jkokich
Joined on
Jan 25, 2012
|
Comments
 |  |  |
| EveningOut by catastrophe from Your City - A Night Out | The Colorado River and Henry Mountains, Utah by wam7 from Through the port hole (aircraft) | The Queen by TheGlennPalacio from red |
wasTF: It's cheaper than an iphone Xs max, and the imagequality may be much better ;-)
I love this thread.
wasTF: It's cheaper than an iphone Xs max, and the imagequality may be much better ;-)
obscurelines, ladies and gentlemen!
Sardonic G: Meh, my Argus C-3 is mirror-less too.
peterwr, ladies and gentlemen!
Horshack: One additional note about video - these are the first iPhones that record in stereo.
Horshack is a very old and respected name...
HRC2016: If you're not into photography this can be turned into a harp. Or a lightning rod.
Or a hat, a brooch, or a pterodactyl!
NaBalam: In order to place 6 more cameras, the new Iphone XII will no longer have an ON button nor a screen. A colaboration with LEICA.
Now, that’s comedy!
Remember pleated pants? More, more more!!!
I don’t know... With every new camera, I just want to be amazed by the pictures. These are nice, but so not amazing.
jpr2: no left-side PASM dial? a lack of easy access setting & quick switch/memorizing for user-defined sets of params?
no II-nd control ring at the back?
AND... NO IBIS ???
And questionable video, slow FPS...
User9362470513: I can understand the attraction of a Leica - they look cool and so well made. Users often justify buying them by referring to a unique look and quality they have. I just don't see anything out of the ordinary in these images. They don't look particularly sharp or crisp with no extra detail or punchy colour that I would expect to see.
If you enjoy taking okay pictures, all the more power to you. I get no enjoyment if the pictures aren’t good.
User9362470513: I can understand the attraction of a Leica - they look cool and so well made. Users often justify buying them by referring to a unique look and quality they have. I just don't see anything out of the ordinary in these images. They don't look particularly sharp or crisp with no extra detail or punchy colour that I would expect to see.
The only justification for a camera should be the images.
jkokich: Rumors, huh? That’s the worst kept secret in history.
I meant that they were working on them. It would be pretty remiss of them not to be.
Cultured Woman: doesn't sound like a homerun.. and i already sold most of my canon gear in August... good luck canon... ignored us too long perhaps?
Going Sony?
Rumors, huh? That’s the worst kept secret in history.
While I don’t want Canon to simply produce a Sony clone (I’m a Sony fan, but I fondly remember my AE-1), I hope they have looked at the top Sony mirrorless cameras and said, let’s put all that stuff into a camera, and add even more. I believe they have the knowledge to do this, and make a camera that would lead the world.
Well, I can dream, can’t I?
rdscibilia: You don't spend $4,000 for a "good try."
Direct, succinct, and spot on.
Mssimo: Cant wait till next manufacture releases a DSLR (for the laughs) Will it be canon? or will they join the rest of the market? I think we can now say DSLR RIP.
Agreed.
LMBC: I'm glad that finally one of the big camera brands aknowledge that mirrorrless is the future which brings competition to Sony and other brands, and that is awesome for consumers.
But unfortunately DPreview article is as silly as Nikon trying to fool consumers:
If you want a "pro camera" with dual card slots grab & great auto-focus, buy DSLR D850 for 3,296 USD
If you want a good but "non pro camera" without dual card slots & not so great auto-focus with three lenses in their ecosystem, you can buy a Nikon Z7 for 3,396 USD.
In top of that there is this article that adds:
Instead of buying Sony A7RIII for 2,998 USD, which have dual card slots, great auto-focus, great lens ecosystem, game changer eye-auto focus, you can now buy the 3,396 without these features but with a better ergonomics, that feel like a real Nikon...
This article is not a comparation, this is just silly talking...
Right on.
jkokich: Why do so many people insist that a mechanical mirror system is still viable? When you look at it, it’s a Rube Goldberg design (google that). I would think every photographer would be overjoyed to move on from such a convoluted, limited mechanism. Less moving parts, in any mechanical application, is a better solution. You will never get a mirror system to move as fast as a mirrorless system for FPS.
Who needs 20fps? Action photographers, parents with small children, dog owners. And it isn’t a question of need, it’s a question of simply better technology. If you showed the two designs, a flipping mirror and a mirrorless design, to an engineer who didn’t know anything about photography, he wouldn’t waste a second on the mirror. If you, personally, like a DSLR, or even a rangefinder film camera, more power to you, but mirrorless is not merely the future, it’s the present.
Why do so many people insist that a mechanical mirror system is still viable? When you look at it, it’s a Rube Goldberg design (google that). I would think every photographer would be overjoyed to move on from such a convoluted, limited mechanism. Less moving parts, in any mechanical application, is a better solution. You will never get a mirror system to move as fast as a mirrorless system for FPS.