PerL: 1. No question - DSLRs are still the way to go for best results.2. If you dont want to make any effort, I guess it is time for another hobby.3. There have always been simpler, more portable, easier cameras to use, but always as a complement to the real stuff, and everybody knew it.4. When convinience is king - the end of photography as an art is near.
So HCB should have used a 6X7 camera instead of a 35mm Leica then?
There's generally nothing more amusing on the average afternoon than reading the Dpreview pundits' opinions on art.
Modern classical music and jazz are considerably less "popular" than pop music and they are much harder to understand, but does that make them rubbish? Is popularity the only arbiter?
My purchase decisions are based on lots of factors. Professional review sites are somewhat tied to their testing methods, but are certainly consistent, detailed and with lots of samples. If DPR and Imaging-resource.com agree then I usually think I'm on firm ground though.
Some specialist sites (like Photozone.de and Lenstip.com) are refreshingly honest and informative, and LensRentals is a useful source of QC info. DXOmark is exact and sterile and you have to understand what it's telling you, which may not actually matter in real life.
User comments and forums I take with a pinch of salt. You can generally tell someone who has some experience from someone who does not, so they can be useful for the odd subjective opinion, but reading through enough of them allows you to get a feel for persistent QC issues.
Then of course, I have to try one out in a local store....
Anyone who reads this and doesn't squirm a bit isn't being honest with themselves. I suffered from GAS, though I'm largely cured.
Firstly, I no longer purchase on the basis of "if I had one of those..." though I did, as my Elinchrom kit will testify. I just realised it was too much effort to keep discovering I was only average at things.
Secondly, I have had a 10 year battle with QC. I have grown weary of faults, some major some minor, which can't be successfully or permanently fixed under warranty.
When the pleasure of acquisition is replaced by anxiety, when you find yourself testing each camera or lens for 3 weeks instead of using it, you are half way there. If your gear spends more time with Nikon or Canon than in your bag, you are almost cured.
Buy stuff you know you will use and make sure it works, then keep it till you wear it out. Any merely "good" lens or camera that works is better that one that's "excellent" but doesn't, and way better than one you never use.
57even: If you had a choice between better live view AF and better DR and noise performance, which would you choose?
I guess the responses prove what I suspected. Stills and video shooters want different cameras.
If you had a choice between better live view AF and better DR and noise performance, which would you choose?
What it is is the ultimate social media camera, allowing you to develop and upload photos and video on the move, add comments, and download apps that support the camera (endless possibilities there for third party add ons like time-lapse, large pano stitches, geotagging etc.)
In fact I can see a lot of bloggers, estate agents, travel writers, photojournalists and so on liking this a lot. Of course, I can do the same thing by using a Canon or Nikon with a decent tablet, but it's far less seamless and a lot more to carry.
We now have two extremes from the Leica-like Fuji (all mechanical controls and no concessions to new fangled social media nonsense) to this Samsung. My preference as a traditional stills shooter (shooting for prints) with very little interest in social media is for the Fuji, but it IS nice to have choices.
It's not like everyone has to like it as long as it works for some. Certainly Samsung have the space to themselves and I can see why some would love it.
Well, it IS hideous....
But people pay huge sums for expensive Swiss watches with standard Seiko quartz movements which are also available in $300 watches.
But this was designed by an interior designer who specialises in rich men's yachts.
spidermoon: Don't think, obey and consume. No need of top photographers and writer nowday, just use emotions, take picture and videos in the very heart of action, put few comments and send them quickly to your reader, before the corpse became cold. Wash, rinse, repeat, with some ad's in the middle. That's the new news today, for brainless zombie customers.
People really need to get their head around the impact of enabling technologies. Newspaper businesses were necessary because of the investment required to run large presses and distribute millions of paper copies.
They are now almost irrelevant. As news switches to online media there will be much greater input from freelancers (both images and content) and even personal blogs.
It is high time news was democratised, even if it causes issues of its own. Efforts by the media moguls to own online content are doomed, and I think that's a good thing.
Lets look at facts. If the paper had gone out of business, the PJs would be out of work anyway.
A lot of breaking news content is gathered from the public. Whatever the quality, the impact of a pixellated iPhone photo or video taken at the time of the event is always going to have more impact that one taken later. Reporters that turn up later only need to photograph a couple of witnesses and the scene.
The demand for quality editorial photography and coverage of known events and situations can indeed be covered by reporters themselves, freelancers or news agencies. There will still be "great images" but smaller papers will simply buy their photos from Reuters or some other agency. Very few have the wherewithal to lead.
Photojournalism is not dead. Like many other specialisations it is moving towards freelance rather than salaried employment. The upside is that the freelancer can retain the rights to the image and sell it to whoever they like.
samhain: Very nice review DPR, good job!
Athough i have to say- I'm a little surprised the build quality & egronomics/handling score wasn't higher. Imo- it's the best dslr body I've ever handled in terms of ergonomics + it's built like a little tank.
I use Nikon but I had one of the early K7s and before that a K20 and K10. I still miss the green button - possibly the single most useful feature not found on any other camera - which makes P and M mode a lot more versatile.
Xiaomao: K-5 scored 83% in 2010, K-5 II (s) scored 81% in 2013. Does it mean a step backward? Anyway, I prefer what K-5 IIs delivers.
Weeell OK, I have an A3+ printer too, have had for a while, and sure results from 16MP are fine. Fine up to A2 if you insist. But it's easy enough to order prints online these days, which I do if I want A2 and A1 prints.
But if you are printing A2 on a regular basis, 24MP definitely has a slight edge, assuming you are using an adequate lens.
Of course if you are not, it's all wasted storage and processing IMO.
I have to say this is Oly's best looking camera for a while. It has a far more functional/purposeful look than any previous model, especially the EM5.
Having said that, there seems to be precious little separation between models.
PhoCam: Sorry Photoshop..... Capture One now has my attention for this type of work! You wouldn't listen, so we moved on. We outgrew you!
Good luck trying to do this in Capture 1.
Don't get all the complaints, though it's par for the course on DPR. The same techniques can be applied in any program but if you are going to do a demo, which one to pick? PS and Elements still account for most users around here.
If you want layers in LR the Perfect Layers plugin is free (onone software) though of you want all the masking options and gradients, you can get the whole suite. Also a plug-in. Works with PSD files too.
But although PSP etc. all do it slightly differently, the technique is exactly the same.
BJL: How about calling this technology "X3", which is the jargon adopted as an industry-standard by CIPA? "Foveon" is just one approach to X3, and not the one that Canon is pursuing, and the "X3" tag is also well-known.
It would be sweetly ironic, would it not, if the ultimate art in digital sensor design actually used ideas from film emulsion technology :-)
Marty4650: Fuji must be following the Microsoft business plan.
They seem to be very fond of marketing products full of bugs, then releasing lots of firmware upgrades ("Service Pack 2?).
Does "Version 1.05" mean that this is the fifth firmware upgrade for this relatively new camera? If so, it makes you wonder why they didn't do a better job testing the camera before release.
Fuji might want to consider making firmware updates into a subscription service. Each time you connect your camera to your computer it checks with headquarters and automatically installs this week's upgrade. The concept seems to be working well for Adobe. :)
It does not have any bugs. The new lens requires new firmware to optimise it's performance, but it still works fine without it.
Funny how people can put a negative spin on a positive drive to improve. Nikon released a FW update for the D700 recently. Now why could they not have fixed that 3 years ago?
She can say what she likes, as long as she says it to me over a glass of wine....
Larger companies do like monthly fees. Easier accounting, no investment cost, easy upgrades. But is this the whole story? Not for software.
SAAS licensing has been touted by software companies for over a decade, but in the end the infrastructure implications (firewalls, control over software distribution and workstation build control) make it impossible for larger enterprises. It is simply unacceptable to have external parties controlling the version level of PC builds, especially via the internet, or losing control over company data security. It's a CIO nightmare.
For individuals and non-business users, SAAS makes very little sense. They like to have permanent ownership, control over upgrades, and portability.
So who does it work for? A handful of small independent design shops running Macs and nothing but CC, and no-one else.
Even MS have massively overstated takeup of 365 in large enterprises:
Klindar: Adobe's decision may very well provide competitors with the business they need to develop their products into complete/superior alternatives. For many years I used JASC (now Corel) Paintshop and switched to CS a few years ago only because I needed support for 48 bit images. Corel then announced support for 48/16 bit and I was happy being able to go back to Paintshop a couple of years ago. For me, it is the technically superior product with a similar (but better) interface to Photoshop, accepts the same plugins and is 10% the cost. The scripting is more flexible and easier to do than Photoshop "Actions". A single license lets you install to 3 machines ... my main unit, backup and portable. I'd have to buy 2 licenses from Adobe to use Photoshop that way. I realize you can transfer a Photoshop license but it's a nuisance. Unfortunately, no Paintshop Apple version but the way Corel has ramped up support and been promoting Paintshop suggests that may come.
I also started out on the Jasc product and it was very user friendly. Only issue I have with it is that the RAW engine is nothing like as good for some cameras as ACR or LR, and it takes longer to get new cameras on board. It's also not as responsive as the newer versions of PS which matters if you have a D800!
This may of course change if their sales take off and they can get more staff. In the meantime you can use it as an editor with LR.
But I agree it's an excellent product and with all the free plug ins its a great deal.