Comments |
|
Canada
|
About us
|
Sitemap
|
Connect
|
Hang on, did they double the price of a 'Pro' (= ad free) account? Yahoo may have just talked me out of spending any money with them next year...
It is good to see Canon bringing out more options that will work with the EOS-M ;)
Do people really have model releases for all of those entries? I find it hard to believe that people could provide "a signed release from all persons who appear in the photograph submitted" on 7 days notice for some of these images...
You can see why they run these contests - last year had 12,000 entries at $15 a pop. I find it amazing that so many people are willing to PAY NG to give THEM the right to publish, use, etc. their images with no additional compensation. I don't mind paying for a contest entry, but they shouldn't get to use non-winners...
justmeMN: With the EVF it's not compact. With a metal body, it's not light. Why not just buy a DSLR, which has a larger sensor? You can get a really nice DSLR for (less than) $1,500.
@Marike6 There are different definitions of 'pockets'. I take my E-M5 with a pancake lens in my jacket pocket when I ski or am out with the kids. I did a run with the kids last week where I brought the E-M5 with me. No question this camera doesn't have the pocketability of a S90 or something like that - but it IS more portable than a dSLR. I never would have grabbed my 7D, gone for a run and got this shot: https://www.flickr.com/photos/47706598@N08/8716678984/in/photostream.
To me the benefit of this kind of camera is if you make it the ONLY camera you own. Then the slight premium in price pays off as you don't have to own a P&S or run two systems.
Your point about the 7100 are exactly opposite why I like the OM-D as my only camera. It is precisely because I do some video with it that the EVF and IBIS come into their own. For stills, agreed that IBIS is only so valuable.
Isn't this kind of pointless? I can wait for the real news release...
Nice! Didn't think anyone would be saying 'I shot my zoom lens STOPPED DOWN at f/2' any time soon :) Sigma is bringing out some interesting stuff these days...
michi098: Would love the 30mm 1.4 but I have mostly moved to Canon full format sensors. (Still have a 7D but not buying any more APS-C lenses). I think that quite a few people are doing the same. Kind of a shame Sigma is ignoring a growing market with their new lenses.
I was thinking the exact opposite - at least someone is paying attention to APS-C and smaller formats and making dedicated primes :) I'm impressed with the direction Sigma is heading in lately!
bobbarber: marike6
Just curious. You've stated several times that "jpegs don't matter" or something along those lines. It is obvious to me that the jpegs from the E-M5 are much better than the jpegs from this camera. I encourage anybody to compare the jpegs from the D5200 to the E-M5, starting at base ISO.
There have been several threads in the past here where some pro shooters have weighed in and expressed their preference for jpegs. Not the kind of shooters who spend all day taking 3 landscape shots, but wedding shooters, for example, or sports shooters, or other types of documentary shooters, who take a lot of shots and don't have time to process raw.
I have no doubt that some wedding shooters, etc. prefer raw, but is it accurate for you to say that raw is all that matters, jpegs don't matter, etc.? That isn't my belief, and it isn't the belief of many professional shooters.
While I prefer to shoot RAW, jpg performance is as useful as anything to compare. I make use of JPGs at family events or other occasions where I might take a lot of shots at once, and be unlikely to want to print them large. JPGs have a lot of detail if you are only going to be using them for web use or small prints.
I agree with BobBarber - I see little advantage to the D5200 over a MFT camera for what I use it for. Even if it is better at an absolute level - the real question is if that translates into any difference in my photography. The ability to carry a small, lightweight kit with me trumps absolute image quality - but we all have to evaluate and weigh the trade-offs and make our own decisions...
howielenny: Good to see Tamron investing into M43. Having used Tamron lenses with my D7000 along with Sigma and Nikon, this will be a nice addition to m43. I'm more of a prime man myself so will eagerly await to see what primes they come out with :)
Agreed - while this lens doesn't appeal much to me, both Tamron and Sigma make lenses that do. Any signs that 3rd parties are producing lenses for MFT are welcome...
bcalkins: Well, I'm glad I downloaded the RAW and took a look. I can't see any problems with the LR 4.2 processing of the Fuji file - compared to the MFT camera I'm familiar with I'd say the files out of the Fuji look great, though the difference is not huge. The samples above really don't do the Fuji or ACR justice... Posting default ACR is an OK starting point for a comparison, but it certainly doesn't come close to showing the capabilities of that combination. I'd get the impression you are better off with jpgs and should avoid ACR from these samples above, which is not close to the reality. Not impressed with this article - using defaults gives you some ground to claim you don't have a bias, but misses the whole point of what cameras can do photographically. Is C1 better just because the defaults suit this camera better than ACR? Hardly...
Good points - I guess I see value in both, a comparison of the defaults, and then some results after tweaking with a display of those results and settings. I personally use Lightroom and spend some time tweaking and then make that a preset for importing, so I'm not going to live with the defaults for long - but it does make it hard to evaluate the software's capabilities given that you need some time invested to really understand the differences. But that goes for just about everything you would ever buy!
Well, I'm glad I downloaded the RAW and took a look. I can't see any problems with the LR 4.2 processing of the Fuji file - compared to the MFT camera I'm familiar with I'd say the files out of the Fuji look great, though the difference is not huge. The samples above really don't do the Fuji or ACR justice... Posting default ACR is an OK starting point for a comparison, but it certainly doesn't come close to showing the capabilities of that combination. I'd get the impression you are better off with jpgs and should avoid ACR from these samples above, which is not close to the reality. Not impressed with this article - using defaults gives you some ground to claim you don't have a bias, but misses the whole point of what cameras can do photographically. Is C1 better just because the defaults suit this camera better than ACR? Hardly...
Timmbits: I find it HILARIOUS to see people here who say they can't wait to get their hands on it so that their MFT behaves like, or becomes as good as, an APSC...
and up until yesterday we were still reading comments in from the MFT crowd how good (or better) their cameras are than APSC.
Hopefully they are two different groups of people :) I'm an MFT fan, know the strengths and weaknesses of MFT versus APS-C and full frame, and am in no rush to go out and get some EF or Nikon lenses and this adapter. I can't think of any lens I'm longing for that isn't available in an MFT mount (which is a much different statement than saying that all full frame lenses have MFT equivalents). Maybe it is a different story if one is running both an MFT system AND a dSLR system with two sets of lenses...
I can't wait until I have to upload 33MP images for 'web use' :) Nikon D800 here I come!
Fixx: Looks like tool for portraiture and maybe product photography. Less a toy for amateurs (who insist on interchangeable lenses).
I don't think 'toy' was meant in the context of toy camera, but rather a want instead of a need. I agree that an amateur (who could indeed be very skilled and a buyer of expensive equipment) is less likely to be interested in this camera as it fills a very specific niche. In my opinion that niche is product photography - don't need a viewfinder, AF isn't an issue, don't need true 1:1 macro, buffer is a non issue, price is similar to a high end macro lens, no moire/low pass filter, etc.
Fixx: Looks like tool for portraiture and maybe product photography. Less a toy for amateurs (who insist on interchangeable lenses).
Agreed, to my surprise I'm seriously considering this instead of a dedicated macro lens :)
Sounds like a winner! Sigma really seems to be on a roll with their fast primes. Hopefully they roll out similarly fast lenses in MFT format...
clcochrane: Am I missing something, or is there no way of navigating to the review you wish to read from within this otherwise very useful article?
It's a bit frustrating having to guess which page of the article refers to the G15 or P7700, etc. Could you change the navigation to include shortcuts to the individual pages which include the camera's names please?
If you hover over the 1, 2, 3, etc. buttons it has the name of the camera as a tooltip, which helps...
Instagram should add "Terms of Service" as a new reason for deleting an account :)
Adrian Van: While I compliment Sony on a very compact full frame camera, is the price justified for portability $2798 on Amazon? Same price will get you a D600 with kit lens plus extra change, or nearly a D800 body (albeit larger cameras). This camera should have come in at $2000 but it is a niche camera for those that can afford its luxury of FF portability. We will see where the price sits after 6 months. Good job on the small package though and Sony FF sensor.
Its sibling RX100 is now 678. (with much smaller sensor) but that is big difference in pricing structure between the two. However, I know this new one RX1 has a superior lens and sensor, and likely body.
This has to be worth $800 more than the APS-C Leica X2 :)
Thanks for another useful review that I can read for free !
I don't understand why people are so fixated on the silver/gold award. Read the review, draw your own conclusions based on what is important to you. Everyone has different needs.