bzanchet: Wel, that is it. I love the DPreview web site, but I started having doubts after the images from my Sony RX100 were so much better than the samples posted here. I recently bought the Canon G1XmkII even though I didnt like the images posted here, and again, my jpegs were wonderfully better than the ones taken by the reviewer. I was following the shooting experience with the a6000 from the image-resource web site and was considering the camera. Today, I saw the images here and again, they were diferent from the other web site samples. I dont know if it is the photographer, but here the pictures seems always out of focus, always mushy and grainy, except from the high end Canon and Nikon full frame cameras.Also the other web site you can compare side by side pictures, multiple studio shots with a lot of diferente settings and cenarios, as with the DPreview you have only one studio scene.Sorry guys, I am searching on others places from now for my upcoming cameras.
They are not photographers, they are reviewers. I assume we have to consider the samples as quick snapshots of everyday scenes taken on the run to comply a certain schedule. The reviewing price would become prohibited If they should hire a professional photographer to take interesting and exciting pictures. Taken that in mind we should just imagine the potential of the camera when we watch the samples
In Conclusion, you should include a field called "flash performance", of the in camera popup flash, specially in small format cameras that are often used in snapshot environments like in personal photos in dark interiors often taken at random and in rush. Flash photos taken with the in camera flash is often the reason why many customers buy these type of cameras. Why should anyone want to take a dark selfie?
Does anyone knows if combination Canon 6D with Samyang lenses are supported?
Not a single photo in the review sample gallery is taken with the standard lens!!!!!!! What is going on?
Congrat! But if they want to keep their very well deserved reputation, they will have to change their program concept in their NatGeo TV channel, for now overloaded with qvasi scientific, paranormal, mithological, new age, false historical, sensationalistic content and be more like the magazine they started 125 years ago. In this TV channel that is signed by NatGeo, the film and commentaries are as terrible as the photos and text in the magazine are great. So one wonders what is happening?
CJ Lan: I am neither Canonian, Nikonian, Pentexian, or micro 4/3 users. I use/like a camera as long as it is good in features and practical. Honestly speaking, I do not quite understand the philosophy behind the Pentax design engineers. Not getting into full frame market before jumping into very expensive medium format 645, interchangeable lens system with tiny p&s sensor (Q), now a bulky mirrorless camera. and who knows the next in the future. Correct me if I am wrong. I thought the main purpose getting rid of mirror is to achieve portability of a interchangeable lens camera system. What does K-01 try to accomplish in this regard? If just for using the existing line of lenses, I would rather stick with K-5 or any other Pentax APSC for their professional looks, not this as bulky and toy-looking "SLR".
Interesting to read when you say that you are neither Canonian, Nikonian, Pentexian, etc. but anyway it seems to me you’re not satisfied with any camera that doesn’t have the DSLR Canon or Nikon look. If you know something about industrial design, you should know that you have to offer something to get something. Therefore it’s important to note:
1 The K-01 is a mirrorles camera2 The K-01 weights approximately 200 gr. less than the already small K-53 The body thickness with kit lens DA 40mm XS is around 64 mm. 37mm less than NEX cameras with kit zoom lens.4 Instead of buying a whole new array of new lenses you can stick with your excellent K mount lenses. Now perhaps you will understand the philosophy of Pentax better.
Picturenaut: @ DP review: thank you very much again for a great & thorough review. Now I can't await your detailed EOS 5D3 review. Looking at the samples here I'd expect it coming soon.
One thing is clear: Nikon made a huge leap in FF technology, what impresses me most is that the D800 obviously beats noise performance of a mid format Pentax 645D without substantial loss of detail! This will drive the competition forward, and I think we customers will finally all profit from that massive impact, regardless of which 35 mm FF system we are using, Nikon or Canon or Sony.
I don't know about the Pentax 645D there hasn't been a review yet, but if we must compair Pentax with Nikon how can you explain that the Nikon D800 got only 82% while the Pentax K5 got 83% in overall score and costs around one third of the Nikon? I wonder who's beating who.
Jim Radcliffe: I used Canon gear for 10 years, starting with the D30 and ending with the 5D MKII a year or so ago. I have to say that I really see nothing outstanding in any way with these photos. They look like they could have been taken with almost any camera. There is no signature, nothing special to my eye.
Agreed! There has come a time in camera technology where good photographs taken with best DSLR of each brand on the market do not make a difference. So why bother to buy the most expensive? After all is all up to the photographer to take a good picture, not up to the camera.
JamesCC: Many of you guys here sound like a bunch of sore losers!
Complain and complain. Is that all you know how to do?
What were you expecting? A Canon 5D Mark III with highest ISO1,638,4000? Weighing at 500g? Costing US$500?
The 5D III is one fine camera to me. And I'm a photographer. If a camera is good, I say it is. Whether it's by Canon or Nikon or whatever.
If it's not suitable, look for another model or even brand! Stop whining about this and that! There are tons of different cams out there.
why only 6fps? Why not 8 like the 7D? Come on, stupid. What else do you want? Why not include 1X features with the price of a 7D and weight of a 1100D?
Look at how much the III has improved over the II and judge. Don't go shooting rubbish from your mouth on what you want, rather than appreciate the many new features that have been given to you.
As I see it, most people here have the right to reveal their views without being losers. That is what dpreview forum is all about. And I think most camera manufacturers are quite happy about it because they’ve got a lot of input about their products. On the other side we don’t really know anything about what results the Mark III can deliver. I just hope they are MUCH better than what the Mark II delivers now. If this is not the case, the Mark III will be just a lot of electronic gadgetry without any real photographic value. But I suppose you will go and buy one anyway.
00112233: The specifications of the Mark III do not justify the almost doubling of price from the Mark II, mostly because they are very alike. So I am looking forward to see if the photo samples of the Mark III are double as good as the samples of the Mark II. And I must say I doubt it because the examples from the M II are exceptional. But it will be interesting to see those samples as mentioned. If the specifications of the M III had been quite different you know like say 32 MB resolution, etc. then this note wouldn't have been necesary. Thats why there will have to be a real difference in the resulting material thet this machine can deliver to justify the high price both compared to its predecesor the M II and the Nikon D800.
Jaimito: I was refering about todays prices, not 3 years ago. Here in Norway, Mark II costs $2586.- While Mark III goes for $4828.-, thats a difference of $2242.-
The specifications of the Mark III do not justify the almost doubling of price from the Mark II, mostly because they are very alike. So I am looking forward to see if the photo samples of the Mark III are double as good as the samples of the Mark II. And I must say I doubt it because the examples from the M II are exceptional. But it will be interesting to see those samples as mentioned. If the specifications of the M III had been quite different you know like say 32 MB resolution, etc. then this note wouldn't have been necesary. Thats why there will have to be a real difference in the resulting material thet this machine can deliver to justify the high price both compared to its predecesor the M II and the Nikon D800.
Good news about Yul Brynner. If he took some shots while filming "The Magnificent Seven" one of my favorite western films, then the exhibition should be extremely interesting indeed!
Hoping for a better understandment for the companies to make cameras that are really good and work well without costing the shirt. Some are on the right track, namely to find a better system which is more universal and that will last and evolve making things better, thinking also on economy for the consumer with better quality and performance. Dpreview delivering a great job with research and communication, thanks and have yourselves a Happy New Year.
There is no doubt dpreview is one of the best photo websites around, but nothing is perfect...... I recently submitted an entry in the challenge "Stone sculptures", I thought it would be interesting because it was a full color photograph of a granitt sculpture from the famous Vigeland park in Oslo, Norway, and I have been disqualified on the grounds that it is B&W! Well of course it looks grey, granitt stone IS GREY but the photo was taken in full COLOR. And I thought you could your thing?!?!?! It was really dissapointing to get disqualified on the wrong premisses by proffessionals that is supposed to know their job.
It must be allowed to take snapshots. One might be using the 645D as a travel camera which is becoming an increasing part of the camera market.
00112233: Pentax 645D body is 156x117x119mm and weights 1480g. incl. batt.Canon EOS 1DX as announced is 158x164x83mm and weights "TBC"Now, to find out what TBC is we can assume that physically has the same type of construction and materials as the EOS 1D Mark IV which is smaller and weights 1230g. incl. batt., the 1DX will then weight more, specially if we include the wireless file transmitter and the GPS receiver. The difference in weight between the 645D and the 1DX will become very small indeed. So I wonder who is going to have pains in shoulders. Fortunately most professionals have assistants that help carrying equipment!
Live view makes sense with mirrorless cameras or making a film, but for real photography the viewfinder is better. According to dp's specification chart, the 645D has LiveView and boosts ISO from 100 to 6400
But perhaps dp has it wrong this time?Anyway, it will be very exciting to look in detail at handheld photos taken in the dark in high ISO with such a heavy camera as the 1DX, when at last comes out.
Pentax 645D body is 156x117x119mm and weights 1480g. incl. batt.Canon EOS 1DX as announced is 158x164x83mm and weights "TBC"Now, to find out what TBC is we can assume that physically has the same type of construction and materials as the EOS 1D Mark IV which is smaller and weights 1230g. incl. batt., the 1DX will then weight more, specially if we include the wireless file transmitter and the GPS receiver. The difference in weight between the 645D and the 1DX will become very small indeed. So I wonder who is going to have pains in shoulders. Fortunately most professionals have assistants that help carrying equipment!
I will be waiting for the follower of the Canon EOS 5D Mark II, a much modern version, perhaps the Canon EOS 5D Mark III?, I like very much that line, a more portable camera in full format, and not so bulky and expensive as the 1D line.
EOS Photographer: Canon could step in cheap for a mirrorles system that is quite popular.The future of Olympus seems extremely grim as from today.
I just do not understand your remark. What does Pentax have to do with this?. And the fact that Olympus has dismissed an executive has nothing to do with the quality and technology that the company has acquired through the years. I have an old Olympus Camedia C-830L that still takes very good photos and I will never give it away!!
As far as I know this is good news. Hoya is a manufacturer of filters and such. Ricoh is a manufacturer of cameras and such. So logically Pentax is better of with .............. yes you guessed it: Ricoh!