Sexiest camera ever?

LINK

Cost less than $1,000, does 1080P, has 13 stops of dynamic range and is smaller than an iPhone5 yet looks better than anything Apple could produce for the same price.

Xmas is too far away...

 

I like it, good price too, will have to see some reviews.

 

Uhm what? It's not smaller and it doesn't look better. WTF does it have to do with apple anyways. The camera in the iPhone 5 is a quarter inch sensor.

 

It's cool and all.....but I don't find it sexy

 

hdr yuck.

 

I am still using my Sony Mavica CD1000 new was $1250

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sonycd1000

takes a better picture than my wife Sony 12mpix pocket camera

 

Well, the first part of that comment related to size, and the second part of that comment carried it forward; as Apple and Black Magic share a similar school of thought on what industrial design should look like.

It wouldn't stand out in an Apple store.

Their 4K cinema camera for less than $4k, would; as Apple would never produce something like it - it would be too far removed from their consumer range of products and possibly invoke nerd-rage amongst those who perhaps would have been looking forward to buying an Apple Camera, only to find they cannot afford one.

LINK#2

FanBois are fickle.

 

how is that smaller than iPhone 5 again?

 

Sorry that looks nothing like something Apple would have made, they dont make cameras anyways so your comparision is a stupid one for sure. also what eclap said, its wider, longer, and 5 times thicker. That does /=/ smaller

 

I like the looks.

But this looks mutch more interesting...

 

that just looks stupid. I laugh when people buy similar cameras and then attach big lenses on them just to tell me it's uncomfortable to hold. I would rather see that attached to a proper dslr body.

 

800 x 480.... oh well...

 

Simile > Metaphor

And eclap, there are no DLSR's out there with this level of dynamic range for this money for Movies.

Sure, there are RAW stills on pretty much any ol'DLSR from your usual suspects, but the moment you move to a moving image, it won't have the 'range and be in H264 MOV format (typically) - losing all of the range with which RAW has to offer.

Now, this has the option for MOV/ProRes, but also has lossless CinemaDNG RAW. Combined with 13 stops, you got something which the Canon EOS-1D C cannot do. Srsly.

 

Pretty much this. this isn't something to take pictures with, this is a camera to shoot video with.

It's smaller than a GH3, which currently is the best video option to get. not to mention, it's also small enough to be able to mount it somewhere and use it as a B camera, kinda like a gopro.

So you would rather have a bigger camera that performs worse, because it looks better?

Just because something has a big body and is called a DSLR, doesn't make it the best kind of camera in the world. but if you like to think that, go ahead...

 

no. I would not want a camera that's impossible to hold with a big lens attached and has no hw buttons to change the most used settings on the body.

 

I need example videos. If you are using this for video, you want a stable platform, not holding it out in front of you with just your fingertips. A smaller/lighter camera would shake like crazy for video, like with my Sony NEX.

 

It's a bit heavier than an NEX 3. 297 grams vs 355 grams. I guess it would work the same as any other camera its size.


Although the majority of people using this camera would be using it along with rigs for stabilization.

 

I don't find it sexy at all. But I guess it is great for videographers.

 

This.

 

Lol. /Thread