Andrew Reid

It shows wider public interest in days of 5D III and D800 has dropped off quite a lot. These were hot ticket consumer goods. Maybe after spending £1000 on their phone, people can no longer afford a high-end DSLR?

That will be nice. Hey, anybody remember the days of getting the news first on launch day and all the excitement of a surprise. All that with plentiful information on the day, even some reviews and features. It's a shame that somebody working inside Panasonic, is undermining the company by leaking info. We're so used to these rumours sites now. But I think the leaks need to stop. LX100 II - hope it maintains a fast zoom, rather than go prime. No scrub that, I hope it is full frame like the RX1

The aspect ratio hasn't changed though. Distortion has.

Hansel, what the hellareyou talking about?

The question is whether the novelty will wear off like it did with other 3D devices, because if there's not the long-term interest there, there won't be long-term 3D content. It's a good way to differentiate it to other phones though... Certainly stands out as different, both in branding, design and the display. Not sure about the camera. Is it better than P20 Pro? Most smartphones are too alike these days so this is good from RED... But we'll see how it does on the market.

Yeah, I tried that and trend was similar. D750 isn't reeeaaally in the same line though!

Google registered 75% less interest in the 5D Mark IV launch compared to the previous camera. Overall, all search queries for the Canon range has fallen 50% since 2010. With that an other insights let's take a deep look at the search giant's traffic... Read the full article

They were unwilling. This is the company that brought out the 5D III originally with no 1080p HDMI output, claiming the hardware was unable. Then they magically enabled it in firmware later.

Unable or unwilling?

Yeah it started with the D5200. What a total bargain that was. An A7S-like image for really cheap. It was a more cinematic camera than the GH3 at the time and better in low light. D5300 fixed the banding. So light and great big LCDs. Also I have always been impressed by Nikon's codec. The creamy blacks. Great colour. Sony could learn a lot.

No it doesn't matter. But it is interesting to know why it happens, as it's very strange.

The lens on the DP3 is absolutely insane. The DP2 is good as well but that 50mm on the DP3 is a razor blade.

To be fair there were NO specs in the press release not even megapixel count. It was just Nikon saying "we're making a full frame mirrorless camera". So that's no-way an indication of lack of 4K, which is in all the leaked specs present and correct. Video has not been an afterthought at Nikon since the D750. They woke up. Sony see the demand for 4K enough to do a separate model for us - A7S - which has sold well - and Nikon see the same market demand and same data as Sony do - so they will provide the video specs we need... Maybe not to the extent of a dedicated model, but certainly building on the D850 spec. There's a lot of speculation that it will be a damp squib vs the mighty Sony benchmark. Well actually the benchmark for a full frame mirrorless camera is the Leica SL in some respects - best EVF on the market, best ergonomics, largest grip, highest build quality. Some of that photographic heritage is there at Nikon as well. And they will bring it to an A7R III-like body, what's not to like about that? I say give it a chance, because I know a lot of people are deeply indebted to Sony and invested balls deep in Sony gear, so it's hard to get your head around the fact there may be a second choice that wasn't there previously. If the Nikon ends up outperforming the A7R III, I am sure Jon will switch like he did from GHx to A7x and change his mind entirely about his previous kit. Just imagine IF... The IBIS is as good as Olympus/Panasonic... The EVF is as big as the Leica SL... The 4K is as good as the D850 but with extra options like HLG and Nikon LOG... And the AF is Dual Pixel... That would mean the Sony A7R III would be beaten and it would leave the A7 III to win on price but not much else. They already are though! Sigma for one. Given the Sigma lenses for Sony FE-mount are as large as the DSLR mount versions, you may as well use the Nikon F mount adapter and the existing versions on the new camera. Given the way the autofocus on the latest Sony cameras, it bodes well for the Nikon in video mode.

It's gorgeous stuff, how can anyone complain this is ugly. As for the mount... if it falls off, we will know about it, but until that fateful day, who cares about the number of screws Anyone can tell this is going to be nicer in the hand than the A7 III and A7R III Bigger and more tactile. Just like the 4K files will be... Thicker than Sony. At least until the A7S III comes along (maybe).

Yep, the non-bayer design of the Sigma is outstanding with how cleanly it resolves resolution. I have one and should finally get round to finishing that 2nd article about it. I'd put it at around A7R III level of detail, so not quite 50MP but very very clean and very close for the price. It has a lot of other weaknesses along with the mirrorless version of it, however, so it's a special purpose / occasional tool, not a full on replacement for anything else.

At launch: X1D body RRP $8995 GFX body RRP $6499 Those do not include tax. At current time, the X1D has dropped $2500 because nobody bought it. It's still more expensive than the GFX at B&H. Maybe at some shops around the world, it is the same price... because of lack of demand and a glut of stock. They got the pricing wrong and they know it. 63mm F2.8 for the GFX is £1359 new. This is a 50mm equiv. focal length on the GFX and X1D Sony CMOS medium format sensor. The Hasselblad system only has a 45mm and 90mm, nothing in between! So that is 35mm and 75mm-ish, right? No 50!? And how are we doing for pricing on that 90... Yours for only £2899, a complete bargain... not. The autofocus is crap on top of that. I bought mine used. Used, they are going for £2000 less than the X1D. For me, that is reality my friend. I.e. how can I get the camera for best price possible and still with 12 month warranty. I got mine from London Camera Exchange for £3800 with the 63mm F2.8, which effectively made the body cost £3000. The cheapest I have seen the X1D go for used is £5800, and that is only in the last few weeks after the massive price drop on the new bodies. If you bought the X1D at launch or just a few months ago, you'd be seriously fucked-off with that kind of depreciation and price drop on the new model. Yes it does. I can shoot medium format at F1.4 I can get full coverage from Minolta full frame lenses and even some Contax Zeiss gems on the cheap. The creativity is endless and the looks never before produced. Possible for the first time with the GFX 50S. For video? Yes. For AF? Yes. For 50MP photography and dynamic range? No. Don't try and simply my argument until it no longer makes sense! "Best image quality" is more like "exact same image quality" in case of X1D vs GFX. There are plenty of other cameras with a leaf shutter and high speed flash sync BTW. Hardly makes X1D unique.

Transcoding the H.264 to ProRes really helps fluid 4K editing. It helps more than upgrading the system. To answer the OP... Yes the upgrade is worth it, 100%, over the 12" MacBook. But you will still need to convert the 4K H.264 from the A6500 to an editing codec to see the most significant leaps... Or switch to FCPX.

30p is a crop, so the lens correction wouldn't reveal the very bottom edge of the sensor readout. Looking at Caleb's video, the stretch is certainly enough to push the bottom of the frame out of the picture where the blinking pixels occurred. My theory is that Sony discovered some units shipped with a hardware fault causing corruption on that bottom scan line of the readout, and only way to fix it was to hide it with firmware fix, rather than do a recall. Why else would it be stretching the picture? It has no purpose and is an unlikely "bug" (would be the first bug of its kind ever in the camera industry). It is a full pixel readout in 4K/24p/25p of the entire sensor top to bottom, so yes they are scaling from 5 or 6K down to 4K. I don't think that's the issue. They have done it before, no problem. Wonder if A9 has same stretch?

Although we shouldn't worry too much about this because it's barely noticeable, it's an interesting mystery to test and solve for Sony. Read the full article

For the money I bought it for there was no better stills camera than the GFX 50S. Next jump would have been the 100MP Hasselblad H6D which is £20k+. I could pay £3000 more than the Fuji for the X1D for no benefit at all, and have to invest in all-new medium format glass. Besides my 13 year old Hasselblad H3D II has faster autofocus, better viewfinder and similar resolution. OK. OK. Let's get a reality check. Leica SL is £4500 brand new, £3700 used. Hasselblad X1D is £12,000 with one lens! I have not seen it for less than £7000 body-only either new or used. Besides the cost of the X1D lenses, you can use all sorts of stuff on the Leica and Fuji GFX...Also AF is much better on the native SL mount, as well as the fact it does 4K video whereas Hassy does not. Specs are out there and unless proven to be wildly wrong, suggest it is very capable. Of course "reality" after the camera is out, is a different matter, which is why I said "on paper". Since when has a mechanical shutter mattered on a camcorder?! "Intention in same category". No. One is a photo-camera, one is a camcorder. You're not comparing even remotely the same tools. Unless DJI target different group of customers entirely, X1D will never compete with A7 series.

Sometimes I feel we go over the same arguments again and again for the benefit of people new to the thread or the story and who haven't done their research.

That's the thing... A joke is not a statement. It's not even real. It's not an actionable intent. It's an act. Said it time again. Learn to tell the difference between fiction and reality. Or you'll be stoning comedians on stage at this rate.

Why would one buy it over the GFX 50S? It is a hip design but far less practical and much more expensive, with no advantage in image quality over the Fuji! Plus you can't adapt glass to it very well, it lacks a mechanical focal plane shutter and the electronic shutter has more rolling shutter than a A6300 shooting howl's moving castle. Panasonic G1 was mature and very refined straight off the bat. Leica SL was and is a much better all-round system than the X1D. Nikon's first gen full frame mirrorless looks on paper to be superior to latest Sony stuff. In Cinema EOS land, C300 was a first gen product... and took over the planet. So it's not the case that no company has never made a great first effort, starting anew. It might. It might not. A bit of blind speculation there... I'd bet on it remaining a very expensive one-off rather than something to take on Panasonic, Sony and Nikon.

It depends on the region. I see far more Fujis in peoples hands around UK and Europe than Pentax DSLRs, that's for sure. The shops have far more room dedicated to Fuji's cameras than Pentax, and the unit shipments don't take into account the fact higher priced models ship in smaller numbers, but might take a larger proportion of the market by value than by unit numbers. Of course Canon and Nikon getting into mirrorless is a severe storm for Fuji, Panasonic and Olympus. They are going to get squeezed. It should prompt all 3 to go full frame, so we win in the end.

Do Fuji, Panasonic, Olympus and Pentax really fight over just 13% of the market between the 4 of them? The numbers seem a bit off to me, given what we know about the strong Fuji sales in particular.