DonSantos: 24-48mm 1.8 zoom for ff please.
For APS-C it weights 810 gr, for FF that will be 1,5-2 kg. to say nothing about price.
I joined 500px 2 years ago, as it was the whole new level. Many really talented authors uploaded their images there. I have never seen photos of that level in that concentration ever before.But now 500px slowly becomes a trash can of crowds. People upload their garbage, family photos, "look I finally got DSLR"-photos etc. It is impossible to dig hundreds and thousands of ugly photos in "upcoming" and "fresh". It is increasingly difficult to find a new author worth seeing. I think they must limit photo upload to 1 photo a week from all newcomers and 2-3 photos a week for those with impact 10000 and more. And that is it. No one on earth makes masterpieses faster than that.
I think DPreview should not kill time by taking new images with "new" Canon cameras. It is enough to write "see corresponding section of our review of Canon 550D".
sarit: I'd like to see the manufacturers put 1" sensor for these bridge cameras or at least 2/3" for god's sake.
or at least 1/1.7" ;)
ZAnton: Dpreview, please add a page with comparison against 650D (600D).
You are right, that will probably be a single line of text.
Rachotilko: Hopefully for Canon (but also for their vendor-locked-in customers) this performs much better in terms of noise floor - ie. the dynamic range - than 650D. In case is does not (and this seems likely), then their trailing behind the competition is truely woeful. But maybe Canon thinks we don't need shadow details @ low ISO.
unfortunately 90% of DSLR users never use RAW, and have no idea what "shadow details" are. Considering a number and success of "Profi-Books", that tell us what DOF is, what aperture does, and how do you use flash (which is extensively explained in the manual), there will never be a need for Canon to make low read-noise at low ISO.
Zvonimir Tosic: Brilliant move from Canon — finally a camera that makes tiny kindergarten fingers happy (Canon had huge complains from kindergartens across the world, that their DSLRs were unusable by 5-year olds). Now, if they could pull out the same trick with their lenses, especially zooms, and shrink them too. O boy, shall we dare to see … 18-55mm f11-f16 for APS-C ! .. now, that would be something!
18-55 f/11-16 for APS-C is a pin-hole ;). You can make it at home.
Dpreview, please add a page with comparison against 650D (600D).
DerbyBill: Still waiting to hear about the 70D...
70D will probably get AF of 7D, while 7Dmk2 will get AF of 5D3. So that's it.
ZAnton: Good circuitry is OK, but why can't they make a proper pixel binning for HD video on an existing sensor?Instead of roughly 6000px*4000px, make a pixel binning 3*3 clusters to appr. 2000*1300px.
OK, not 24MP, then 8 MP, they already have this sensor for a canon C-video camera. If 1Dx is capable of 12fps on 18MP, 24 fps on 8 MP should not be a problem (except of the power required, hehe). Well anyway, as an engineer I am very curios about HD-FF, the ISO performance must be astonishing, but if I were marketologist, I would have some very serious doubts about such product. Using it as a HD-camera for normal filming make no sense - night lighting is very very bad, I mean not intensity, but aestetic attractivity. So only astrophotographers left. How much of them do we have? How many of them would pay astronomical prices for that camera?
Good circuitry is OK, but why can't they make a proper pixel binning for HD video on an existing sensor?Instead of roughly 6000px*4000px, make a pixel binning 3*3 clusters to appr. 2000*1300px.
Peiasdf: Got a feeling Sigma's 50 f/1.4 is going to be better than the Zeiss.... hmm. Zeiss aren't that impressive lately.
The new Zeiss 55 f/1,4 is very good indeed, but at price of 3000 Euro - forget about it.
Please, correct the name"F4.5.6 G SSM" to "F4-5.6 G SSM"Concerning lenses: Sony sells non IS lenses at the price of Canon/Nikon IS/VR lenses. Inbody IS gives at best - 2 stop, usually 0,5-1 Stop, whereas optical IS - at least 3 stop. So I don't think it is wise to get Sony at least at current prices.
I don't see much sense in that expenive lenses for m43. For a FF or APS-C you get those lenses for 1/3 of the price, why on earth does this thing cost 550 Euro? It is smaller (less glass), it is for smaller sensor (you dont have problems in corners as on FF), there is no stabilisation, but yet this simplest prime costs more than a camera...I have FF and m43, but untill prices on m43 lenses will stay unconnected to reality, I will continue to broaden my FF lens collection, while Oly Pen will live with its kit lens.
ngollan: So far so uninteresting. A slow wide zoom and a purely professional lens.
I have been talking quite a bit with a friend who's going to get Canon equipment, and honestly, Nikon has a lot of catch-up to play when it comes to their lens lineup. There may be many great lenses, but there is, e.g., nothing to beat something like a EF 4,5-5,6/100-400 L IS USM, with the only remotely competing lens predating AF-S and VR.
There don't seem to be any modern lenses in the "amateur" telezoom range, and Nikon seem to have phased out interesting, differentiating, lenses like the DC primes.
All in all, I hope that they are going to use the 80th anniversary of the Nikkor brand to modernise their lineup and re-enter the market for affordable, interesting lenses.
@ngollanit is not the question WHY Nikon has updated their standard lenses, but that they HAVE it done, and Canon - doesn't.
In corners - defenitely better than Canon 35L.
toomanycanons: I've never used ACDSee. Anyone want to comment on this update as opposed to, say, Lightroom 4 or CS5/6, if they're even comparable.
For viewing I use IrfanView, very small, fast, and versatile (plugins). Its copy/move window is genious, helps to sort lots of photos very fast. It also does Batch convertion/rotation/resize and lots of other stuff. For RAW editing - of course LR.IrfanView doesn't have good viewing of the whole folder (small icons on the left, bigger photo on the right), but since it is free, I can live with that. Folder view can be made with Win7 or Total Commander + Plugins (also good for rotation/resize etc.)
I have stopped using ACDSee on its 7th version as its databese had taken whole drive C, it was slow, and unstable. I have no idea what is ACDSee now, but following the trend of all programs (except few), they become worse and worse. =)
I don't know if it is made on purpose, but shooting macro is usually used to conceal poor ISO performance. Slow gradients, even colors, no small and sharp detail. Cactus, rind, leaves - are best for this. Same on the test scene - hand painted figures, wooden man, fiber balls. My cell phone will show decent performance on these objects.
Calvin Chann: You'd think that from the bitching that's going on in this thread that Canon were forcing you to buy this lens. They're not.
@ Calvin Channyour theory doesn't work with Leica. That is what Canon will be in couple of years.