How the HELL does the D71000 "offer[s] a nicely upgraded movie mode compared to the D7000" if "It gains 1080p30 shooting, rather than 24p" ??DPReview have been around video (and assessed video on cameras) for MORE than long enough to understand 24P is the most important video frame-rate currently available ... how is 30P an "upgrade" ??
Donald Duck: New trend: interchangeable cameras instead of a cameras with interchangeable lenses...
What next - wide Sigma camera, fisheye one, etc.?
Close-up AND macro, solarsky ? Close-up, yes, at 1:3 ratio - but certainly not macro. As for "reproduction", well isn't all photography "reproduction", but if you mean in the sense of copying small items such as slides then, once again, no. A magnification of 1:3 would be insufficient for most reproduction purposes, unless you wished to reproduce items larger than a bank note.
zodiacfml: This is probably made for macro work. While the focal length is nice for portraits, I will find the max aperture not enough to produce the bokeh that I like around f2.2 or larger. I'm pretty sure though that lens performance is even better than found on the DP2M.
MADE for macro work ?? When it can't even remotely reach a macro ratio ? Get a grip.
Photonhunter: Camera clearly aimed at reproduction and product photography? Now, does this mean that we will get the 50/2.8 macro in Nex E-mount too in the near future...?? ;-)
Reproduction at 1:3 magnification ? Product photography at 1:3 AND with no tilt and shift ? Maybe it can be done in some scenarios, but it is CERTAINLY not "clearly aimed" at either scenario at all - not even nearly !!
Future user: Well, by its specifications I guess the lens is more designed for macro than portraits, but I bet there won't be sharper and more detailed portraits than the ones taken by this DP3m. Per-pixel sharpness and detail reproduction of DPXm series (at low iso) is out of this world. Shame the poor high-iso and weird color blotches... When Sigma will solve that...
"Macro" ? If you call a 1:3 ratio "Macro". Don't just repeat the marketing crap ad nauseum. 1:1 is Macro ... 1:3 is just "close-up" or some other amorphous term.
emircruz: without really telling me how it works..
Can someone school me about Faveon Sensors? What it's good and bad at?
too lazy to google
Per Marek: Better than ANY other camera with traditional sensor ?? What a load of absolute crap. Most recent Medium Format backs will positively destroy the Sigma, and even the lowly Nikon D800e is better (downsampling the D800e for smaller print sizes dramatically increases the "per pixel sharpness" and at larger print sizes, it's not even close).
Pretty sure the sensor is different between the iPhone 4s and iPhone 5 even if the megapixel count is the same.
PS - the LENS is 8 megapixel ? Surely there's no such thing as an "8 megapixel, five element lens with f2.4 aperture" ??
latinware: Kim, it's great. Not only he has ballz, but hi has enough knowledge of street photography...
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. He has a little knowledge of street photography (well recycled cliches mostly, but you get my point - which I have chosen to make through using a cliched aphorism).
Dan1964: I like Eric Kim I subscribe to him on youtube
That would be an example of vast reductionism and oversimplification. What I said explicitly is that great photographers tend not to have YouTube videos to which you can subscribe - but you still haven't remotely understood my point. I shall explicate it fully rather than relying upon your initiative:
Eric Kim is a social phenomenon, whose fame is derived entirely from outlets such as YouTube and his blog (marketing and self-promotion), rather than through his photographic output. There is nothing wrong with this, in isolation, however it is becoming obvious (even in this thread) that people are increasingly believing he has garnered accolades and renown for being a great street photographer - ala Bruce Gilden. My point is that this is not the case. There is a distinction between an internet star and a great photographer (and very few world class photographers have YouTube channels - at least at this point in time).
How many of today's great photographers do YOU "subscribe to on YouTube", hmmn ? 'Nuff said ...
thubleau7: From looking at his sample photographs there is nothing he can teach me about street photography .the samples are just C**P.I just think DPR should spend more time on getting out reviews then endless no sensical articles on the front web page.most here dont care about this stuff we just want honest reviews and tests of equipment and then most if not all head straight to the forums to see whats happening.
total waste of web space.
People around here act like there will be a certain level of merit or "quality standard" in every thing DPR chooses to post.
Mssimo: I think he was on a digitalrev video. He did street photography with film/flash setup. He would get right in peoples faces. I have to give him some respect..he has ballz. I did not find any of the front page images on his site very good but I know he is a really good street photographer.
I've never heard anybody with any knowledge of street photography call him a "really good" or even "moderately good" street photographer. I think you may need to learn a little more about street photography, so that your "knowledge" is a little more well-rounded, ahem ...
Philip Corlis: Kim is a genuinely underwhelming figure in contemporary street photography. Looks like it was a very slow news day at DPReview.
Yes. I'm actually a little annoyed with them for this ill-conceived "click through" cross-promotional opportunity. Content should be "king", not page views ...
VadymA: Sorry but the entire article looks like a high school essay; nothing more than a compilation of thoughts that have already been said by somebody, somewhere, sometime. And I had exactly the same feeling when looking at his portfolio. I definitely respect Eric for pursuing his passion but I am quite puzzled by how his work could already make him so "popular".
It's clearly NOT his "work" which makes him popular. It was his self-promotion ... but therein lies a lesson really doesn't it ? I thought everybody already knew the cliche "it's not what you know, it's WHO you know" (in this case, Leica).
LOL - I'm assuming this was deliberately ironic ... and hence VERY funny !
qwertyasdf: DPreview, how can I make you feature my blog on your site?!I want instant popularity!!!
Write a heap of crap, unoriginal, "me too" articles with lists - Make them all a "Top 10 of" and a "Top 50 of ", then link it to your YouTube site with a video of you "street shooting"... have at least one article on why you've decided to shoot film from here-on in, one on why film is different to digital (just recycle all the old cliches) and make that a "Top 10 ways in which film is different from Digital". Speak about Leica non-stop until Leica decides to sponsor you as a reward for your "ambassadorship" and "page views". Use Leica's sponsorship to lead street photography "Masterclasses" all over the world for the followers you have gained through YouTube and your blog. DPR will hear of your name through a blog entry you wrote (probably a "Top 10") which is "featured" on Leica's website and Voila !! Instant international acclaim and credibility (well, not quite instant, but these are the steps to replicate).
No. He can't make up the time of your readership (who HAVE taken the time to read this little snippet), and some who may have been fooled into believing this was a DPR "endorsement" of the site in question may have even "clicked through". Of all the worthwhile and informative sites on the web worthy of promotion, you have chosen Eric Kim's poorly written, (self) promotional blog ? Really ?? Therein lies the real problem.