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.
AllOtherNamesTaken: Aaaaand it's only $6,000 overpriced, lol.
Where do you think your nat geo shots are being taken? Even with a strapping system it won't save you from having to swap out lenses safely.
Your cheaper, shorter and slower lenses might work but if you're out in the field looking for getting a great shot you might as well carry the best gear possible. Your ISO and smaller aperture have limits as well. And if you're shooting in a snowstorm you have a really funny idea of IQ, in more ways than one.
Chaitanya S: Why did it take so long for Canon to introduce this lens? and that pricing is crazy it too overpriced even for the people who can afford to spend 12000$ on a lens. At that price many pro photographer will prefer to get 600mm f/4L instead of this 200-400mm zoom lens both lenses even have similar weight.
If you're primarily shooting at 600mm you should stick with the prime. If you want to zoom you should get a zoom. The 600 f4 IS II is similar in price to the 200-400L.
Until you drop your $7,000 lens in the ocean or concrete because you wanted to change out your lens in the field...changing a lens with gloves on isn't my idea of fun.
I'm probably going to move to this lens and sell my 400 2.8 IS II. The extra stop advantage doesn't compare to getting a zoom and integrated TC in the field for me.
If you think this lens is too expensive you can always buy a Sigma 120-300 2.8 OS and put a TC on it for a 'poor man's' 200-400 f4. Works quite well too.
Industry people will have to migrate to this eventually as more features get put into the files so designers and photographers will be able to work on files they get from CC.
The biggest problem with this subscription implementation is that CC will not even allow you to open or print any file once the subscription has lapsed. If Adobe were to allow a way to open/view/export (limited) regardless of subscription status it would go a long way towards alleviating concerns.
After that is the price, but Adobe products have never been cheap, and it was hard to 'skip' a version if you were always working with other studios and designers giving you more recent Adobe files.
Davidfstop: There's a definite favouritism towards the big two.There are lots of other camera's that we have been hungrily waiting for reviews on (Pentax Olympus etc). Nikon walks in and the others get a back heel!When the 7200 comes out next month, will that get a full review too? ;-0The Nikon on paper seem nearly as good as the K5 though.
I'm not certain on how the reviews are done, but I do think the system is set up to favour the bigger and more exciting entrants.
I'd love to see a behind the scenes look at how reviews are done, but I'm guessing part of the problem is that DPR only uses loaner cameras from the manufacturer, so if there is negative issues (like the 1D3's AF issues), Canon can play rope-a-dope with DPR to delay their review, or give them a very early review camera to test.
Smaller players may not have the ability to pass out as many loaner units/pre production units and then the lag time becomes pretty huge in comparison. I don't see why DPR doesn't use some huge distributor (like AMAZON?) to get a production unit off the line (no cherry picked units/ringers), and then sell it on DPR's own buy/sell board when they are done.
The second part is self selecting. Given Nikon and Canon's huge market share, reviewers will likely be more familiar with their cameras and be able to bang off a review faster.
How do you guys like people to submit corrections? Private message or as a comment?
Last page, Handling section, third paragraph, third sentence. Saldy -> Sadly.
plasnu: You guys just don't know that Pentagon is one of the largest client of Canon.
howardroark: Nikon: take beautiful pictures of the natural world before you rape it.
It depends on how much we like eating soylent green.
tonywong: Please read your copy more carefully as well:"The Independent cites research by Scientific American magazine research that suggest the practice has halved the population of lions in Africa over 30 years."
The Independent does NOT claim this.This is from the Independent article:"According to Scientific American magazine, trophy hunters have played a part in the halving of lion population in Africa over the past 30 years."
Please correct your article. It is misleading and just gets people worked up over the wrong reasons. If the Independent would care to cite which SA article it is, one can find out exactly how much a part that trophy hunting has contributed to the halving of lion populations over the last 30 years. It could be 10%, it could be 90% of the contribution, but the Independent makes it sound like a significant part, but your interpretation makes it 100%.
"Using satellite imaging technology, researchers said they found strong evidence of correlation between the population decline and a dramatic 75 percent loss of habitable savannah land during approximately the same time period."
I don't think Nikon scopes are responsible for the loss of habitat.