retro76: The one thing I cannot figure out: Reviewers absolutely love Fuji cameras, but consumers do not - why is that ?
Products sell inversely proportional to price. So consumers look at the Fuji (online since aren't carried in Walmart or Best Buy) and wonder why pay $1700 for a camera that has few, expensive lenses when the Canon does more, has more, with more selection of lenses with moderate and low priced lenses for much, much less!
ecm: I wonder if this app will be a front end for a mainframe at Adobe actually doing the grunt work - then most of the processing overhead at the tablet or phone would be uploading/downloading and graphics rendering. It's the only way I can get my head around the price they've proposed.
I also wonder if Logmein or one of the other remote desktop programs could do something similar for less.
1 MBps upload? That's a low end cable connection. I have a middle of the road internet cable service that is 10 MBps upload. Try getting a decent internet service speed instead of paying $20 a month. You get what you pay for!
Holger Drallmeyer: Am I missing something? LR runs on Surface tablets for a long while already. And what about $99 a year? Isn't that a huge rip off? I probably just don't get it.
Surface is a real computer. Apple mobile devices are very limited operating systems and CPUs.
So LR mobile will be much more expensive than LR for computer? $99 per year vs. $150 for as along as you want then $79/ for an upgrade version use as long as you want. Adobe thinks customers are chumps and will pay what they feel like charging.
Ayoh: Cool, now why don't you now also add some scientific rigour to your test scene and ensure all camera sensors are exposed to the same amount of incident light, as currently they are not. Otherwise you should clearly state that your current test shots cannot be used to compare noise performance, as, by looking at the comments, that is what most readers are doing and making incorrect conclusions.
Agree with Richard. when I take photos I'm not out there to put an image sensor through a rigorous test I'm out there to capture the light I want to, how I want to. Measurebators!
vFunct: How come there was no D4 review?
Because it's a top of the line dSLR if you want or need the best buy it. That's what professionals do. It's the gadget junkies/uber-enthusiasts that want to see numbers and graphs before buying something!
Mazhe: Are you also racing a K-3 review?
Dude, the d4 and 6D came out long before the k3. Chill out.
I knew there was no way the same quality image sensor was going into the df for half the price of the d4. d4 is a good stop better at high ISO than the df. The df is good but of course the d4 is better just like d700 vs. d3s.
Johnny Liu: I voted the K-3 because i felt it was the only no compromise enthusiast camera in the list. Everything else is crippled in some way....
"crippled", please grow up!
forpetessake: It stands out among entry level DSLRs, it's lighter, smaller -- some like it, some don't. But nobody really likes the outdated Canon sensor, which is a generation behind the Sony sensors used in many other cameras.
marike6: LOL! You know there are 100,000,000s of people if not a billion people on this planet that know of digital photos in no format other than JPG!
The world is now viewing photos on phones where images will be small images or greatly reduced in size. JPG is a great storage format and differences between it and TIFF will need to be hunted out and viewed at 100% computer screen view or more magnified. Great if non compressed huge file size files excite you. Let me know when they come out with a 36 MP TV screen that is 120 inches diagonal. When they do it'll be half priced in 3 years with more features.
RedFox88: This is deplorable. Time should be ashamed of itself. 95% of these photos are of death, destruction, and war. Year ago these images were not as accessible, now they are on the TV news and internet news website daily. No wonder the world is in such negative shape: images people see directly affect their mental mental condition and so much negativity severely damages and affects viewers brains, seriously. Negativity and graphically violent images are toxic.
Dude, I didn't say "all" people there. Gihadists in the middle east are brainwashed into thinking killing themself for Allah will grant them 77 virgins in heaven!
Glory? It's been decades, if not centuries, since war was seen as "glory" in at least the developed world. Only the people in the middle east and north korea see war as a glorious thing these days.
Time should rename them: their most graphically violent and disturbing images of the year.
Ridiculous. When I workout I don't want to wear something that will make my face sweat more. Samsung: this is an audio device (music and phone calls) so why do you need to wear glasses for it?? LOL! This is what a bluetooth ear piece is for your phone and today many people's music player is their phone!
And what if this never happens? People get bored and leave and no photo is taken. Fail, sorry dumb teenager!
instagram photos are web sized results which will look crappy printed bigger than 1.5x2.25.
brianj: Does a photo need to be about some sort of violence to draw people's attention?
Certainly not, it's the stupid editors that are in charge. If you want to see a wider variety of news, and more in depth, read and view NPR/PBS news. They get into more uplifting and positive news instead of just a 30 second "making a difference" on NBC news that is really just fluff.
Oh for the day when "local" news on TV shows only local news and not national or international news. Leave them for the national news right after your show!!
This is deplorable. Time should be ashamed of itself. 95% of these photos are of death, destruction, and war. Year ago these images were not as accessible, now they are on the TV news and internet news website daily. No wonder the world is in such negative shape: images people see directly affect their mental mental condition and so much negativity severely damages and affects viewers brains, seriously. Negativity and graphically violent images are toxic.
mpgxsvcd: Nikon is still the class leader for noise control. However, they all look great.
what is "noise control"? RAW is without noise reduction/removal. If you bring a RAW file into Lightroom, the program will remove all noise in there for you. So when developing RAW files I never see noise.
peevee1: DPR, are you going to fix your tests (or is it widget?) anytime soon? Why at ISO12,800, daylight RAW A7 and A7r are showing f/5.6 1/6400s while D610 shows f/5.6 1/4000s?
nothing to "fix". DPR says they don't just use the exact same shot settings from camera to camera but settings to get a standard exposure amount.