ThePhilips: I hope the lens performs. Because it appears that they have fixed most complains of the original G1X.
Not including an EVF is a let down, though.
True. But ruins the all-in-one experience.
I hope the lens performs. Because it appears that they have fixed most complains of the original G1X.
CameraLabTester: The only thing separating the GX1 series from other mirror less quagmire is the OPTICAL VF, and they removed it.
Welcome to the QUAGMIRE, Mr. GX1 Mark II, you are now a mediocre commoner, like the rest of us mirror less motley crew...
Wow. You are missing the G1X' OVF?... Almost literally THE worst OVF of all times?
Why there are no TCs for mirrorless, which go between the camera and the lens? Only the ones to screw on the lens?
RichRMA: Why do Fuji RAW's at high ISO look like other camera's JPEGs? What I mean is that although their RAW's look clean, they look NR washed, for lack of a better term. The grain is massaged away. If I look at the RAW's and switch on other camera's JPEGs at 1600 or higher, in the studio scenes, I see more commonality.
"Why do Fuji RAW's at high ISO look like other camera's JPEGs?"
1. You can't look at RAWs. You always look at JPEGs. RAW image is just a dump of numbers, as read from sensor.
2. There is a standard, baseline demosaicing algorithm for Bayer sensors. What you see as RAW is actually a JPEG, produced in ACR as close as possible to the baseline demosaicing algorithm.
3. There is NO baseline demosaicing algorithm for X-Trans sensor. The standard (presumably developed by Fuji) demosaicing algorithm includes NR and other bells and whistles within. Thus RAW view for X-Trans is only marginally different from JPEG view.
4. Since there is a baseline demosaicing for Bayer, you can compare the RAWs between different cameras. But they are incomparable to RAWs from X-Trans sensors, since they use different demosaicing, which already includes PP.
ipecaca: Why would one be interested in samsung cameras, what's the catch? Truly interested, can owners tell me?
Not an owner, but followed Sammy for some time. NX advantages:
- Good sensor with lots of headroom in RAWs- Good selection of affordable lenses- Pancake lenses- Shortest flange distance or all mirrorless. *ANY* legacy lens, literally, can be adapted.
- Crippled JPEG engine.- No 3rd party lenses so far.
Also, previously Samsung was charging a premium for everything. But in the last two years prices for NX gear have dropped considerably.
The prices of old + poor JPEG engine = unpopular. Heck, even Sigma doesn't make lenses for them...
ViCorp: Any chance in the future when one clicks on a link on the front page to an article, it actually goes to the article and not some intermediate page with the true article link? It is really annoying.
It's not so confusing, if you think about it.
The original article (which is linked from the intermediate page) was published long time ago.
This article intermediate article is needed so that you have something on front page to link to the 3 month old and now updated article.
"I wasn't a big fan of this feature on the Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7, and my opinion remains unchanged. I just don't feel the need to look down into the EVF when I have the much larger OLED display that I can use for the same purpose."
Wow. You make the "nice bonus when shooting in bright light" sound like it is a bad feature.
Jeff Keller, you have to work on your writing style. At the very least, when talking about non-intrusive gimmick bonus features you should sound neutral, not negative. Negative - only for the gimmicks which break some workflows, make features less accessible, etc. Tech-writing wrapped in a consumer friendly format isn't easy and you need to work on it.
"A smartphone-like pull-down menu [...]""While the camera can do silly things like act as a baby monitor [...]"
Hehehe. So Samsung stopped "hiding" the fact that the NX cameras run the Tizen, a mobile OS for phones and in-vehicle infortainment.
EOSHD: You can't judge noise levels on YouTube. Compression removes it. ISO 1600 looks worse than 25,600. There's also the matter of rolling shutter on this camera, it isn't pretty! http://www.eoshd.com/content/12631/sony-a7s-rolling-shutter-test
"Many videos produced today are for youtube consumption."
For YT videos, one does not buy a $$$$$ cam.
Otherwise, the video artifacts are not the same as stills artifacts: heavy NR of stills might go unnoticed on laptop or phone screen, while wobbling/tearing/etc would be visible even after YT conversion.
chillgreg: Which ISO corresponds to the naked eye?
Pretty amazing really.
Human eye has dynamic sensitivity. And as justinwonnacott says, as sensitivity rises, an eye becomes less perceptible to color.
I heard a figure that eye sensitivity can increase in darkness by 10000 times. Never really bothered to translate it into EV stops.
P.S. More info:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_eye#Dynamic_range
Digitall: Surprisingly good even with 409.600 iso
Good is relative here. The NR has completely destroyed the resolution of 1080p HD. But has given a decent SD resolution video. Which is still remarkable.
OK, it looks... not good, but the new possibilities are very very interesting!
bluevellet: I don't know why other mirrorless manufacturers don't encourage other companies to join them. They accept third party lenses and some accessories but not much else.
I'm also curious to know how m43 lenses will work on Super 35. Cropped mode? And will there be special lenses by JVC to better take advantage of the super 35 sensor?
"I don't know why other mirrorless manufacturers don't encourage other companies to join them."
Oly/Fuji/Pana did advertise the standard, but few were interested. Heck, Fuji itself, though still member, doesn't manufacture the m43 at all.
Judging by the amount of the new gear presented, JVC worked on m43 for quite some time.
Aroart: Ok lets get this straight. you guys that are complaining get a life. This camera is made for video first so stop whining..just check out eoshd if you want real video specs...
> This camera is made for video first so stop whining.
Actually, the more I dig the specs, more it looks as stills camera.
If they wanted to really compete with the GH4 in the video, they would have included internal 4K and Cinema 4K.
Though S-Log2 gamma looks very interesting.
In the end, it would largely depend on the price. If rumored 1699,- is right, then it is a very interesting package for available light photography.
For a moment, I thought I have mistakenly opened the Engadget.
"It's also designed to release the lens on a hard impact without a twist in order to minimize potential damage to the lens and device if it was dropped. "
The idea isn't new.
Once I read that literally all (D)SLR lenses have metal mount only on the surface: beneath the metal is plastic. The purpose of the plastic is to prevent/minimize the damage to the camera body/lens in case of fall: the replaceable plastic would simply tear, separating lens from camera.
Peiasdf: "....It's also designed to release the lens on a hard impact without a twist in order to minimize potential damage to the lens and device if it was dropped...."
Name another lens mount that have this capability. Samsung fanboys... I don't know if they can read or not.
"Name another lens mount that have this capability."
Literally all of them.
Beneath the shiny metal of the mount, inside the lens sits the plastic.
The question was raised to lens designers once about "why so cheap?" and they have said that lens is intentionally coupled via plastic to the body to prevent fatal damage to the camera's mount. If camera falls, in many cases the plastic inside the lens would simply tear. To repair the damage, all you have to do is to replace the plastic piece inside the lens.