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. :-)
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.
Raist3d: I am kinda dissapointed Fuji has expanded their lens line this way. I would have expected the original F1.2 lens to have more than good enough bokeh.
I just feel like the original lens should have had good enough bokeh. I sort of see it I guess.
Finally! e-shutter option for the X-line. Now Fuji, get that in the XE-2 or an XE-3 and take my money.
The biggest news for me is the electronic shutter. That sounds like awesome on a cake- because it means it's coming to the rest of the X line. I so have been asking for that.
bigdaddave: Emperor's new clothes, retro is always best.
A fixed lens, utterly limiting, a pointless exercise in posing
No worries. There's a lot of photographers that want and can do a lot with the "utter limiting" prime lens.
What interests me the most here is the fact this is the first X-trans line camera with APS-C *and* electronic shutter. I can only hope the Fuji X-E3 offers one. That would be just great.
I am kinda dissapointed Fuji has expanded their lens line this way. I would have expected the original F1.2 lens to have more than good enough bokeh.
CameraLabTester: The marketing spin doctors at Fuji should follow the Canon style of promo:
Keep all three (X10, X20 and X30) as current!
That way, there are choices of different arrangements.
Canon still keeps the 600D churning, even if the 650D and 700D have been launched.
A lot of people still want the X10 and X20 but can't find them on shelves.
Marketing 101, Mr. Fuji...
To me the RX100 (I & II and probably III) all handle horrible. I tried to like it, but passed on it because of this.
Looking forward to see what Panasonic does with the LX8.
I really think that at this size, an 1'' would have been a more attractive proposition. I suppose the price is not horrible considering they give you a reasonably good lens with that zoom range, but still.