Strange that the statement is not likewise co-authored.
kewlguy: LOL, hopefully the M bodies/lenses are made by Leica, not Sunny Optical... because then Leica is just a certification company
but what experience anyway do they have of miniature lens design and assembly, where size is such a dominating constraint??
hydrospanner: Samsung's Marketing VP is Ben Hur?
That's pretty awesome.
Yeah, that's why TouchWIz comes with so many extras.
Reilly Diefenbach: Just what the world needs, more blurry water pics!
Well, there is the other one - get rid of people and traffic from a street scene.Maybe I'll try a solid old tree with leaves fluttering in the breeze. That might look sweet, especially in early spring where the trunk and branches are also visible. There should be an interesting continuum from sharply defined trunk down to to blurred tips of the twigs, and the leaves
... Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 300mm F4 IS Pro, which offers an equivalent focal length of 600mm in full-frame terms...
Er, no. This one is only 300mm FF equivalent ... it's cut in half
probert500: "Eviscerate" has a very strong negative connotation - misleading headline.
Interesting, but I've honestly never seen eviscerate used to mean to criticise a person heavily. I could see how it might be used that way in a highly metaphrical context. What surprises me is that you readily accept that usage, yet rail against its usage in the more proximate context of removng the innards from a device.
Uh? So nobody would understand the guts of something to be a reference to its innards, unless the object was a living thing? Eviscerate is a fine choice of word here - the lens has had its guts exposed and removed. I think we get that is was never alive. The fact that they took the emblematic word from the source material is also entirely fitting.
J A C S: S4 (13mp) -> S5, S6 (16mp) = progressS6 (16mp) -> S7 (12mp) = progress
Progress is not measured in Mpix but in the round of picture quality, ease of use, reactivity, etc
RedFox88: Short focal length of lens in a smart phone gets everything in focus all the time anyways. Samsung seems to be adrift needing direction these days.
Eh? So you see no difference between stuff in focus, especially if close to the phone, and the rest. Go to Specsavers.
"Metal backplate", or glass?IP68 (article), or IP67 (spec list)
shademaster: do you really need AF of any kind on such a pinhole? even at, say, f/2, it's going to be a huge DOF.
Haha, maybe that is how the AF works, just like it does on a pinhole camera! It is automatically in focus, AF.
Jonathan F/2: What's the point of mirrorless if the lenses are the same size as DSLR lenses? Sony doesn't even have proper pro-oriented repair facilities like Nikon or Canon. At most these will be expensive toys for the well-heeled, amateur tech geek who likes to match their Sony TV, PlayStation 4 and Sony Alpha camera! Their idea of serious shooting entails sipping Starbucks ordered at the drive thru and shooting urban blandness of generic suburbia!
"What's the point of mirrorless if the lenses are the same size as DSLR lenses?"Why would you expect any difference in the lens size (for the same sized sensor)?
Tiderace: LED vary MARKEDLY in their uniformity of wavelength. Unlike blackbody light, such as the sun and tungsten lights, they can have large inconsistencies, gaps, and color casts. And to make matters worse, there are now several types of Led lights which if combined can make it impossible to correct skin color and background in post. CRI does NOT measure all the factors that are needed to examine color rendition and uniformity of wavelength of an LED. It would be very useful if DP gave us in their reviews a examination of each LED product offered not only its CRI but its actual wavelength uniformity so we could judge its usefulness for videography.
I always thought LEDs were a fixed and very precise monochromatic source, the wavelength fixed by the bandgap energy of the semiconductor junction. As such I am little surprised by the fact that all red LEDs always look exactly the same colour as each other. You don't see some a bit pinkish, others a little more purpleish.White LEDs would be a different matter being composite devices.
photomedium: Hopefully led are purchased in bulk and then tested and selected for uniform emission at some desired wavelength range. That would justify the price vs DIY.
how do you get variations in colour out of a regular LED? The wavelength is fixed by the energy band gap between the semiconductor materials either side of the pn junction, and that is not a variable AFAIK. It is an atomic property of the two materials.I've never noticed "vast variations in colour". Quite the opposite, with any and all red LEDs in any application I am always struck by the fact that they are all exactly the same hue of red. Likewise the blues and the greens etc.
wetsleet: This glut of "360 degree" cameras - their speil all seems to imply a full sphere of vision, but you keep on with the "360 degree" moniker. Which is it please, and why the confusion of terms?
Au contraire. If you get the full horizon then you've got 360 degrees. Be that a thin strip around the horizon or a full sphere, the 360 degree measurement does not distinguish since it is only a one dimensional measurement.
My point is that these cameras do much more than 360 degrees, and to describe what they do requires a two dimensional measurement.
I'm not suggesting they talk about steradians or solid angle, since few will understand, but equally using simple degrees is meaningless. So we are stuck between the incomprehensible and the meaningless.
Unless perhaps they describe them in terms of percentage of a full sphere. I think most would understand that.
This glut of "360 degree" cameras - their speil all seems to imply a full sphere of vision, but you keep on with the "360 degree" moniker. Which is it please, and why the confusion of terms?
Let's not forget, the world's first ever webcam was for a coffee percolator, and it served a very similar function, to inform users of the coffee pot's contents. Plus ca change...
tecnoworld: I'm curious to see which score this camera will get on DPR. If more than Samsung NX1, then I won't read this site anymore, since NX1 has been out for more than one year and every spec is better than D500.
We could start with the viewfinder. As DPR found with the NX1, "you're not going to mistake the EVF for a true optical viewfinder".
It will be interesting to see also how well the D500 autofocus works - high hopes have been set.
For me these two things are what I look for above all else. Not that the rest is unimportant, more that most cameras do OK already on the other major aspects.
But seeing the image in the scene is paramount for me, without that there is no photo to take anyway, and so for me the immediacy of a really good OVF is a must (and one that it has taken the DSLR industry a terribly long time to approach).
Just as important, getting the critical moment in critical focus. For the want of than most of my shots are sub-par.
Poor focus vies with poor composition as the biggest culprit in poor photos. And of course the two are related, often it is the delayed focus which spoilt the composition.
For most people the IQ of digital cameras long since became more, much more, than adequate. So it is great to see real emphasis being put on focus capabilities
Does this thing capture a full sphere, or just 360 degrees like the name implies?