SeeRoy: The EU primarily exists for the benefit of Big Capital. There may be some real benefits for some countries (like being able to **** off to a previously civilised country, in order to reap the benefits of centuries of social development) but primarily it's about ready access to markets and suppression of wages (for the working classes only, obviously) in order to maximise corporate profits.For most of us, especially in Britain, it's the absolute worst thing that has happened since WW2. At least in WW2 we managed to escape being invaded.This sort of legislation is just one more example amongst many.Let's hope the Greeks initiate stage 1 of the EU's disintegration. Stage 2 should be Britain's exit.For decades I supported the EU idea - but I've seen the consequences.
"The EU primarily exists for the benefit of Big Capital."
... says somebody from a EU country with the least corporate oversight, the least financial regulations, the least consumer protections and the least employment regulations.
And suddenly - can you imagine - it is the rest of EU who are "for the Big Capital".
RunningTurtle: This whole pan 'EU' nanny thing has turned into quite a monster. I'm surprised how Europeans can put up with so many bizarre and silly laws interferring with their lives.
@SeeRoy, I'm not sure how to even reply to that hollow demagogy.
EU is not a singular entity. And most of the work in EU right now is the harmonization. Just like it is stated in the DPR's article. And obviously all the present laws are looked at: from the most extreme to the most lax. Because they are all already existing laws inside the EU.
Considering the diversity of the laws, I actually think that full harmonization is likely to fail with the states on the extremes likely to abstain.
> certainly here in Britain ...> Consequently many people are frightened to utter any overt criticism.
You must be kidding? Right? Do you read your own press in the UK? watch your own TV? You made a scarecrow out of EU, which is very fashionable right now to openly throw rocks at. On public media. And you say you "frightened"?
luisflorit: I completely agree, anyone using commercially should pay to the copyright holder.
But only if, at the same time, the copyright holder removes it immediately when someone does not like it. Since we are not free to avoid seeing a huge ugly construction right in front of our noses, the copyright holder should remove it from our views.
Your proposal makes lots and lots of sense.
At least in comparison to the EU's one.
ThePhilips: To make the AF in video really useful, they should start thinking about developing some cheap parafocal lenses.
> Sony 28-135 is considered very cheap
$2500 - very cheap indeed. Only f/4.0 - but who can complain at this price.
ThePhilips: > We've certainly seen implementations of eye AF in other cameras ...
... which is why competition is so important.
Eye AF is just a refinement of the face detection AF.
Eyes are important feature of the face, and face detection already has to find them. The only thing changed is that camera now offers an option to the user to pick left or right or nearest eye. I doubt Sony needed much help from Olympus or anybody else to implement that.
> We've certainly seen implementations of eye AF in other cameras ...
To make the AF in video really useful, they should start thinking about developing some cheap parafocal lenses.
jabz: So can someone please tell me how I can achieve this with a Sony a7 II, which lens do I need?thanks
Well, you can't put the price on quality, as the Zeiss fans on Sony forums would tell you. :)
MeganV: I suspect Olympus is thinking about how to pre-empt and/or play nicely with this:
Every camera manufacturer should be thinking about that.
That disaster of an article is what happens when a non-techie tries to write about the tech stuff, s/he understands only on the level of the promotional fliers.
johnpendleton: After a year or so of open-source input it's disappointing to see this released as basically just a smartphone accessory. No tablet attachment? No audio "in" jack, dust protection or IS? I was hoping this would be a great videocam device to give all my expensive M.Zuiko PRO lenses even more flexibility. Hopefully the Air AO2 will hit closer to the mark for more serious users who already have a considerable m4/3 lens investment.
I think you are talking about the modular camera concept, which pops-up every few years.
Air is not it. It is primarily targeted (despite the advertisement) at the DYI crowd, who were pining for long time for an embeddable camera module with decent IQ.
AutoEverything: I have mine since a few months, downloaded the SDK and played with it. Its not my favorite camera, but it is really fun and the sensor is pretty good. Not sure, if it is the same as another µFT, because it looks much better than even my E-M1.
Great toy. To the others: programming a timelapse and similar apps for this camera is peanuts. This is, what it makes it so interesting.
Can you describe your setup: cables? wi-fi? bluetooth? where from you control the Air (smartphone/tablet/PC)? Wi-Fi range?
Lightcapture: I am getting tired of trying to find what equivalent 35mm focal length(s) of this contraption?
> Reading from a mobile phone IS hard...
You are forgiven. One of the reasons why I have given up on this whole "mobile" revolution.
> I am getting tired of trying to find what equivalent 35mm focal length(s) of this contraption?
This "contraption" a "body-only" thing with the standard m43 mount.
It can be apparently purchased as a kit with 14-42 PZ (28-84mm eq, powerzoom) lens.
Otherwise, you can pop on it any m43 lens.
> nevermind the fact that it followed our 'sharpest 85mm of the system' rule
Hang on. That is not what DPR said previously when asked about why you use the plastic fantastic Oly 45mm to test the m43 cameras. I do not want to start anything, but find it quite inconsistent on your part.
> Hasselblad is not a luxury brand
Make an affordable TLR. And an affordable medium frame camera/lenses.
But I gather we pretty soon would find out that our understanding of the "affordable" differs.
Had once a cool conversation with an owner of golden Rolex who was insisting that the Rolex is solely for the time telling purposes. I think the discussion with Hasselblad would go the same way.
Zdman: Have to admit there is something to be said for these high res sensors. Even scaled down to print size they're clearer across the frame. Shows you how much demosaicing blurs the final image. And no its not just the anti aliasing filter demosaicing blurs seriously (check out the wikipeidia page).
Foveon FTW. Olympus E-M5/mk2 Hi-Res mode also negates the corruption of demosaicing.
hypo: Call me old-fashioned but I can't be doing with the phrase "backside illuminated".
Try as I might it only brings up totally inappropriate imagery.
Am I the only one who has this problem?
Cosplay! DPR, welcome to the modern ages!!
Fairy Tail FTW.
nicolaiecostel: Good. Another subject tracking test done in perfect light. Take that camera to a football match, ISO6400, f/4, 1/500, see how that works out.
Or at a wedding, when the light turn off and they are dancing, when you have to focus and then take the shot using off camera flash or none at all.
Right. Because all photographers are rabid football fans slash pro sport photographers. And at the same time, they are also pro wedding photographers. /sarcasm
It's not like DSLRs had this ability forever. Only five years ago people we saying that it is crazy to shoot at ISO 6400, least expect AF to work in any capacity. And now you talk AFC...