hikerdoc: I copy material to a term paper it is plagiarism and I am expelled from university.I walk out of walmart with a DVD it is shoplifting and I go to jail.I copy someone's lyrics it is copyright infringement and I pay a penalty.I use someone elses patented process to create a product I can sell to their customers at a reduced rate having avoided the R&D costs and .....I am a victim if the other company is larger?
It's hard to know without reading all of the patents and reading the judge's entire report, but with many patents it's quite possible (even likely) that that infringing company didn't avoid the necessary R&D, rather that their designed necessarily covered some possibly-overly-broad patent already awarded.
Still, it's up to the infringing company to research any still-valid patents, and negotiate with the patent-holding company to prevent this sort of litigation succeeding.
It *might* be that they simply didn't check thoroughly enough. Or it *might* be that Sigma did check, and considered that their designs skirted existing patents enough so as not to require negotiations with Nikon. Or some other permutation - maybe we'll find out over the coming days.
ZorSy: OK, let them settle for good: it is obvious that Nikon knows the inner workings of Sigma OS (as much they know about their own as it appears to be 'similar') so they could create a lot of fuss to owners of new Nikon bodies that wouldn't work with Sigma OS lenses. This is FACT, and the 'war' happened over end users head. Now, is this 'settle of the records' going to change anything for end users? Is Nikon going to 'enable' Sigma lenses on newer Nikon bodies through FW update or is Sigma going to get the required 'knowledge' to upgrade their lenses so they can be used on Nikon bodies without side effects? Less likely! I think all those users who own OS lens and Nikon body and NEITHER works as meant to, should take massive class action against BOTH companies...because they are the real LOSERS in this patent infringement war.
Alex, I think he's referring to Nikon doing things like producing new cameras (or changing camera firmware existing cameras) to ensure Sigma lenses won't work properly with Nikon bodies?
If so, the point isn't that Nikon should build cameras to work with Sigma glass, it's that Nikon actively fiddles with their cameras to try to stop Sigma lenses working properly.
Richard Franiec: We all should be glad that idea of patent did not existed at the time of the wheel invention.On the other hand, in our material world, stealing (adopting) versus purchasing the rights to intellectual property is considered as an act of piracy, perhaps rightly so.
Wouldn't matter much if patents did exist then, given that they only last for around 15-20 years, depending on jurisdiction.
Andrew Booth: Sigma's turnover last year was 33 billion yen - $320 million
This shouldn't concern them too much.
Andrew Booth says Sigma's *turnover* was 33 billion yen.
Dave Oddie says Sigma's *profit* on just these lenses was 10 billion yen.
One of those figures must be wrong? You probably can't make 10 billion profit on 33 billion revenue overall, let alone 10 billion on just a subset of your product range.
I don't understand the point of the audio comparison, as the camera is in different locations for each test?
Francis Carver: I just love these Micro 4/3rd form factor lenses with their amazing 2x and 3x zoom ranges. So handy in the field. [Sarcasm intended]
Yet another oh-so-valuable comment from you, Francis.
Keep 'em coming!
RPJG: This is meant to be a photography site, right?
Yet whilst an average new camera or lens can generate 100s of idiotic fan-boy replies, an article about a marvellous exponent of what we're supposedly all here for - photography! - merits less than 50 comments.
What a sad lot we collectively are.
Fair point Michael. Still, the comments section here is generally a depressing place.
This is meant to be a photography site, right?
yabokkie: a funny design that is against the basics of camera design.
raztec: The more I read about what Panasonic, Fuji, Olympus, Sony and Pentax are doing, the more I dislike CaNikon with their incredible greed and pretentiousness and lack of innovation.
These two companies are riding on their name only and either charging ridiculous amounts of money for their high end products or putting out consumer oriented crap.
I can't wait to sell all my Nikon gear and invest completely in another system.
@PrebenR, yes, because it's impossible for Lightroom to get updated to handle other sensor types.
forpetessake: So slooow, hardly usable. The FF version is so much better.
"both lenses behave as an f/5.3-9.5 lens would do on a FF camera."
In terms of DOF maybe, but not in terms of exposure, they don't.
caissam: Hm, I wonder why people who are looking für the best quality are buying a dslr and add such a superzoomlense which lowers the picquality to an just very average level?!
Far to much glass.
I tried an 18-270 Tamron and 18-200 Sigma and sold it. The Tamron shows lots of faults (CA, fringing, vigneting) and was very soft on the long end so that I did not use it above 200mm. Only between 24 and 150mm it looks quite ok, but not outstanding.
I prefer an 17-70/50 sigma or maybe an 16-85 VR.
If you *really* can't think why at least some people, for at least some of the time, want the features of a DSLR and the convenience of a zoom lens like this, then... you're just not capable of thinking.
One lucky (talented) lady.
Photo Pete: A firmware update prompted by the upcoming Nikon D4s no doubt.
Always makes me wonder why such features weren't in the original firmware... but reassuring ongoing support nontheless.
Michonn, the D4S release doesn't make your D4 any less capable.
Do you propose something ridiculous, like a minimum timeframe before vendors are allowed to release new products?
325xia: A great update. Installed on my 1D X last night. Feels like a new camera again. One of the first to get my 1D X in the States. Way back in mid 2011. Serial No. under 100.
Cool story bro.
88SAL: Is it 24-1600 on the Astro? Reads 24-160 which is barely over 10x
Err... 24 * 65 = 1560. They obviously just dropped a 5 when they said "160". Maths isn't that hard, is it? :-)
tommy leong: how is the image better in this new 50mm compared to the previous 50mm?i don't care about how many thousand elements are in the lens.Do you ?
Thanks, great comment.
Jan Chelminski: Folks, it's a luxury, top level lens, at least for Panasonic. Oly top lens still cost far more but this is P's top lens. Why cry? There are so many choices here, from the excellent and affordable MZ 45mm f/1.8, all the adapted legacy MF 50's, the great Nocton and the cheap yet sensationally sharp Sigma 60 f/2.8, why gnash your teeth and wring your hands? Surely there's something here for everyone?
It's because DPReview seems to have more whingers than photographers.
tkbslc: It's a race to 15-1500mm equiv. 100x zoom. Who will get there first? Optical quality and lens speed be damned.
Optical quality, with in-built corrections, will be totally fine for the vast majority of people taking holiday snaps or whatever.
Not everyone (including most of the snobs on this forum) take fine art photos that are blown up to 4mx3m prints for viewing in a gallery.
new boyz: Some say it is correct for short term.. as you can recall details later from the pictures you have taken. I think this is exactly the point of the study. We are confident that all our memories will be safe in those hard disks. As a result, we didn't enjoy the moment and busy taking photos instead. This is especially true during concerts - people raised their iPhones(even iPads!) to record the concert. It makes me wonder - If you don't enjoy the moment, then what's the purpose of coming to a concert? Isn't it better just to buy the CD of the concert? Because that's exactly what they are doing - making CD of the concert.
Now, some may argue that in 10 years, even the one who didn't take photos will forget everything and photos will be useful in helping us remember things. True, but who will remember better? I bet the one who enjoys the moment. But, if nobody takes photos, we will not have photos to look at in the future. Well, true again but that's what an official photographers is for.
Sure, but hopefully very few people spend nearly 100% of their time looking at the back of their camera/iPhone/etc! You can watch the concert (or whatever event) *and* take the occasional photo.
And to answer your possibly-rhetorical question, being there is obviously entirely different from listening to a CD, even if you spend 10-20-wahtever% of the time taking photos or video.