Can you use it to take pictures?
HozicEmir: I will cry hard if this will not be available in K-mount.Than will hate sigma til the end of time.
If this will be made in K-mount no mater optical quality I will buy one.
Ha ha! You gave me a laugh!
AbrasiveReducer: The problem with all these schemes is that the guy who steals your camera/computer/stereo doesn't know he needs a password.
Haw haw! That spoils everything!
Sh]t on that.
I'm right this minute hammering my scope sights into plowshares.
joe talks photography: Pretty impressive. Maybe it's me, and I am not criticizing any technique in capture, but, some processing looks to be needed for greater contrast in some of the shots.
I'd own one if the OVF wasn't such a premium priced item. Maybe a third party one will come along.
Argh! Do I proofread? For "I like than snappy vernacular style" read "I like THAT snappy vernacular style."
Some web-posted prices deserve to be described as "get the eff out of here."
Being a Noo Yawnker, I speak a language that is a combination of Porto Rican, Yiddish, Arabic, and maybe some English.
pannyics: It's ironic that Nikon put a 1" sensor in their interchangeable lens mirrorless cameras and an APS-C sensor in their point and shoot
Why don't Nikon run their project plans past us piranhas fisrt?
ijv: Get that lens up to an acceptable competitive level and we have a winner. Image stabilized and at least 2.0, but ideally 1.8. Also a 50 mm version would be a dream.
Make that IS, 2.0, and a VF.
The lower left-hand corner of the STOP sign pic shows amazing detail.
Ha ha, I like than snappy vernacular style.
PhotonTrapper: Again... No challenging low light conditions, that a larger sensor is supposed to cope with better. I'd think it's the one type of shot you would post, that potential buyers would be interested in seeing, instead a bright daylight post card scenes that virtually any modern camera is able to capture. And, again... no "macro".
Some high ISO examples would not come amiss. Can you add some? Thanks.
photo perzon: I put a $ 200 Voigtlander glass and metal OVF on the A and it is fantastic. Nothing better than clear glass. Looks just like the Nikon.
Just what I was about to suggest. $450 is an insult to the world economy.
Is DSCF0135 a father-daughter shot?
vkphoto: Subtitle typo: "Fujifilm X100 Real-world Samples Gallery". Should be X100sPhotos look good.
More macro photos of nematodes, please.
Nikonworks: Why do most of the 'Real World' samples on this web site all seem to be subjects that do not require a photo release?
Most of the 'Real World' shots we DPReview readers take are not the 'Real World' photos displayed in this article.
Please take this as constructive in nature.Providing real 'Real World' photos would be very helpful to all of us here, both management and us readers.
More photos of horseshoe crabs, please.
Pat Cullinan Jr: When will the review be ready?
I'm forever popping off. Sorry, everybody.
When will the review be ready?
Jordan Norris: Dsnoir I think the negative commenters' point is, that on a photography site we don't need/want these kind of slice and dice techniques... I'm sure there's plenty of photoshop forums out there for that. I'm also sure the majority of photographers on this site would appreciate more articles on photographic technique, basic PP or physics behind photography and cameras and lenses.
What I was trying to say was that I thought the example was too simple. But now I'm thinking maybe I was being too snooty or too pat-centric. I let my sub to Photoshop User lapse because I thought the examples were too simple. I mean, one writer used some 75 layers and I'm saying it's too simple. Plus, the sub was too expensive anyway. Heh.
Y Hafting: Now while this is relatively powerful, and "cheating" (the image is no longer a photo but a compound image), the more typical situation for beginners would be to mask bad exposure by pulling out two different brightness settings from one raw file, and then combining to get a decent looking picture. Compared to using HDR or shadow-highlight tools, there is a good chance that using blending with a gradient layer mask will turn out much more natural.
Sorry, I must've expressed myself poorly. Dodging, burning and the like, however executed, is processing. Digital (or other) transmogrification that goes beyond this might be called forging, unless the customer or target vidience* is informed about it, in which case you wouldn't call it forging, but working over. Or not?
I have at times, without making it known, shamelessly worked over some of my photos in order to straighten out my nose. But no one cares anyway._____* For instances of this monster-word "vidience" going back to 1875, see www.google.com/search?tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=vidience&num=50.
The example is simplistic.
I'd like to see a piece on correcting a really nasty, intractable color problem.