So if Flickr is where all the phone-snappers hang out, where have the camera-using photographers migrated to? 500px?
Vergilius: You know, after reading some of the sour comments on this thread, I'm glad that I'm an amateur with little technical knowledge. That way I'm able to just enjoy these photographs just because I think that they are gorgeous. Thanks for sharing!
Sour grapes = sour comments
luxor2: These photos might look better with the unforeground cropped away.
That second shot wouldn't be anywhere near as interesting as it is currently with the "unforeground" sand cropped out. I think both compositions are excellent as they are. Great work, Erez.
I can already tell from the comments that a lot of people who read this didn't really understand what they were reading. It's a very sensible opinion piece, not an attack on everyone who chooses to shoot with a full-frame camera.
Kurt_K: Overpriced, I would say, given the lack of stabilization.
Yes, the Samsung 16-50 has IS. It's also faster on the short end at F/2.0.
Overpriced, I would say, given the lack of stabilization.
Wow. Just wow.
The Tamron 150-600 deserves to be on this list. The guys at The Camera Store put it in their top three for 2014, and here it's not even an option for the top 13? Seems like a curious omission.
I don't mind the rock on the left side, but the exposed sand is a little distracting. All in all, though, still a beautiful shot. Excellent processing, too. Thanks for sharing.
Beautiful images. I especially like #4.
A beautiful scene captured brilliantly. Very well done.
That 300mm is a monster. It's too bad Samsung cancelled the 70-400 that used to be on their roadmap.
Prairie Pal: 6 identical pictures of kids pointing weapons with the same unbelievable "green-screen" open mouth expressions, and fanged monsters added in post. I wouldn't say this is a new DPreview low, but really don't you have better things to with your time than repost crap like this? Don't you have camera reviews to catch up on? Looking at this is like Canadian Tire money; the second after you exit the store you throw it away.
Saying it's not to your taste is one thing; calling it crap and comparing it to looking at Canadian Tire money is just a little over the top. It's possible to be critical and have class at the same time.
Very creative and nicely executed, though not my cuppa tea.
Kurt_K: Some folks here may be scoffing at the alarmists, but I think wildlife photographers are going to need to have a very serious discussion about the ethics of using drones in their work. And I think that those who can't see the potential impact of drones on wildlife are either very naive or very short-sighted, or perhaps both.
So the onus should be on the intelligent to prove the obvious to the naive? Are you sure that's the kind of world you want to live in?
RichRMA: Did a liberal ever live who didn't want to ban, regulate, prohibit, control, oversee, observe, meddle with EVERYTHING IN SIGHT?
So drones are a liberal vs. conservative issue now? Really?
Some folks here may be scoffing at the alarmists, but I think wildlife photographers are going to need to have a very serious discussion about the ethics of using drones in their work. And I think that those who can't see the potential impact of drones on wildlife are either very naive or very short-sighted, or perhaps both.
Photography based on fun and creativity. Who'd have thunk it?
Thanks but no thanks, Tamron. I would love to see some third party interest in the micro four thirds camp (long zoom anyone?), but not if it's just going to be more slow lenses covering the same old ground.
I don't know why they would add 5-axis stabilization and still withhold the option of shooting RAW. Seems like a big missed opportunity.