1D Mk IIn5D Mk II17-35/2.824-105IS70-200/2.8100-400IS50/1.885/1.8
NEX-3 with a few M39 lenses
Here's a thought for the reviewer's once in a lifetime vacation...bring a once in a lifetime camera setup. For all the rest, use the GM5 and its various jewel-like lens options. Absolute sensor performance doesn't mean that much to me anymore. Sensors have gotten so good relatively that if you can't cope with any of the modern sensors, you're doing it wrong. With a 5D2 and 1D3 handy to me, I want the biggest gap in size and handiness to those...I still take my GM1 everywhere and have produced more keepers with it than any other camera I've owned. My NEX flirtation was short lived...not small enough to be unobtrusive to go everywhere.
kixigvaq: Collectors are generally not big fans of the special Luxus Leicas. The regular production run cameras are more highly valued. I'm surprised it sold for as much as it did. One Leica I wish I'd bought on eBay was also a IIIc. On the back it had an inscription to a German General from his staff at Stalingrad. It sold for just over $300.
jacketpotato: heehee :) LEGO RULES !!!
Why did the photogrpaher use shallow dof field.Those classic photogrpahs were classics partly due to deep dof showing every element.
Maybe just the semi-macro nature of it. Hard to get more DOF?
John Driggers: Oh yeah...the flash doesn't work in silent mode as a criticism???? Why, pray tell, would you want the flash to fire when you are being "stealthy?"
In fact, if the flash would fire, THAT would be a valid criticism.
There are just too many really dumb observations in this review.
If a flash goes off in silent mode in the woods, would anybody see it?
WAY awesome. An oily fractal!
bigdaddave: Try here, way better
happypoppeye: yip ...and here come the SLR guys defending their purchases ...I hear them running behind me now.
Who are "SLR guys"? I have 1- and 5- series Canons and almost always pack my Panny GX1 instead these days except for very specific purposes.
dark goob: WANT!!
The slow, loud focusing speed of the existing 20 is its only real drawback. I'll probably keep it and use the other one on dual GH3's to do 3D video.
How much autofocus do people really use in video? I rarely if ever.
Artistico: Yes, the moon is closer, but only fractionally and not really visibly so in photos unless you put it next to a photo of the moon at its farthest away from the earth in the same context. If you want the best photos of the moon, every full moon is as good an occasion as this - only less hyped up.
Do we really have to go through this every year when the full moon is at its biggest for that year? Watching the news on tv, I'd rather not have forced upon me awful photos of blurry, overexposed moons sent in from viewers - some straight from their smartphone, which - as we know - is the best tool for capturing the moonrise...
It's not a awful thing if gets people out to appreciate it.
Fascinating. Quite close to the limit for many lenses.
gl2k: Odd focal length.Nikon has already 2 very good 70-200 lenses. The 80-400 has some massive overlap to both of them. Additionally there is the quite good 70-300 consumer lens which is inexpensive and delivers a lot for the money.I'm not confident if this is really the lens photogs are after except "birders".
I think this is a much-favored general purpose (not professional) daylight sports range. It will be quite popular.
I have to say that those high-ISOs are stellar. I love Fuji's rendering choices, allowing for some grain and shying away from over-smearing that others would call "clean". I'd call the Sony and Olympus images cartoonish with Pentax second best to Fuji.
Agreed that it's a nice "capture" in general, but gosh, it's not really very good technically. Surprised at the 1st place.
cityathrt: This is my personal favorite, love the fantasy realm feeling.
Ditto. And subject considerations aside, I find that technically, its individual components are much more well-matched than the first place image in terms of depth, lighting, color, etc. Well done.
I'm rarely critical in the contests forum as most of the photos are frankly fabulous. This frankly just looks glued together. I'm quite stunned it's won and disappointed in the readership. Sheesh.
tonywong: Apologies if this seems overly critical, but Jeff's review was posted June 15 and DPreview's version is posted July 16. Seems like a fair amount of time to add DPR's take on Jeff's work.
Anyhow I'm hoping to see more reviews soon.
Regardless, I like Jeff's frank spin on things. I'm hoping this is part of the positive side of this cross-polination.
inframan: This is an excellent example of the use of photography as propaganda. I'm not saying that what the photographer describes is not in fact what happened.
What I'm saying is that we look at the image & form an instant & visceral judgement. While actually knowing nothing about the woman, the husband, the incident or the photographer, we are ready to start a war amongst ourselves.
A great lesson. Now look at the image & ask yourselves how you would feel if you found out it was staged. Note that I am not saying it was set up, but it could have been. What then?
In my opinion, you are taking a hypothetical point of view too far. The photograph emotes the byline (picture is worth a thousand words, etc). The journalist or story-teller plus the facts and opinions in the world around us provide the context.
In this case, the photograph certainly has emotive and possibly even artistic properties, and people have voted to deem it so. There is plenty of additional context documented to say bride-burnings are real and an offense. If people chose to feel outraged in such context, they should feel free to do so without any sort of "great lesson" being attached and that their reaction should be somehow qualified by your implied scolding.
At the risk of delving into an old cliche example, if an image of the Holocaust gains acclaim and foments great emotion or argument, that is certainly no "great lesson" that we should temper the reaction in case it's set up or could have been. Be real.
Will this work on my Newton 2000?
Louis_Dobson: I'm pleased you did the shadow pull - vital info and especially relevant here (and I still don't think it is the G3 sesnor, but who knows?). That was my big worry on the camera. Seems fine - good, even.
I agree with your comment that if you want visibly better IQ you need to go right up to FF. If budget allows, I think the best bet is to have both. FF is a real pain to carry, as I found out during my four years of D3 use, but a brief loan of the new D800 showed that there is something there worth having. A D800 and an OM-D strikes me as the ideal combo, and I'll be trying to put it together...
Different types of cameras marike. The ratings are within-segment, not between. If I'm going to carry a 3100 or 5200, I'm going all the way to the 5DMk2 or something. I use my GX1 for example for completely different things and accept a different level of image rigour.
I HATE IT!!!