pbailey4: HDR techniques - please respect the fact that some people (ok it may just be me) see these images as a manipulation to far, compressing the natural lighting range to show detail. Did I just say the king has no clothes?
I think Ansel Adams would have seen HDR used correctly as the digital version of the Zone System and darkroom printing. To say "manipulation to far" fails to understand the power of what HDR when used correctly can deliver. It is not the posterized stuff we see by people all to willing to abuse the technique. The best HDR is less than noticeable. As Chris2J says, "it all depends on how you apply it".
Graystar: "perhaps the most significant of which is a very impressive-looking video specification."
WHAT?? Pass what you're smoking, cause I want some!
At this level, if a pro needs pro video he's going to use a real video camera! The AF operation down to f/8 is far more significant, allowing the 500mm and 600mm lenses to auto-focus when used with the 2X teleconverter. THAT'S important to a photographer! Not video!
Simply sublime logic. Let's see, what do you do for a living? Are you a Pro? The reason the 5D2 was so ground breaking was it's video. Movies and TV have used them to shoot scenes. DOF is the reason along with the size of the sensor and noise levels at low light. It's the reason we now see the new FF video cameras coming out -- why is RED so hot, thank the 5D2. You and Sam can from a club of people in denial about technology and why progress happens. This reminds me of the silly Film versus Digital debates back around 2000.
larrytusaz: Ah yes, a pro using an iPhone. No matter what awards he wins, he (or she) is no pro at all in my book if they use an iPhone instead of something like a d-SLR or a mirrorless compact. I'm no pro, but even I know better than to regard a smartphone as a serious imaging device.
People are intimidated by SLRs, yet will prance & dance for a camera-phone? That's sure silly. Camera phones can immediately publish the images around the world seconds, while SLRs are "offline" unless an EyeFi card is inserted--yet the SLR intimidates? How silly is that? And yes, since an SLR or mirrorless can be connected via a smartphone & an EyeFi card, why not that route if real-time publishing is your goal?
Smart-phone cameras are fine for soccer moms & teens snapping themselves acting giggly at a bar, fine, no problem with that. But serious photographers? Oh puh-leeze.
Here here Chadley, I agree all around. Since getting my iPhone 4 I pull my G10 out less and less often. In fact I am thinking about selling it.
I am amused by all the Apple Haters out there. THe bottom line for me is that I own two DSLRs and a Canon G11. Since I got my iPhone I use my DSLRs more and I use my G11 almost never - twice in 6 months. The combination of software, images, ease of use, and the reality that the best camera is the one you have with you has changed how I do casual photography. Even more important is that I can post any picture I take with it to my Facebook page in a matter of minutes from the shot, the editing, and the upload. Apple might not have the best phone, but they have the support, the infrastructure (iCloud will be killer), and superior pricing. The fact is they sell more smart phones than any other single manufacturer. Apple also makes more than 51% of the profit for all smart phones -- dig that, they make more profit than all other smart phone makers combined. I do agree that a roundup on just the photo/camera software for camera phones would be nice. I love my iPhone4 and Camera+, they rock!