?is shutter up to 1/8000 ?is as reliable as the E M-5 ?
If the answers are "yes", if more lenses will come up, and Olympus does not upgrade the E M-5 within 12 months (forget the E M1 -that's for 4/3 lenses), then I will switch to Fuji
SteveNunez: Considering the worldwide growth of m4/3, surprised they don't offer this len for that system- it would easily be the largest focal length available and would surely be popular with m4/3 shooters....ashame.
Agreed.However, please not this lens with an adapted m4/3 mount.a decent (not necessarily very fast) prime tele (250 - 400mm) or zoom tele (150-300mm) designed specifically for m4/3 would (IMO) be received enthusiastically
I respect this review. which proves once again to me not to make a judgement on a new camera based on its specs alone when it is released, but rather to wait for a professional review like this one. btw, I was interested in this camera, not to buy it because am happy with my Em-5, yet interested to see the innovation trend taking a good direction.Hopefully this trend will continue with refinements and improvements, and in a few years I will upgrade to a better camera.
is E M1 AF faster than E M-5 AF with micro 4/3 lenses mounted on both cameras? how faster?
in other words: did Olympus improve the contrast AF ? or did contrast detection AF already reach its limit?