cseiler: Reading this is like hearing that a very nice meal I just had was full of glutamate!- I guess sometimes its better not to know the recipe.
He started with a RAW file. RAW, like uncooked food. Other than maybe oysters, herring and sushi, do you eat much raw meat? Do you think this image was over-processed? If you do, then you're mistaken.
Thanks for sharing Erez. Always appreciated.
mosc: I'd so much rather have 16-150 than 16-300 if the image quality were even slightly improved. Where is all this demand for the long end coming from? APS-C DSLR's can't focus at f6 in anything but direct sunlight and anything you have to be that far away from is most likely moving. I never understood the market for slow tele.
It's APS-C, it should be cheaper than FF to get some decent aperture telephoto lenses. Why are all real telephoto lenses FF? Show me something past 150 that's faster than f5.6 for APS-C and not FF? Pentax, champion of APS-C makes 60-250 f4 which is incredibly expensive ($1400) and 250 f4 isn't that impressive. Minolta had a FF 210 f4 more than 20 years ago and it never cost that much nor does it weigh 2.2 lbs!
I have Canon 600D and 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS. Great lightweight, budget combo. You can buy the lens used for $350, but even $650 new is not too bad. I have many good shots, both action and static with this combo.
JapanAntoine: Thanks but would like to see more shots in dark situations, with ISO pumped up, or portrait shots with wide aperture, to evaluate the bokeh.Thank you!
Agreed. I'd like to see the night city skyline shot at f8-f11 too. Looks a bit soft at f4-f5.6 to me, although the bridge shot isn't too bad. Decrease Av, increase ISO, increase Tv.
Mssimo: I still only see 4 pages. Need to add the other 6.
Shouldn't have to go and clear the browser cache to see it though Barney.
Not that I'm looking to buy a K3, but this camera has to be the biggest soap opera ever on this site.
Tim Streater: Not having a rotatable rear screen is a big PLUS as far as I am concerned.
Why? Canon's implementation of the swivel screen is sublime. Sturdy enough and when tucked away is barely noticeable. I have used mine on many occasions.
Joe Ogiba: Wow, I purchased $20,000 in studio and darkroom gear from them back in the late 80's .
Sounds like they could have used another 20K from you last year.
Honestly, the world baffles me these days. More specific, it baffles me what people spend their money on.
Bill Bentley: DPReview should contract user EOSHD to provide the video summary for all their still camera reviews.
Very good Richard. Carry on then, and nevermind little old me. :-)
DPReview should contract user EOSHD to provide the video summary for all their still camera reviews.
So for non-commercial images is it best for us "enthusiasts" to watermark our photos then? I know that if someone wants a photo "bad" enough they will still steal it and try and remove the watermark. But maybe it's a small deterrent, just like having security company stickers on the doors and windows of your home or business. You hope you thief will just move on to a simpler target.
Edit: I'm talking about uploading of images to other sites, not Getty.
yabokkie: the lens looks good. would like to see it on X-A1 and be compared against other super wide APS-C zooms.
also I would appreciate if focal length, shutter, aperture, and ISO be displayed under album thumbnails. like "10mm/6.4, 1/300s, ISO800" for 1024mm_DSCF2293.
If you are using Chrome as your browser you can install an extension that will give you this functionality for any picture on the web that has the data still encoded. If you hover your mouse above the top left of the image it displays the exact info you mentioned in a small blue bar. It's very handy.
Wow, the high ISO shots (4000+) look very, very good to my eye. I can even see the fine honeycomb texture in the ceiling in image 1024mm_DSCF2285. There may be a fine amount of NR smearing going on in the ISO 6400 shots, but it's certainly something I could handle.
medon78: Look at 1024mm_DSCF1820
... strange colors on the left side of the building. Doesn't look like a regular lens flare?
I suspected as much Barney, and it makes total sense what you did. That building shot wouldn't be a keeper though. If the lens had of produced a ring effect then maybe.
It's not a pleasant "ring type" lens flare, but it's definitely lens flare. I get this with my Canon 10-22 sometimes too.
I wonder if a hood was used at all? Probably not since this is essentially a pre-production model.
Laptop > desktopTablet > laptopSmartphone > cheapish compact cameraQuality compact camera > DSLR??
Looks like Kai Wong from Digital Rev wearing the white gloves in pic #5?
Maybe David Hobby did convince him that X100s is a great cam after all. ;-)
gskolenda: Please, Please update these reviews, it's 2014!!We need more info on Video Specs!!!!!!!
Bit Rates!! File type!!! Uncompressed Video? video focus modes?
LOL, +1 for Marty.
That pop-up flash makes this look like WALL-E.
Kwick1: Where, exactly, are the "first impressions"?
First impressions don't always have to involve hands on shooting.