Top ten sensationalist photos of the year.
I like such pics but these don't work for me. No atmosphere. Either over-processed or too close-up, or the light seems wrong.
And they'll never do better than the vietnam pics, such as
photo nuts: 580g? The more useful Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 only weighs 560 g.
Presumably, with all those elements, it's highly corrected.
And Tokina has terrible multi-coatings. I would have purchased their wide angle zoom otherwise.
Sean65: If I remember right, my Nikon D700 had one firmware update in four years. I used to be proud of this as it suggested 'how right' Nikon got the camera, first time round.
Fuji have a different approach. It's more like 'live R&D'. It's not a good thing in most cases. Fuji seem to be balancing on the edge of greatness but ALWAYS get let down by their designs.
"You could also see it like this: Fujifilm keeps on working for you, even after having received your cash."
hmmm, that's being too charitable. Really, they had to keep working since the older firmwares were undermining their own sales (poor AF etc).
Regrettably, I will not be upgrading to this firmware for the time-being, if at all.
With the XE-2 adjustment to shadow control (at a default zero of +1 to the X-pro1/XE1) which means less DR in the darks, and also the very worrying early cut off of shadows in the X100s, the loss of jpeg shadow DR is a real possibility in this firmware update. Has the X100s early shadow cut has found its way in to the X-Pro?
The dpreview X100s SR tests did not include a shadow control analysis unlike the X-Pro 1 DR tests, so we don't know if we can compensate for the early cut-off. In any case, if the +1 shadow default is the new reality, then we're screwed anyway.
It would be interesting to know if Fuji have further extended the highlights via the loss of shadow DR. That would be some consolation as I still get blown highlights even at DR400 sometimes. Currently I get 3 stops of highlight protection over the Nikon D5100 highest DR mode (not HDR).
"pro level X-Pro1"
hmmm, I don't think that's right. Except for the lack of phase focusing, the x-pro 1 fits this category better.
It doesn't have RGB histogram (which it desperately needs due to red-channel blow-out issues), only a +-2 EV, off-center tripod, and the flaw of a very weak hotshoe.
onlooker: I am not following the logic of the categories. On the one hand we have "enthusiast" category, on the other "mirrorless". Are these mutually exclusive? Since EM1 did well, apparently not.
Also, will GH3 make it into any of them? It's not really small, so presumably not into the "Small, but serious". It did not make it into the current one, must not be for enthusiasts. Where will G6 be? Or will it be shunned like it has so far?
Mirrorless is a hot item at the moment. Enthusiast is another money spinner.
From a business perspective, the categories work quite well.
Let's remember that dpreview isn't trying to be a work of academia.
sixtiesphotographer: These categories are so overlapping, arbitrary, and subjective as to be pointless.
I appreciate DPR's hard work, but I think this comparison/review is meaningless.
How many would prefer for DPR to spend their efforts elsewhere, such as for cameras long-overdue for review?
I think the categories aren't so bad, from an ordinary consumers' perspective.
I reckon a lot of folks will be interested in this.
Perhaps not so much the enthusiasts who might be commenting down here in the murky depths, however.
Paul Petersen: This is really getting old with the bullies at Nikon picking on Sigma.It has most likely been going on for a while. The last round was a lawsuit over supposed patent infringement of image stabilization technologies. Not much ever came of it but it matched up well with the introduction of the SD1 with superior resolution to anything out there at the time. The D800 was the first to beat it.Now Sigma has been on a tear with their "Global Vision" product line. All pretty much outperforming most lenses at greater prices. Now a new Nikon body makes all Nikon lenses malfunction. Very suspicious. Gotta love the agility of Sigma to get a fix out. It seems rather prescient of Sigma to introduce the USB adapter for their new lenses. They must have saw this coming after past skirmishes and figured Nikon would engage in these games next.Checkmate to Yamaki-san
Maybe they did eventually, but even now the fuji processing is still better than what the 3rd parties produce. they likely withheld something. Instead of specs they should ahve handed over the source code.
"The bullies at Nikon? Imagine that Nikon wanting to make sure all F-mount lenses work as advertised on their bodies. "
Then they give the communication protocols to Sigma.
Your type of thinking is typical of the bureaucratic mind that seems to be prevailing in the West these days, even the UK and US.
I agree they aren't really bullies, just fixated on their short-sighted we-want-it-all business plan. A bit like Fuji and their unwillingness to handover the x-trans processing source code.
itsastickup: " its detail is unnecessarily high"
There's an illogic going on here.
Including for portraits. One just resizes, a camera setting, or apply a blur filter if need be. If someone wants a huge portrait then that detail may be useful.
I wouldn't want a lockable EV dial. I've had to live with them with my other cameras and they are a pain. In the meantime the X-Pro 1 has a nice reasonably stiff EV dial that does the job well (though reports vary as to its stiffness).
" its detail is unnecessarily high"
I don't understand this lens at all.
At that price it should be fully corrected with beautiful bokeh.
I get that with the Fuji 35/1.4. (Granted it isn''t FF, but it's 50mm equiv in APS-C).
Denver Wedding Photographers: Why release such an expensive piece of glass, only to have such poor wide performance? Clearly its intended market is those who want wide open apertures.
hmmm, at 58mm it's looking to me like a dx portrait lens (with fx abilities). And on the numbers, it seems to me that portraits is all it's good for. And since the bokeh ain't so good, obliteration bokeh is the only option, which is typical of a wide-open portrait.
There are a lot better options for portraits.
Richt2000: Canon have lost it. Just boring these days.Then they do release something exciting it takes 2 years to become available or it is so overpriced its for corporate purchasers.
Overtaken by Nikon and Sony.
I have been Canon for 20 years, next camera will be Sony or Nikon, and a complete system change too.
Goodbye Canon, may your photocopiers and video cameras keep you afloat.
For me, Canon's enduring success is that their lenses, so many of them, have such excellent bokeh. That's not true of Nikon or Sony. Sure, they have one or two but they aren't as consistent as Canon's zooms. And zooms are the money lenses.
The problem for canon now is that everyone else has caught on to the bokeh dream. And horribly, with cheap aspherics, it's possible to produce a sharp and bokelicious lens.
Hello Fuji, goodbye Canon.
Marty4650: This really looks like a beautiful lens.
I don't even own a Pentax camera, but I'd love to have one. Just so I could handle it, and look at it. And I really am not kidding.
(Wow.... I probably need professional help for this gearhead thing!)
We are evidently brothers although by your pic I would imagine our parents are unrelated.
My favourite lens is the pentax s-m-c 50/1.4 . I've not taken a single photo with it since I can't stand to accidentally scratch the lens body. From time to time, I take it out and touch it. And then I put it back again.
PK24X36NOW: Sorry, but I don't get it, Pentax. This is a 2:1 zoom ratio, relatively slow, variable aperture lens that isn't very wide on the wide end, isn't very long on the long end, and you want 849 POUNDS for it (I don't even want to think of what that is in dollars)?!
The main thing that's "limited" about this lens is what - range, versatility??
You would think that for your top-line lenses, you should be able to muster a 3:1 zoom ratio, constant aperture, and a focal length range that isn't boring.
If they are going for ultimate lens correction with no compromises, then the limit on the zoming might be understandable.
I'm all for dials, but the lack of an aperture ring on the 'kit' lens is just wrong. They should supply it with the earlier 50mm.
70's? I think it looks mid eighties. The silver one reminds me of their cheap plastic film cameras.
Zigmont: I guess I'm the only one who thinks this obsession with the past, i.e. "retro" is absurd. I'm old enough to remember the Nikon F's in the '60's, I don't want a camera that looks like that, I want something new and modern that breaks the old barriers.
Retro design is an excuse for companies who have no new ideas and can't come up with a new and ground-breaking design, so they go back to the past.
Quite frankly, I'm sick of all the new "retro" look cameras. I want the camera of 2020, not 1950.
Some of us regret not being born 500 years ago, and regret that we are surrounded by architecture from people with your attitude who don't care at all that it depresses the rest of us.