DSapper: What about Oil & Dust?
You have to add that yourself. No longer included with Nikon bodies (one would hope).
sillen: Purchasing a new DSLR with this hefty pricetag, you would expect specs that are competitive for a few years. At this price level you would expect premium photo resolution and high video quality such as 4K. How come the 4S only provides medioker photo resolution, and yesterdays video specs?? Imagine how behind the 4S will be in a few years, when it is so behind already at the launch date
How many megapixels do you require from a body like this?
Throughput (frames per second) and fast and accurate autofocus, and low light shooting are arguably more important than megapixels for wildlife and sports photographers.
4k video would be nice though.
tvstaff: It would be nice if Canon did the same and replaced EVERY mirror box in the 1DX. A $7,000 body should not have oil and debris issues. PERIOD. How can Nikon do this for a consumer camera and Canon is leaving it's pros hanging???? If Nixon ' s new D4 is a winner, canon will lose a lot of pros!!!
No problem with my 1dx (5th production unit) either.
ondrejbobek: Not bad, but 1D-X has faster fps, more sRAW options and stiil better(?) AF fort sports (much, much faster USM lenses)... hopefully better colors are true (from D600/D4/D800 its really hard to work with this "in tests great sensors").
The D4 and D4s sensor has better DR at base ISO and any differences are academic by ISO400, when compared to the 1Dx.
The 1Dx is on par with the D4 and edges it in the features that matter to sports and wildlife photogs. The D4s should put Nikon at parity with the 1Dx. The D3 and D3s soundly trounced their Canon rivals previously.
Aaron801: I know this is a really ignorant question, but I know nothing about this class of cameras... I'm wondering why a camera so bulky and so expensive is only 16mp?
As a sports and wildlife camera, the frames per second requirement needs a sensor that can shovel out data rapidly. Higher megapixels means higher processing subsystems that aren't core to the mission of this type of body.
The weight and bulk of the body is for durability and toughness to operate in inclement conditions, support larger capacity batteries and to balance the camera system when a long telephoto lens is attached.
katy C.: I thought he made a grip for the Canon EOS M too.
Why no mention of that I wonder?
I'm sure they'll finish their EOS M review right after the 1DIII review and 1Dx review gets posted.
I don't rely on dpr for exhaustive timely reviews any longer, and I know others who feel the same way, sadly.
topstuff: Interesting in that it tells us that IQ is not the top priority for people.
It also reveals the truth that people generally look at photography through an iPad or tablet and don't print large anymore.
It also reveals that a large percentage of shooters only really take pictures in undemanding situations, with good light and conditions.
Why else would a MFT camera win? ;)
It is not the question of absolute best image quality, but that the image quality of the gear in question is 'good enough'.
Image quality now is a matter of diminishing returns because other factors come into play, like convenience and ease of use, or lens availability.
For most people in most situations, your average $1000 interchangeable lens camera of any sort or brand will be good enough.
Otherwise we'd all be carrying around medium format backs. It is rapidly becoming even more of a fringe case to require something 'more' than the intermediate setups, whether it is 36 megapixels or 14 stops of DR or 14fps or 63 AF points.
D1N0: Olympus will win. more fanboys. But no mickey mouse sensor camera deserves the title imho.
That's right. Only the Pentax 645D should win this then.
Mrrowe8: Sorry Pentex sucks rt now compared with bang for the buck that nikon or canon give and actually Sony is much better choice then Pentex , now I know Pentex fan boys are to defend why their camera is great , but it's not .. I would buy a Sony before giving a Pentex a second look .. Just not big enough selection .. Maybe down the road but by then sony with be the 3rd name in DSLR
Pentax has a much bigger ecosystem than Sony, and there is always the risk of Sony creating yet another lens mounting system. Sony seems to be throwing a lot of things at the wall to see if it sticks. Glamorous looking kit but hard to build a system out of. Pentax is pretty neat, and inexpensive to get into but the lack of full frame has been a thorn in their side. An update to the 645D would be awesome though.
Karl Summers: At first I was concerned about the security breach, but I think that can happen to any company. I was also concerned about "renting" software vs owning it outright, but that's just the wave of the future. You can either ride that wave or sit on the beach as a spectator. Whatever, it's your choice.
I truly believe after the security hiccup that Adobe is getting its act together. I wouldn't expect it to happen again, and if it does? I'll just get a new card issued by my CC company. No huge deal.
Bottom line is, Adobe Photoshop is the best thing going right now, and $10 a month for the first year is an ABSOLUTE DEAL.
You shouldn't take security too lightly.
First, the Adobe passwords were locked down with a single encryption method. Once that is broken, every single one of the passwords lost will be available to the bad guys.
Second, many people reuse passwords from one site to the next. That is bad practice in itself, but Adobe's loss compounds it. If you have used your Adobe password on some other site, it might lead to (eventually) allowing the bad guys to get a hold or more information about you and lead to identity theft.
Third, cancelling a credit card may also cause other pre-authorized payments to be declined, and again cause other grief in fraudulent transactions requiring reversal etc.
The Adobe security breach shouldn't be mixed up with this reduced price offer.
HowaboutRAW: Does this new CF card design use pins within the camera? SanDisk, and camera makers, need to be really clear on this point.
Pins are trouble. And of course neither the XQD cards nor SD cards use pins.
Ahem, it's in the Press Release:The SanDisk Extreme Pro CFast 2.0 cards are created to withstand real-world exposure to temperature, shock and vibration, and include a pinless design, which lessens the chance of damaging the card or camera while changing cards.
Surprised no one has complained that these reviews took almost 20 years to finish.
Does this mean I can finally buy the QV-10 now? Why didn't it get a Gold Award?
(Just kidding guys, neat article!)
Is it me or does the photo of the camera on the sand look very 'flat'?
DigiMatt: Let me get this straight DPReview. You will not review the EOS-1D X professional camera that cost $6,800 but you will review the $11,800 200-400L professional zoom lens. DPReview staff, which camera is most likely to be used with this lens?
I have heard your lame excuses that Canon will not give you a 1D X to review. We are supposed to believe that despite being owned by Internet giant Amazon, DPReview cannot afford to rent a 1D X for a week to give a quick review and post raw samples? Your reason is nonsensical. Get off your butts, spend the $317 to rent one for a week and stop being lame.
I'm starting to think that most pros don't bother waiting for a dpr review anymore. They've really been erratic in their SLR reviews. Sometimes they are bang on but oftentimes they are late if there is any review at all.
I'm sorry to say but if you are relying on DPR's reviews before you purchase a SLR, especially a smaller volume one, you will likely be waiting a long time.
Part of the problem has been the erosion of traditional photography...point and shoot models are suffering across the board in favour of phone cams, and SLRs are pretty much reaching saturation.
Even this 200-400 f/4 IS review isn't much of a review from DPR's traditional standard. I'm sorry to say this but the DPR seems to have lost it's focus.
JWest: Still no face tagging = still no upgrade from me.
Face tagging works well for me. I use it to find photos of a person, usually for presentations like Weddings, Birthdays, Anniversaries and funerals (sadly).
These are renderings and not photos. Still lovely nonetheless but it has little to do with photography.
jm67: I'm still using 24-70 ver.1 and have been awaiting comparisons of ver.1,2 and this lens. I'm getting to the point I would like VC even in this range at the end of a long day and had high hopes for the Tamron. The niggling thing for me is the AF speed. Everyone agrees it's slower than Canon but how slow is slow? I guess I'm just going to have to get a loaner or rent to find out for myself just how slow "slow" is. My only other question is...how come everyone seems to be reviewing this lens with the 5D2? Shouldn't it be stuck on to the 5D3 and/ or 6D?
The Camera Store guys did a review of it on youtube a little while ago.
Canon 24-70 F2.8 II vs. Tamron 24-70 VC Shootouthttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcsnsJUKhAg
BeanyPic: Just realised I replied to a spammer on here. "tell the truth" seems to live on another parallel universe. Watch out DP Review
Thorbard is right. tell the truth speaks no truth and just trolls to get his jollies. If he was funny there'd be merit in looking at his/her posts, but as it stands, typing in varied caps and all caps does not pass as humour.
I feel sorry for the Panasonic. With comments like this guy's, sales of the FZ200 will probably go down instead of up.
thomas2279f: You could pick up a Nikon version I/II new or second hand plus a good body like D300s/D800,etc plus some other Nikon lens gems and still have change...
The image quality of the 200-400 VR/II is very good but not great. The original optical formula was developed a long time ago, when primes were much better than zooms in optical quality.
The new Canon is based off their latest generation of lens R&D and technology, which has been very, very good. The new zooms (24-70 2.8II, 70-200 2.8 IS II,, 8-15 fisheye) rival primes in resolution and price.
nathantw: But it's $5k over the competing Nikon model. Is having to pay $5k more worth not having to put on a 1.4x teleconverter manually?
The 200-400 f4 VR II seems to have some image quality issues at times (longer distances). The Canon looks to be a better performer than the Nikon.