tom sugnet

Bokeh seems nicer on the Canon:
http://lcap.tistory.com/entry/APO-Sonnar-135mm-f2-Review

Bokeh seems nicer on the Canon.

expensive

That's a 28-55 f/2.8 lens in FFeq terms (except for shutter speed/exposure)
For a cropper, this pricey lens would be acceptable if it had stabilization, which it doesn't.

Sizzling

They look okay, but a bit soft, maybe due to soft kitlens.:-P

Something's wrong with the blue channel. Maybe you have some picture style on.

To many people these will be perfect sleeping glasses.
Aliens and other intruders don't like cameras ;)

If you're into one shot HDR (pseudoHDR from one RAW file, very useful with moving subjects), you should opt for a new(er) Nikon cameras. Just put the NEF/RAW file into a program like Photomatix,...

I have a 400d and a 50d, and thank God new Canon consumer cameras haven't gotten any better, I don't have to waste my money:

boring

I have an S3, so I will be waiting for an S5.
Would love to see a 6 inch screen.

boring

I have Sigma 10 f/2.8 HSMand it's great.

If Nikkor 35 f/1.4 AF-S is too expensive:Nikkor 28 f/1.8 AF-S is cheaper and has much better bokeh than Sigma ;)

Nikkor 28 f/1.8 AF-S has better bokeh, and is cheaper.

Very appealing

I love my S3

I have this camera and the pictures look soft even after you've taken them (when previewed on screen). I guess the effective resolution is around 4 megapixels (due to strong NR), it's much much...

I have this phone and pictures look soft even after you've taken them (when previewed on screen). I guess the effective resolution is around 4 megapixels (due to strong NR), it's much much softer...