Very very nice images. A great addition to the Fuji X system.
Though it reinforces the "too expensive" moniker. But with this kind of IQ and rendering, the price is actually quite acceptable.
(Not targeted directly at the PhotoKeeper, but to the clouds companies in general.)
Literally all of cloud storage services have few - IMO critical - problems at the moment, which are the reasons why I'm not even trying them.
1. Geographical location of where the data is stored. Location plays huge role, since the local laws of where the data actually stored are what keeps the data protected. (Similar and related lesser problem: physical security of the data centers.) Ideally, the storage should reside in the same country/legal zone where I do.
2. As few past fiascoes had shown, some cloud services save on the storage costs, and have only limited internal back-ups and employ cheap RAID configurations.
3. Very rudimentary download options, making it often next to impossible to retrieve your data in full. Mass upload options are diverse - but download often is file-by-file.
arhmatic: Manufacturers needs to stop this thin device craze forever.
Image quality is more important. Battery life is quite bad, most phones barely last through the day... Phones are uncomfortably thin to hold.
Samsung, apple and the rest, please stop this.
"Battery life is quite bad, most phones barely last through the day..."
Let me guess: you are huge fan of Google and use the pure unaltered vanilla Android OS?
Pixels of that size filling up a FF sensor... Some landscapers' head would simply explode at the idea.
P.S. 36mm x 24mm = 36000 x 24000 = 864MP. Shy of a gigapixel resolution.
ThePhilips: > 2.26 megapixel CMOS sensor> 0.0005 lux> $30,000
So deeply niche product that it's not even funny.
But the comments below, people /explaining/ why they need the 0.0005 lux, ARE funny.
You do not need such sensitivity to shot people. Mostly because people don't do anything in such dark conditions - because they can't see a darn thing. A major safety hazard, and everybody's getting sleepy and mellow. A sure downer for a reality show.
And turnover of the nature documentaries... Let's just say: nobody ever became rich by shooting the documentaries.
It is niche product. If price goes down, the number of applications would definitely increase: the security applications alone are huge potential market. But it would still stay a niche product: because nothing interesting happens in the darkness.
Drazen Stojcic Buntovnik: Wildlife, documentary and reality TV crews will be standing in lines with cash in their hands to get this camera. And once you start seen inexplicably good looking night shots, you'll know it was shot with this baby. Also, rest assured that this will be used in Hollywood productions BIG time. Upscaling 1080 to 2K or even 4K in cinema is pretty common, especially if you have high-quality source material.
> reality TV crews
The end is nigh.
bovverwonder: Who cares about this camera? These comments are a lot more interesting.
Not after reading the comments!
stratplaya: So where's the video proof?
> the announced camera has much improved low light specs.
Not by much. Not by magnitude. The first example in the video, the starlight, has luminosity of 0.0001 lux.
Ulfric M Douglas: No panorama mode ... touristic fail.
But at least it has the MicroSD slot.
gvfx: Canon probably just wants the label of best low-light camera. All those articles and viral videos about the A7S probably did some damage and they realized they could eliminate that without even creating a real product.
> All those articles and viral videos about the A7S
Canon was developing the specialized low-light sensors long before Sony even joined the camera business.
IIRC this particular sensor (2MP, extreme sensitivity) first was in news/rumors about 2-3 year ago - year or two before the A7s was even announced.
robjons: Can DPR please just include the retail price of products posted on the front page? Annoying to have to dig for it.
> At the end ...>> Annoying to have to dig for it....I also vote for the price (if known) to be visible on the front page.
> 2.26 megapixel CMOS sensor> 0.0005 lux> $30,000
So much outrage about effectively a 3D photograph.
It's not like it is yet practical and would rob you of your business overnight.
CameraLabTester: Barely a week into its existence... The AP channel has a clip of an Alaska Bear injuring an Australian Tourist as the most watched video, so far, with 186,000 views in just 2 days!
The internet is a strange and unpredictable universe.
"Just wait until networked VR comes!"
Then the delivery of nutrition via tubes.
And then humanity would willingly turn itself into the Matrix.
bootsofspanishleather: WHAT WOULD YOUR CHOICE BE.
I own a fuji xpro 1 with the 35F1.4 and the 18-55 fuji zoom2.8-4 . I also have a Lumix GX 1 with the external view finder a 25mm Summilux, a 45mm F 1.7 Olympus Zuiko and a medium to long. Lumix zoom. I love them both. I find image stabilization to be so helpful. Most I.S systems are in the lenses. Out of the 5 lenses only the two zooms have it, I am not sure how to proceed since I can't afford to own both. With a 20meg file, an image stabilized body, with the other lenses over shadow the Fuji. 16 megs, no I.S. body, the best viewfinder and the lenses I own! Also the Fuji X Pro 2 is supposed to come out in the first part of 2016. What would your choice be. I'm leaning Fuji but ???
> What would your choice be.
I do not like waiting a year. Because waiting always begets more waiting.
Today, if given your choices, I would have went with either GX8 or E-M5/mk2. And later picked up some cheaper (but newer than your current) Fuji body for the Fuji lenses.
Since you own a smaller m43 camera (GX1), I would actually recommend the (smaller) E-M5/mk2 over the (larger) GX8. Unless, of course, you want the goodies of the GX8 (e.g. 4K Photo modes, deep buffer, beefy grip). (Since your Fuji gear is larger than the m43 one, I would try to stick to the one larger system + one smaller system.)
@DPR, the GX8 in your camera DB is incorrectly listed as having a tilt display, not the "fully articulated" one. And the the "Environmentally sealed" should be "Yes" too.
"The internet is a strange and unpredictable universe."
Nope. It just shows how people really are. We are the herd. We are the animals. Chewing grass is not enough - we need the thrill to feel alive. And internet provides us with the endless stream of cheap thrills - from the safety of our homes.
Jurka: "Gets darker on smaller sensor"1.Take a pic with 2,8 on full frame.2. Go to Photoshop and crop picture 2X!3. It is darker now????
4. YOU ARE AN IDIOT!!!
Don't feed the trolls.
ThePhilips: I do not understand the "built-in flash" whiners. It might have mattered on the GX7, but GX8 is larger. You lose nothing of the portability or size by adding a pocketable external flash (Nissin i40, Mecablitz 26, Olympus FL-LM2).
Otherwise, I have used the built-in flash on my GX7 probably 3 times in all time I own it (and I bought right after the release). Larger built-in EVF totally worth the "sacrifice".
@ofquiet, I haven't said that, neither implied it.
And even if the GX8 had built-in flash, I bet your ilk would have been here complaining anyway, about how weak the built-in flash is.
privater: I don't know how is that bundle price comes from.Got my panasonic 14mm f2.5 for only $129 years ago.
$300 is the official MSRP of the Pana 2.5/14mm lens.