VadymA

Amazing! Would be even more cool if they add it to Google glasses or something; then one could change viewing ange by simply turning his/her head. That would be one sweet ride; at high speed might feel better than a rollercoaster.

This twisted cheerleading of smart phones is really annoying. The only things that made this photo worthy NYT's front page were the Subject and the Skills and Status of a Photographer.

Sure the technology is making it easier for the masses to sing without voice, play music without knowing notes, make pictures without understanding light and composition. But without true skills and talent the outcome will always look comical, grotesque, amateurish, cheap, fake, 3rd grade-ish, etc, etc.

That's why I find such articles really annoying. They give too much credit to technology without any analysis of real factors of success of certain photographs.

Yes!!! I think this will be a cool birthday present for my 7 year old daughter this year.

Shouldn't the title really be " Another professional photographer joined Apple marketing team"?

I still think he is a little bit a snob. Compact p&s cameras with identical specs existed for almost a decade now. But they weren't inspirational enough for him. Yet, I've seen thousands of brilliant photos taken by those uninspiring cameras. And now, all of the sudden, he is the big news like he is a pioneer who made a great discovery or something. I just don't think he deserved a credit for it, that's it. I certainly respect him as a photographer, just don't like the tone of some superiority in this article and wanted to point that what he discovered is rather old news for many of us ordinary folks.

Ok, some snob eventually discovered something that millions of ordinary people do everyday, that is taking good pictures with a cellphone. How is that a big news?

For "artistic" photography, which I do purely as a hobby, I resorted to my phone quite some time ago and didn't want anything more ever since.

But for a family archive I still prefer my D300 as I find phones are not very good in most situations except for some static scenes on a bright sunny day. Things like indoor light, large distance, fast speed, video, and yes sometimes creamy bokeh still require a better tool than a cell phone IMO.

Is this Sigma marketing idea to boost their sales? In order to get DPM system one would need to purchase three lenses, three bodies, three sensors, three batteries, not to mention accessories like three fast memory cards, three grips, etc, etc. All for over $3,000. And in addition you would need something else for sports and low light photography (maybe there will be DPM4 and DPM5 for that). And with every new model you would have to start from scratch all over again. Interchangeable lens approach sounds much more economical from consumer stand point IMO.

Interesting, but I think the true "companion" to a smartphone would be a module that snaps directly on the body of a smartphone and uses the smartphone screen as a camera display and special apps for direct image processing.

DPR, please change the title to "The Most Interesting Camera of 2012", because this is what this poll is really about. I don't have any of the listed cameras but I voted OM-D because to me it was rather a head turned in 2012 and I think it deserved its place fair and square. Is it the Best Camera out there? Probably not. But we are just DPR Readers, not the camera experts. This is Our poll, Our opinion, Our fun way to pick "The Camera of 2012". Those who believe otherwise and come here with angry comments only make fools of themselves.

The description is quite misleading as in reality you can only shift the background by a couple of millimetres; so it's not very useful at all. And with the focus shift, is there any way to see everything in focus on the picture? I find the out-of-focus area on Lytro samples rather flat and unpleasing (no fall off at all) and noticed that I would rather prefer everything in focus, especially on their macro shots. I could not find how to do that, so another disappointment.

In general, they might be just slightly ahead of time with this invention. I am guessing this technology could be much more suitable for 3D screens...

Mobile site and no App? That's not how Steve Jobs would launch it...

I wonder how easy is it to use this tiny screen even without manual adjustments? Having a viewfinder instead of a screen seems to be much more functional for this tube-like design.

His arguments are not convincing at all.

At first I thought ILC body would make much more sense with this camera. But then people would demand better speed, low light, faster lens, AF, etc, etc. Sigma probably realize that they are not able to deliver all of that (at least now) and prefer to stick with the niche market for landscapers. Still kudos to Sigma from me for keeping Foveon alive. Hard to believe they are making any profit on it though but at least Foveon makes photography "landscape" more interesting...

Sorry but the entire article looks like a high school essay; nothing more than a compilation of thoughts that have already been said by somebody, somewhere, sometime. And I had exactly the same feeling when looking at his portfolio. I definitely respect Eric for pursuing his passion but I am quite puzzled by how his work could already make him so "popular".

Very nice image but it looks more like evening to be honest which is a bit disappointing to see as a winner in the Morning challenge.

I've never used Instagram and can only judge by a few samples I've seen in various articles including this one. But I wouldn't call it "debasing photography".
I see at least two positives in apps like Instagram. First, those filters are for Fun, not for Art. Nothing wrong with people having fun IMO. And second, it forces real artists to become more creative in order to differentiate themselves from the masses. This may lead to groundbreaking innovations in the art of photography (which later will be copied by Instagram creating new innovation cycle). So it's a win-win for all types of photography IMO.

I learned who Steve Jobs was years after I knew what a great product Mac was. This guy is like the opposite, there are more knews about him than about his product. It's a bit irritating...

Yes, and I am glad this tool is available to those photographers now. Others probably said it better than me - this is a special tool for special purposes; not a snapshot camera. More like a prime lens I would say.