tkbslc: Wow the review is published exactly one year - to the day - from their last article touting it as the camera for a new era.
Do you know what's even more eerie? The same person is at it again and has amassed almost 10% of all comments in this article, just as they did last year when the initial release story came out.
If they're not being paid then they're being very dedicated.
They need to put their old 85/1.4 and 200/4 macro back on the market.
CRI is meaningless. Show us the SPD curves.
I can't help but think they should have sized it up just a little to make use of 2 AA instead of 2 AAA. AA cells are only 6mm longer and 4mm wider in diameter but 2.5x bigger in capacity. Battery swaps are annoying.
ozturert: My Samsung Note3 takes 4K video, so this product is bad.If this was produced by Sony, we'd all cherish and cheer up, and brag about how innovative Sony is and how Canikon lags behind :)
If Sony had decided to produce a camera like this, they would have done so about 5 years ago as a modern followup to their F series.
PB47: If DPReview gets a chance to interview Canon I hope they ask them why they chose to go with such a slow lens that severely limits the ability for this camera to create anything with a shallow dof. And when the Canon reps respond that they felt reach was more important than speed I hope DPReview points to the RX10, which is a smaller and lighter camera with a similar lens that is a constant f2.8. Surely Canon could have made this lens a constant f2.8 at the least. Also, why is there no dual pixel autofocus, xlr inputs, etc. To buy this camera and a couple decent CFast cards you're looking at around $3,500. $3,500 for a lens that is equivalent to f7.6 to 15.2 in terms of depth of field. Think about what you can buy for $3,500. If you have to buy a Canon just get a C100 with the dual pixel upgrade for $3,500.
No need to ask that. I'll save you the trouble: "I wasn't actually aware that it had such a slow lens!"
The New Gold Standard.
This interview sounds a lot like the last 'head in the sand' Canon interview posted here previously. Each Canon interview is entirely predictable.
It's also sad to see some of the more rabid (paid shill?) posters making excuses for Canon. One single person is responsible for almost 10% of the posts in this whole comment thread and each one is full of rationalizations and excuses.
StevenE: I bought the original EOS-M, with 22mm f/2, the 11-22 mm IS lens, and adapter ONLY because I expected a better camera body to come. Now I'm just very angry at Canon for withholding the EOS-M3 from North America.
Why sell us lenses and then withhold the body.... that's a scam!
rrccad sounds like he could be Maeda-san himself...
steelhead3: I can't understand why DP would justify their high score for the 750 with explaining that the total recall of a their favorite camera is not justified.
It's the Gold Standard.
They invented tripod collars for a reason. The same principles extend to shooting handheld with heavy lenses... You shouldn't need to buy this thing at all.
Minos82: I will shed a tear with grad photographers when all of the following becomes true:- Grad images stop charging extortionate fees from already indebt students for their graduation image
- These images are indeed actual work of art and not an industrialized process devoid of any workmanshipand finally:
- Grads are given the opportunity to actually have friends or family step in the very place the photographer is during the graduation ceremony so as to take shots of "the moment". This "golden position", devoid of any obstruction, is unfortunately reserved/attributed in a monopolistic way to these people therefore preventing parents to take better pictures of their own offsprings' graduation
Untill then, no tears from me. Those businesses, clothed as education institutions, would sell your homeworsk to tabloids if they could.
I was under the impression works had to be creative to be copyrightable. The bar is obviously too low.
AbrasiveReducer: I hope a business student somewhere is following this. We'll never know but it would be interesting to compare the cost of admitting the problem up front vs. denying it and having to fix it anyhow.
Even more interesting would be the thought process that led them to believe their customers would accept the situation. To be fair, the intensity of Nikon fans may have misled them somewhat.
I wouldn't be surprised if the EU played a role in this too, because they are far less forgiving of warranty shenanigans.
Cultural arrogance and hubris would be my guess.
Wahrsager: That's great news- Makes me feel a lot better about the company I've invested a lot in!
You feel a lot better about a company that ignored and brushed off customer concerns for over a year, and only did the right thing less than a week after they had a class action lawsuit filed against them?
peevee1: All pictures look too flat. Maybe Sony tries to show off the dynamic range of the sensor which is higher than what you can from P&S and phones, but they've gone too far (just like Auto picture mode on Oly m43 cameras with Sony sensor - yeah, good DR, but just not contrasty enough - Normal looks great though).I am sure contrast is right there in the settings - I am not so sure many buyers will bother to find it, and will just choose Canon with high contrast by default.
Oh please! It's a $1300 super zoom camera when the small sensor super zooms are $300 at Walmart and Amazon.
The people who would even think of dropping $1300 on this thing aren't going to be morons too stupid to figure out how to change contrast settings and "just choose Canon" because of some default setting.
The Polaroid copied everything right down to the oily sensor issues. All it's missing is an inflated price tag. Somebody grab a rag!
stuntmonkey: If there was any justice, the Pentax K-3 should get the lions share of the traffic today, not the D610 announcement.
Anastigmat has been crying about full frame since 2004. Those days back then were spent trying to convince the people on the forum that sub $1,000 full frame was easily doable (then) if only the manufacturer's weren't conspiring to keep them out of the hands of the consumers.
GradyPhilpott: It seems to me that the only people who really have a complaint are those who bought a D600 and if those folks have only to send a faulty D600 in to a service center and get back what is basically a D610 without the badge, then I don't see that anyone has much to complain about.
There are no products that cannot have certain issues at the time of roll out, and beyond, and that is why there are warranties. That's why there are recalls.
I have to admit that since I got into photography I have been both appalled and amused at how ridiculous photo hobbyists can be with the "my camera brand is better than your camera brand" and what not.
I'm not going to defend the Nikon brand because I don't think that Nikon needs a defense.
There are names for those who refuse to live in the real world and have to whine about every little thing the corporate world does. Pick your favorite.
As for those who are completely bummed out, just move on to another camera brand. There's no shortage.
When did Nikon admit a problem with the D600 or issue a recall? They seem to spend as much time denying warranty repairs on the D600 shutter as much as they do on fixing them.
photohounds: Ah, amnother poster who "thinks" less glass/metal means the lens is "worth" less.They'll buy an f150 truck rather than a Ferrari because more metal for the money is "better".Making excellent small things is harder and costs MORE, not less.
Some people appreciate the price of everything and the value of nothing.
More compact cameras often translate into more/better photo opportunities.
Agree, Nuno, I don't hang around the CaNikon forums either. Too busy enjoying my camera.
These cross brand whiners are a very sad lot and it must be very depressing in CaNikon land for them to enjoy spending so much time here ....
Why do people care? Precision corrected optical glass costs a lot more than running a picture through a math equation. If they're going that route, they should price their junk lenses accordingly. Remember, software correction isn't "free". They degrade the image in some way, be it resolution, noise, or some other form.
That must be why the lens cap is so expensive and the hood isn't included.