Stitzer23

Can someone help me out please. I have noticed, from this test scene (even the one before) that the D7100 has yellow 'patches' or 'blotches' in its images starting at ISO3200. Seems quite bad. I...

Cool. What's even cooler is if they let you do it again.

Nowhere has a patch of green leaves and fluff been more scrutinised than this test scene.

As long as they actually do look like that when I come visit, I'm ok with them.

What about optical zoom?

Its just that it has been what a month since the last proper review? people are famished

Camera of the year? Back to back OMDs. Sweet.

"no different then people post-production Photoshop works I seen"

+1

great! no depth of field problems...

what's the word again? Backfire?

Too small and people complain its too small and doesn't handle well.

Is this what photography's come to? Making it 'prettier' than it actually is? No wait, I get it, its 'art' and that's how the photographer 'felt' at the time.

It is not "Digital". It is not a "Review". I guess it is "Photography".

Yes, exactly on the sensor size. DPR keeps leaving it out.

Yes, exactly on the sensor size. DPR keeps leaving it out. Imagine reading a car review, and engine capacity is not mentioned.

I am puzzled (again) as to why DPR keeps leaving out sensor size in the specifications highlights bullet list. This very detail tells so much about the type of camera being reviewed. Isnt sensor...

Why is sensor size missing in the key spec bullet list? Not key enough?

if i had the RX1, RX100, X100s at my disposal like the reviewer, I wouldn't ever need a DSLR, much less "for months"