Lens Fanatics: David & Goliath combo ! An amazing small A7series camera with a usual huge dslr size lens.
I was really hoping that Sony will use their "engineering genius" to make a small lens to match the small mirrorless camera. Quality wise most advance/pro cameras are not very far apart. "Size really matters" is the idea that some of us got lure to this system.
well there always is the physics you can't get around. certain lenses will be bulky forever. and todays technology adds a lot to image quality and comfort, so even the primes can't be as small as they used to be.
Joseph Black: Interesting in terms of art, but as a real photo shoot with a bride and groom I think it's just people making something meaningful into something needlessly epic. Everything has to be epic. You can't watch a sporting even without every video or commentator acting like every second you watch is some world changing event. In the case of a wedding, doing something like this for anything other than a few art shoots is taking meaning and turning it into nonsense drama. It looks like this isn't a common occurrence or even the main thrust of any given shoot, but I still don't get why real people would do this.
i agree, the forced "epicness" is getting on my nerves too but that is implied in the economic system. everyone needs to sell stuff so they jazz it up.
falconeyes: Still looks tiny besides a D4shttp://camerasize.com/compare/#639,543
Whatever negativity I read about this SL, it seems to be the first mirrorless which doesn't look and feel like a toy.
it is really weird to see your link and the pics from the articel.
Richard Craze: Oskar Barnack must be turning in his grave right now. Look at the size of that thing! Douse a 35mm camera have to be that big! Who ever designed this camera must have been inspired by Lego. I thought Hasselblad had lost the plot a few years back but now it looks like its Leica's turn.
i agree with some opinions here that in a body like that there should at least be the Leica S chip, if not a true medium format chip. i don't care if it is a womans hand, that thing is huge and the lenses are even larger.
but i like it anyway. it's going to have superior image quality and that is all that matters.
ABM Barry: In answer to my previous post where I stated: "Pros won't buy it"
shoppingboy, contradicted:He replied: "Why would you want to calibrate the screen. Apple screens don't need calibration". poor ill informed little boyI forgot about the totally ignorant and brainwashed!This is where Apple spend their money, .. Hide the facts, .. keep-M-dumb. ....... I dumped all my Apple gear 5 months ago, ..
@the rest of commenters here: i perfectly know what calibration is, how to do it and when to do it. i just smelled that smelly smell of Apple bashing BS in the original post, so i had to answer.
@darngooddesign: exactly. for most people it's wasted effort. and as a photographer with private or small business clients it's wasted effort too, because on that end nobody knows what you're talking about and you can't waltz in there to calibrate their screens, though i often want to ;)
well, technically he is wrong of course but he is also right at the same time. Apple screens look kinda ok out-of-box. And for most people even photographers that is good enough. The only people really needing this whole calibration thing are the guys in prepress and printing.
JaimeA: Talking about photography: This image lacks class. The family is too orderly, predictable in a bourgeois setting, aligned in an unimaginative way, obviously following instructions [now face the camera! smile!]. The good queen looks diminished. Not a hint of excitement or artistry. Testino has made many memorable images. Not this one. Paging Horst, Beaton!
Well, again the Dpreview crowd does not disappoint. i suggest you all go back to your garden shooting flower macros or hdr churches.
ThatCamFan: I like the processing of the image, but the moment is bad. not a good photo of them.
lol! what are you talking about? it's an official family portrait and a very good one, the moment is perfect. it rarely gets any better in OFFICIAL FAMILY PORTRAITS
haiiyaa: I have two hobbies, one is photography and the other one is computer gaming. The average age here is probably around 50 while the average age in the games I play is 13-14. Despite the constant trash talking and death threats I receive when playing games, I still think the dpreview community is worse and more immature. is it because they spend thousand of dollars on their camera equipment, yet will never be able to get a shot like this?
lucrative career opportunities in photography? roflmao!! Those days are over and i hope that the word goes round among the young people who want to be a photographer. It's still a very fine basic education for everything else in the media business but sadly it's not a proper way to earn a living anymore, at least not for a large group of people like it used to be.
Jeff Seltzer: I understand the idea of a very expensive, niche product/brand that's supposed to appeal to a small audience that truly can appreciate the expertise and craftsmanship and is willing to pay for the opportunity. I guess you can say that's the goal for any luxury brand. But, you expect those products/brands to truly set the bar and lead the way in terms of innovation. Is that we have in this case?
"Ferrari is truly innovative"? Are you serious? They are just transforming the image and sometimes technology of their racing stuff onto their regular cars. What's innovative about that?
The OP is right: luxury products are luxury because they stay the same in a world of crazy (forced) changing.
I like Leica, they remind me of the good old days of photography and the monochrome camera was a bold move. I respect that. It even made sense in their world. The fact that the dpreview crowd can't follow, makes Leica even more likeable.
marc petzold: It would be great, if CANON would also add the 5D Mark I as supported.Oldie, but Goldie.
i agree! still a fantastic camera with a unique image impression.
Coyote_Cody: I wonder if Canon is stuck in the:
'video too sharp (GH4/etc) looks too non-film like', so we make our video low rez and low detail & colors weak to approximate the old mostly low rez video film of Yesteryear ?
You think ?
Canon needs better DSPs and better video algorithms - very obvious to most of us.
I respect Canon for many things, but living with head in sand or in the past is NOT one of them !!
They are too fine of a company to be this neglectful of video and many other features that are missing in their cams - all/most of their cams - they have the money - they should use it for development !!
Plz pleasantly surprise us/me Canon in 2015 !!
the whole japanese technology industry has fallen behind, especially in software and everything mobile. the decay of the japanese videogame industry is also kind of tragic.
John McMillin: I know what you mean about the strong reaction a camera such as this will draw from bystanders. About ten years ago, I pooled spare funds with a photographer friend to buy a used Pentax 645 film camera, just for grins. After I received it and shot a roll., I arranged to meet up with him at a convenient spot that happened to be my kid's elementary school, right at afternoon pickup time. The sight of two men handling such an apparatus in sight of children so alarmed one mom that she called the principal out to confront "the perverts." It was a good thing that I already had a friendly relationship with that principal, as a parent and volunteer. The mom still was convinced we were up to no good. "See-- it's a movie camera!" she accused. So I whipped out my big, long, uncut ... roll of developed E-6 and asked her, "Do you think we're an IMax crew?" Well, I wish I had said that! She's still sure I'm a perv, I bet.
people are idiots nowadays. that alone wouldn't be a problem but the massive change of laws everywhere will make every (street) photographer an official perv very soon.
MisterPootieCat: Sorry Bettina, you lost me at "a color profile that reminded me of puke". It sounds like you can't even figure out how to get the color profile right. There's no evidence to support your claim either.
@MisterPootieCat: that is not true. The colors of the 7D really looked like puke if you use the jpgs or the Canon Profiles in DPP or Lightroom. There would be a lot of work necessary to get the colors right. Natural broad daylight was ok but anything else, especially high-iso, looked like crap. Even the old 5D looked much better.
AksCT: This article does not claim to be a "comprehensive and technical review" of the camera. It contains a lot of subjective and personal views of the author. Clearly, as posted in these comments, others have broad and differing personal views.However, it is quite disappointing to see unrelated and inappropriate comments.
If the comments turn out to be the ones i'm reading here, yes, please don't comment!
Oh yeah? And how would one get the colors right? Excessive RAW processing? They shoot jpg and they certainly don't sit at home profiling the camera, this needs to look good out of the box. And as far as i remember my 7D it didn't. It really didn't.
ozturert: I still wonder what she was using when she tried original 7D. "Puke" color profile is the same as all other Canons.And why does she want "lenses true to their focal length"??? Then I guess she has never used 1D (non-S) series with APSH sensor (probably she got "puke" color profile from those, too ;) ).
No its not. The 7D really had the worst canon colors. I totally understood what she meant with that comment. High ISO also looked like sh*t.
pfzt: that is a lot of comments about a thing that no one here will ever lay hands on but everybody has an opinion about it just because of the price. It's really amazing, just write 35000$ or 128000$ on something and suddenly everybody has something to say :) Why is that?
haha, i guess you're right but i wish the comments would be better.
that is a lot of comments about a thing that no one here will ever lay hands on but everybody has an opinion about it just because of the price. It's really amazing, just write 35000$ or 128000$ on something and suddenly everybody has something to say :) Why is that?