Very interesting, but it highlights the gulf between high-end and the majority!
I always try to impress upon clients the need for preparation and the benefits of a reasonable investment, but the majority expect it all to be done on the spur of the moment and get the models free! I've had so many suggest that such-and-such's daughter/girlfriend is very pretty so they'll be perfect...
Once you get to a level where a client will pay £100+ per hour for each model, plus sensible photography fees and studio rates, only the photographer has themselves to blame if it goes pear-shaped. If, however, they want a whole day's shoot and a full portfolio of shots for £200 in total (believe me I am asked all the time and say no!) then it doesn't matter how talented the photographer is, but they'd still take the flak!
The question should not be "What is your ideal camera?", but rather "What would be the best possible camera for you that would be affordable?"
Primarily as there is little point speculating about what may never be feasible: 20-800mm f1.4 (constant) with clean ISO to 256000, etc.Nor does it make sense to keep 'upping' the specification to what would make it unaffordable, even from a personal perspective. A Nikon D4 is more ideal than what I have now, but I can't afford one!
Once that is in perspective, it becomes clear that the nature of 'ideal' hinges on two elements:
1) the applied limits of a particular camera (i.e. the speed of the LX7 is ideal, but the zoom range is not, or vice versa)
2) the user interface
I can accept the physical limitations, as I appreciate the physics and the economics. However, I have yet to see an 'ideal' interface. There are often too many and limited buttons/dials.
If they made better use of an EVF and joystick (to select and change) I'd be happy.
shaocaholica: I have to say I'm not a fan of links to summaries from the main page instead of direct links to articles. The main page entries already have a summary. If I click on a link from the main page, that means I want to read the full article, not another summary.
I've said that a number of times and sent feedback, but it has been ignored.They do that in a number of places where a link appears direct yet takes you to a repeat page effectively and you have to click another link to get to your destination.The other really annoying aspect is differing behaviours: some of these links take you to a new page and some open a new tab/window. Really, REALLY frustrating!
You have discovered (and laid before everyone) that it is the state of mind more than anything else which impacts upon the initial picture.However, that 'freedom' is entirely relative and the limitations of such devices soon shackle what initially would seem so liberating.
Of course, as you also point out, the more capable but entirely 'obvious' kit can provide their own handicap in terms of portability and the reaction of the subjects.
Ultimately, there is no right and wrong. It is better to have any camera than none and it is better to have the small unobtrusive camera where a full DSLR would prevent the shot.
Neither would make a cent of difference if you didn't have the eye, though, and there is no denying your skill in that regard!
For heaven's sake do samples need such comments?
It would seem that opinons of them vary from being fabulous to downright awful, yet all the while 'my' opinion of samples should not have the remotest effect on 'your' decision to buy (and vice versa).
I get the distinct impression it is more about a combination of 'fanboys' and ego: praising or castigating the camera simply because of the manufacturer, and being derogatory of the pictures because 'I'm a fabulous and knowledgeable photographer who would do so much better...' !!!
I don't know about the 'voting thumbs', I think DPR should bin the comments section!
Looking at the opposing views about whether such reviews are merited, I wonder if DPReview could carry out some research (no idea where to start, sorry!) as to the nature of photography, not from the point of the capture device but with regard to the final display. Also, to take into account the average time of display.
In other words, has photography changed from being prints in frames and magazines etc., to 'Facebook' galleries and has the lifespan of any image gone from decades to mere hours in some cases?
Furthermore, what percentage of pictures ever get seen by anyone other than those few who view it on the LCD screen immediately after being taken?
It might make for an interesting piece...
Just go with it!
You'll never please all of the people all of the time and you appear to have put a lot of time and effort into this, so why waste it?
The only other suggestion is to agree with the point about a thread/flat view toggle. It is clear there are two polar views (I'm a threaded man myself), so you would alienate one camp if it wasn't available.
Put in a simple toggle (space bar?) and it would be good to go.
aardvark7: You couldn't make that £5000 could you? I mean, you were British once...
This 'ragtag bunch' have been owned, lock stock and barrel, by Amazon for some long while now, so $5000 is small change!
You couldn't make that £5000 could you? I mean, you were British once...
I hope Mr. Britton did not use a Leica to take that portrait of Mr. Shulz...That is one seriously bad photograph!
Despite the nay-sayers, that had Sony dipping out of the market after a few years, I think they are playing the long game and looking to completely dominate within a decade.
Nikon and Canon must be more than a little concerned!
paulbysea: Reckon they are releasing this so it is ready for when NASA go to Mars. They will probably be the only people who will be able to afford it.
Kapanak, write out a hundred lines!
"I must not repeat myself""I must not repeat myself"...
Esa Tuunanen: Good to see company standing behind their product correcting its problems.But we should also remember why we're in this situation in the first place...
Corporations like using consumers as beta testers in any chance they get and sell unfinished products hoping there's more brand/fashion blinded fans than those who notice "cracks under shiny paint&waxing."It sure isn't in interests of consumers if this becomes more common so we should discourage makers from selling half ready products and maybe fixing its issues some day.
I'm sure no one would accept half working car which would need fixing to be able to drive at highway speed.
I think you've hit the nail on the head, especially as some of the flaws we see in 'finished' products are so immediately obvious one can't help wondering why they weren't addressed on day one of testing, let alone after almost deafening criticism!
The X1 has received great acclaim, but imagine just how blown away people would have been if Fuji had taken just a little more time to sort out these teething troubles first.
Cogburn: Samsung, Google, and Apple can Shove their collective bidding power up their collective bum-holes... They don't want one bit of Kodak's photographic heritage... they just want ammunition to litigate and needle each other over their crappy smart-phones, the likes of which they intend to dominate the consumer photography market. Happy little consumers, snapping away with their smart phones... all the while the mothership is collecting gps data on where the photo's are taken so they can sell you an ad for laser hair reduction as you walk by the new "Hair-Off- While-you Wait" Kiosk in your favorite mall... or worse!!
Not quite the words I'd have chosen, but very lucid and completely on the button I fear!
It's strange how we have lived through the most extraordinary of times and now face the most worrying.
Technology has changed and will continue to change the world beyond recognition and it's not a world I think I will enjoy. Perhaps it is good that I am past the majority of years so maybe wave it goodbye before it gets too unpleasant...??
This is a modern-day Minolta A1/A2/A200 with a worse lens!!
I know there are still people who remember those Minoltas (and use them, including me) with passion and many often said that they had everything except the best sensor.
Why someone couldn't have taken that ball and run with it beats me!Indeed, this has the same size sensor so it should have been a piece of cake.
Hats off to Pentax for at least tip-toeing down the same path, but if only for that decent fast lens...
aardvark7: Pretentious nonsense and most likely you'd get arrested and put on the sex offenders register for the one shown here...
See if you can sign up with your local primary school.
I believe they do classes in reading and comprehension, as you are in serious need of a refresher course...
Do you guys do it deliberately????
I'm entirely relaxed about it, but unless you hadn't noticed, lift a camera in the direction of a young person in swimwear these days and you are looked on as some kind of pervert.
We need every parent to give permission for pictures to be taken of a school play, or sports day. Not so long ago a national newsreader was reported to the police because she had some prints done of her children in the bath.
Of course, if some of you still don't understand this elementary point, no amount of hammering on your thick skulls will change it...
Truly the oddest and most pointless reply.
If you had sense you would have realised that:
1. I think the work is pretentious nonsense2. I was making an oblique observation that taking pictures of girls in swimsuits at pools is the sort of thing that gets 'hysterical moralists' attacking photographers without any justification.It's outrageous that it happens, but it does; far too often.
But you'd have realised that, wouldn't you...?
Pretentious nonsense and most likely you'd get arrested and put on the sex offenders register for the one shown here...