To continue loving video games, their programming while doing & improving my professional photography, punish the guilty, reward the good, educate kids and fight for all that is good. :-)
Raist3d: No x-trans support, no Dxo.
@Everyone recommending this or that for x-trans- I know there are other options. My point is, DXo still doesn't support it. I prefer Capture One for x-trans myself.
@Marc- yeah, it seems weird. They support specific DNG's. But what I have heard is DNG isn't as generic as Adobe sells it. But it sure must be more generic than typical RAW.
@Marc- that's fine. I know there are other options. I am just mentioning DXo doesn't do X-trans yet :-)
No x-trans support, no Dxo.
Marty4650: Nikon makes a very similar lens for quite a bit less. The Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR, which sells for around $600. But it may not be weather sealed.
While you really don't need to be competitively priced once you lock someone into your lens mount, setting prices too high can discourage new customers from getting on board.
As you said, not weather sealed. Pentax needs this so they can sell twir weather sealed body. They market weather sealed bodies after all. Also the street price will be lower anyway.
Raist3d: You can tell how many people just don't get art or photography by all the negative comments instead of simply accepting this is just another brush and canvas of light, different from digital.
Obviously just because something exists doesn't mean you have to use it or buy it, while still be a valid good option for those who know how to and want to use it. Why else would Lomo bottler if there wasn't a market for it?
Saying this as a guy who does not regularly shoot film.
AlanG- I agree. I would even say that's more important, for sure, than the process, when process has gone too technical or has been too much into focus ("better camera, better photographer" faulty thinking).
You can tell how many people just don't get art or photography by all the negative comments instead of simply accepting this is just another brush and canvas of light, different from digital.
Roland Karlsson: Hmmmmm ... a color film with faulty colors.
Yup. Imagine the possibilities.
Yannick KREMPP: That's... not helpful at all. Replace 7D Mark 2 by iPad, or purse, or screwdriver and it all makes sense. Come on, voice tagging ? Crop sensor a negative for sports ? That wifi thing again ? I take it for what it is, a woman's point of view on something she uses as just another tool. Now please read me correctly, I have nothing against her, nor am I being sexist here. It's just like I said, of no interest here: ask a formula 1 or nascar driver what he expects from a car, and post this on a consumer website to help mr lambda choose his next car, you'll get the same.
Now if you're a pro, you shouldn't be reading this, you should already know what to expect or don't care at all. Or be out shooting, or whatever.
Yannick, with all respect, you said your reply isn't sexist, and I tried to follow it, but then you reply in this last reply that her list to point out is because she's a woman. Come on. How about the things she listed perhaps matter to a *pro* working photographer? Male or female?
I have seen similar lists from men. Because at the point you are working to get that image 8-12 hours a day, a lot of other things matter. And if the ergonomics aren't good, that will hurt you.
ManuelVilardeMacedo: I voted "full frame or nothing", though I don't really appreciate the implication of fanaticism that sentence contains. Having used 4/3 for years and dipped a toe or two in APS-C, and having a substancial experience with the real full frame (135 film), I believe full frame is the only way for digital to go. It's better at everything compared to smaller formats. As demand increases, chances are we'll see truly affordable full frame systems very soon. Of course one could go over the top and vote for medium format, but are our computers up to handling such large files? Full frame is actually more sensible than it appears to 1", 4/3 and APS-C users - as long as one doesn't go bananas and buys 36 MP cameras.Some months ago I had the chance to sort a Nikon Df. I fell in love even before holding it. It's such a capable camera! I wish people would look at it without prejudice.
@Manuel- oh, no no. You are hardly disappointing me. Your very first post states very clearly how much in tune with what matters in photograph you really are. You don't need to elaborate- you made it quite clear :-)
Your very post establishes rather well why the categorical statement of FF doesn't make much sense. You are establishing some rather arbitrary criteria for "ok" that is very unique to your needs.
Joe Mayer: Very vague. How enthusiastic do you have to be about your photos? I guess I just don't know what an "enthusiast" is. With that in mind, I voted for APS-C at a minimum. Truly, you ought to buy a FF camera if you really care about your photos. While modern APS-C cameras can give good results, they will never match FF (it's just physics, no matter what magical NR and processing you use all else being equal). Note too that in the past, the size of the sensor had a lot to do with the cost of the camera, hence the affordability and popularity of APS-C. Today, you don't have that excuse. If you want FF, there are options that are cheaper (if you're willing to go with "merely" capable features like FPS and AF abilities) than some APS-C (6D vs. 7D2). I'm not getting into sports vs. portraiture and all that, one will beat the other and so forth. This poll is about (I perceive) image quality. Why not go FF when it's the same price?
There is an excuse- several in fact. Weight, size. Price is still different. It all depends what you want as a photographer. The whole "better pictures with a FF/ or 'better camera'" is a myth. Photography is done by the photographer.
It all depends what you want as a photographer. I like small and non intrusive for a lot of the work I do.
Haha, it was funny to see Dpreview reminding Panasonic that the camera does 4K video :-)
Hmm and the Panasonic representative says "unfortunately it doesn't have a touch screen on this camera.." or such... I like his honesty but not good marketing PR :-)
Chaitanya S: Finally a multi-aspect sensor from Panasonic. good looking camera.
After using the RicoGR in raw crop modes I will have to beg to differ. The whole workflow is simplified and it helps to compose at the time of capture quite a bit.
If they did not show the Nikon 1 at this show that's not a good sign for the system.
@Photomonkey- no marketing hype. As someone else said it crops to the raw and keeping same field of view. The workflow also in seeing the LCD in the crop mode *and* having the raw open that way is really really good. It's just not the same as taking a bigger shot and cropping later.
Oooh... can develop raws in-camera. About time Panasonic.
Ugh Panasonic. You took out the horrible wheel on the back of the GM5 design (applause) but you put it on this one? Why?!
Jogger: At that price, might as well get one of the 1-inch sensor compacts. You get way more features and better/faster lens. The GM1 would have been more relevant 4 years ago.
Faster lens is countered by a better sensor, at least to a big degree. I can't begging to understand why you find the price wrong on what seems to be quite a versatile camera.
Panasonic, thank you thank you thank you for getting rid of that stupid wheel in the back. Best choice ver you could have done for this series.