RPJG: Does anyone know why 14 horizontal cameras are required, given the quite wide 19mm-equivalent field of view - e.g., for better stitching results?
Yes, I guess that might cover it, along with the fact that they're hoping that people won't look "up" that often?
Thanks all, makes sense.
But if that's the case, why is there only one upward-facing camera?
Does anyone know why 14 horizontal cameras are required, given the quite wide 19mm-equivalent field of view - e.g., for better stitching results?
Florida Kayaker: I don't really get it. "Overall, the ZS100's photo quality is very good, though not the best in the 1"-type sensor class"Well yes, detail looks terrible as does color comparatively."Despite a few quibbles, the ZS100's image quality is light-years ahead of any other compact travel zoom on the market"because there is nothing else that qualifies as a travel zoom that employs a 1" sensor?
This review although bestowing "gold" has made me re-think purchasing this camera. I have had it in my basket on Amazon for weeks now but now i'm thinking better to give up the 100-250 range for significantly better image quality found in other 1" compacts. Anyone else feel this way? Maybe my take is all wrong.
"isn't priority number one always IQ"
No, not necessarily. Everyone talks like it is, but sometimes the priority is simply getting the shot - although that obviously depends on what style of photography you're doing. I think DPR sometimes doesn't emphasise this aspect enough.
Ask yourself honestly - whatever the shortfalls of the image quality with this camera are (compared to whatever other camera you might seriously consider), is it *really* bad enough to affect whatever you do with your images, e.g. post to a website, or print for your wall at home? Unless you're doing prints for an art gallery, it's likely that any image quality shortfalls won't really be noticeable.
Not having used drones, can Dale describe what it's like to control the path of the drone, whilst also controlling where the camera is pointing, e.g. does it become quite simple after some practice?
Wu Jiaqiu: as a Nikon 1 user, all i can say is that Nikon do not care at all about their customers, be honest or i'll spend my money elsewhere.
I am sick and tired of these noncommittal answers where things are hinted but nothing is said.
I understand nothing is guaranteed, but is a straight answer too much to expect?
I bet they're crying all the way to the bank :-)
Haha... so, exactly when should they inform assorted whingers about the next iteration of any particular camera/system? As soon as the previous version comes out? A year later? Two? Sometime *after* they've actually made a decision? Or maybe, just whenever they deem it sensible, regardless of the whinging of a few customers who they're clearly happy to lose?
(And here's a pro tip, for free! The customer is certainly not always right. Smart companies know which customers to try to keep, and which they can safely let go.)
I was referring to the ludicrous assertion that Nikon doesn't care about their customers.
That's an idiotic comment in general. It's especially idiotic in the sense that the OP (and you) are implying that Nikon can only respect their customers by telegraphing their every move, even if they haven't yet decided on what that move is! Get over it, you'll hear about the future of the system at some stage in the future, and in the meantime your camera works just as well as it always did.
As for all those lost sales you imply must be happening, I'm sure Nikon know a lot more about the pros and cons of telegraphing their future intentions than you or I do.
To suggest that companies - which depend utterly on their customers - don't care about their customers, is simply absurd.
You're upset because the system *you* chose may not turn out to be a great long-term choice. Sh!t happens, but it dooesn't justify inaccurate hyperbole.
photogeek: Which begs the question, why are SSDs so physically huge in comparison?
Please see my link above.
Nonetheless, the fact is there are huge speed differences between controllers / bus types at the moment, although hopefully that'll all largely disappear (or the differences become irrelevant as speeds increase enough) in the next few years.
To add to barfoo's reply:
Because they're a separate architecture that's massively faster than SD cards?
And because they're massively larger capacity, e.g. 2TB consumer drives or 16TB enterprise drives?
And not to mention that "SSD"s far smaller than even M.2 are coming available, for use in embedded systems, e.g. http://www.anandtech.com/show/10166/samsung-demos-its-first-bga-ssd
Kashim: As soon as I see the words "read speed" and "up to" I have already lost interest completely. These companies try to pretend like they're catering to photo and video enthusiasts and yet they ignore the fact that we don't care about read speeds. Write speed is the ONLY thing that matters. Sustained write speed to be more specific and not this "up to" marketing garbage. I guess they're simply out to make headlines with big numbers that actually mean nothing to the users they're targeting.
Whatever. The class rating tells you the guaranteed write speed. As long as that's as fast as your camera can write, you're set - then there's no need to whinge about flattering marketing-related read speeds.
Boss of Sony: Unfortunately, as this is not full-frame, it's not capable of taking good photos.
Another great post from the BoS! XD
SmilerGrogan: What is this fetishization of dynamic range? Ability to hold accurate color at higher ISO seems more important than a little shadow noise, as is pinpoint focus accuracy, color fidelity under discontinuous spectrum light, and resistance to vibration, shock, and weather.
Do you agree that extra DR is almost always A Good Thing? And that it's not necessarily mutually exclusive with the other desirable aspects you listed?
TyphoonTW: Do people really take pictures at ISO100 than add 4/5/6 stops of exposure compensation in post?
Do you even take photos, bro?
I'm no video shooter, so this question may not make sense... but did you ask him about how he handled the fact that the (natural) light must have been changing quite rapidly, especially when shooting around the "magic hours"?
Presumably you often need to shoot more than one take, or you're shooting different scenes that are meant have happened at about the same time, at quite different times of day (and therefore in quite different lighting). Does he handle that just by overall brightening/darkening of various takes/scenes so that they look right together?
Hibiscusbloom: Maybe it's time for Tamron to come up with mark 2 of their 150-600, maximising performance at the 600 end and if it need be, do a 200-600.
Hi alcaher, in what way would you see the Sport version differing from the current version?
PKDanny: Does Canon and Nikon allow Sigma firmware in Canon/Nikon camera dslr? Others not allow.
Olympus certainly do, on the M.Zuiko lenses at least.
oliver26n: Boy, dpreview has spent a lot of space peddling this guy's workshops, wonder why.
oliver, you expose yourself for what you are when:
(a) you fill your posts with over-the-top exaggerations, as you try to negatively characterise the comments of people who find your posts irrelevant / spiteful / negative / annoying.
(b) you state that those criticising your abysmal attitude are "rabid supporters" of the photographer. Obviously, the two things are entirely separate, but it does highlight your lack of sensible argument
Zigmont: I like the no filter photo better than the weird one with the filter. Just because a slow shutter is good doesn't necessarily mean a moribund shutter is better.
Zigmont, I think you just missed the point again.