Graystar: When I heard about the wireless spec, I kinda figured Eye-Fi wouldn't go down without a fight. They should get paid for what they invented.
Then again, they didn't invent the SD card, and they didn't invent Wi-Fi. You can hardly call connecting two existing technologies together "inventing" something new.
Probably similar to the way Wi-Fi printers are connected (which have SD card slots and have been around since before Eye-Fi existed as a company.)
When I heard about the wireless spec, I kinda figured Eye-Fi wouldn't go down without a fight. They should get paid for what they invented.
They're pointless. Can't tell anything. The artifacts caused by JPEG compression are too great to make any determination from the smooth gradients of the skies and other areas. And in typical Canon fashion, they're oversharpened for better printed results. Everything is covered in halos.
Can't you hand-process a few images from RAW for us?
Graystar: 800 bucks...I just don't understand the pricing of this breed of camera when they can set an ERP on a Rebel T3 of $550...and that's got a bigger sensor and mechanical swinging mirror and pentamirror assemblies in it.
The sensor has a 4:3 ratio and is smaller, meaning it has less shallow DOF than the T3 can achieve. How in the world does that sensor have more in common with a Rebel sensor than another Rebel??
And because it's smaller, the lens is smaller, and so can pull small-lens tricks like greater zoom ranges. It's a metal body, but so is the G12 and it's only 500 dollars.
Stop making excuses for Canon.
800 bucks...I just don't understand the pricing of this breed of camera when they can set an ERP on a Rebel T3 of $550...and that's got a bigger sensor and mechanical swinging mirror and pentamirror assemblies in it.
smallcams: And so many buttons.
But yet it's guaranteed a Silver Award because the ISO button is not by the shutter.
techmine: In the first approach you mentioned that you would manually focus. It's hard for me to understand how and why focus is manual? Especially when you are not composing through viewfinder. Won't you run the risk of getting slightly out of focus pics? I would just point the camera at the subject and let auto focus do the job. Am I missing something?
In that kind of dim light I use my Nikon's AF Assist light function, which I keep on MyMenu to turn it on/off when necessary. The AF Assist light from my flash unit is even better.
WT21: I'm in a hotel with a slowish bandwidth connection. Can't say I appreciate the missing page nav drop-down. I have to go page-by-page to get to the conclusion. Yuck.
Click on "Print view" at the bottom of the content, just before the comments. You get it all on one nice looking page.
Lots of great images. Many two-page images, so it's best to view in a two-page mode ("facing" in Foxit Reader.) In full-screen facing mode, two pages fill my 30" monitor perfectly, and the pages are larger than the printed book!
An interesting read. Recommended.
Guidenet: Great article for people new to callibration. I think a lot of photographers ignore it all together.
However, I think white balance disks are a waste of time for many. It says that it might save time for RAW shooters, but I'm not sure how. No White Balance information has been done to the RAW file and most don't accept the default editor settings which might be the camera settings, so why bother? Moreover, Jpeg shooters might want warmer or cooler temps than absolute perfect WB settings. There's a white duck there. Move the slider until the duck is white. I don't know what can be easier unless I'm missing something.
Great job though on a good selection representing what's out there.
You're missing something. You're missing the fact that humans can't calibrate colors by eye because the brain's interpretation of color changes based on lighting, surrounding colors, and the brain's own interpretation of what it thinks it's looking at. There are plenty of optical illusions on the web proving it. If people could correct the colors of an image by eye, then they wouldn't need any calibration tools, as they would be able to calibrate monitors and printers by eye...but they can’t.
If there's something neutral in the image then WB can be set from it, usually with an eyedropper tool...no sliders needed. Otherwise, it's practically impossible to set white balance correctly. As for wanting a warmer or cooler look...that's pretty much a myth. The best look is always achieved with correct white balance. The only time this isn't so is when the light itself is the star of the show, as with sunsets or colored spotlights.
Custom white balance is the way to go.
Graystar: I was expecting much better results. The noise is terrible...even visible when full image is viewed. Disappointing...
And some people don't know how to read. I said the noise is visible when viewing the FULL IMAGE. I'm also referring to the low ISO shots. Open up IMGP0198-ACR and look at the shadow side of the nose. There's no detail there at all. At 100% you see it's nothing but noise. And that's at ISO 200.
I was expecting much better results. The noise is terrible...even visible when full image is viewed. Disappointing...
I’m not surprised. What people want is a compact camera with an interchangeable lens that fits in a pocket...not an almost-compact that still needs its own bag.
It says "there have been 8 new massages posted. Reload" but after reloading I don't see any massage videos...where are the videos??
In any case, I don't think it would be any great loss if Olympus stop producing cameras. Certainly not like when Coolbrands stopped producing Godiva Milk Chocolate ice cream...now THAT was a serious loss for humanity!
DPReviews image viewing system is soooooo tedious! Can't you make something that doesn't require so many clicks?
In any case...alright, so the V1 images look like they came from a P&S. No surprise there.
The only way I'd buy a V1 is if it comes in it own burl veneer casing!
That thing is so ugly it could have been created by the Nikon V1 team!
This makes no sense. I'd buy a Leica before I'd buy that dog of an SD-1. You should review the M9 before reviewing a camera no one is going to buy.
It's striking how ugly this system is...almost like someone said "let's see how ugly we can make it!"