Sean65: If ever we needed proof that things have changed from photoJOURNALIST to PHOTOjournalist, it's garbage like this.
Years ago it was ALL about the story. Now it's all about the photographers ego.
Good for WPP for stripping this dickhead of his prize. Journalist, my ass!
@b craw. Well said. I am not sure were that claim to objective journalism came from. It is enough to look into literature of 200 years ago to notice that press was as corrupted then as it is now.
Riquez: It actually seems like the mayor didn't like the dark side of his town shown & has tried to find some way to discredit. I think Troilo has pushed his creative licence a bit but there doesn't seem like any gross cheating. 1 photo was in the wrong town, that is why he was disqualified.
@Eric Calabros. Photography is misleading medium. It captures an image in front of the photographer but, even if that image is not manipulated before or after photograph is taken, it's claim to "reflect reality" is dubious. Reality has infinite number of shades whereas single photograph is just a snapshot. Photographer can try capturing that infinite number of tones but he can only approximate and that approximation is already based on his interpratation of the weights of infinite number of facts.
I am not disputing that hiding the fact of staging situations is dishonest as in reported example. I am just disputing your notion that proper photojurnalism is somehow able to avoid ideological manipulation, avoid manipulating viewers' perceptions and leave interpretation entire to them. Put leftist, centrist and rightist photojurnalists into same situation and they will produce "real" stories that would appeal to their respective audience.
Juck: That slow zoom had better be a hell of a performer for $1000.
I am definitly not an expert but wouldn't we catch more rain water through larger roof hole than through small roof hole? The area of the bucket should not matter if we have a funnel shaped piping in place that prevents spills and directs that rain to the bucket. Isn't lens through set of glass eleemnts creating such piping? If focal lengths of two lenses are equivalent are not their aperture sizes equivalent?
I think you are absolutely right. The folks at Olympus, Fuji, Sony, Panasonic and Samsung all made a deep sigh of relief then they discovered that the Canon M3 was just another half hearted attempt for Cannon to have a "presence" in the MILC market.
Of course, it is pretty hard for Canon NOT to have a presence when they command around a 50% market share in the overall market. There are bound to be some Canon users who want a MILC camera, so Cannon has given them one. However not selling their new camera in North America, or not making the EOS adapter easy to find doesn't help that cause.
Canon has foolishly put all their chips on DSLRS, when they should have been putting chips on both. Because both DSLR and MILC cameras will be around for a very long time. It really is baffling as to why Canon isn't aggressive in both markets.
That statistics says very little. How many users abandoned their SLR setup to move to stricktly mirrorless system? What total number of users we are talking about? Is that market even profitable?
I do not see many techonological challenges in producing MILC over DSLR. The products seem very similar apart from few nuances. When companies that offer MILC failed is mostly in marketing and purposely withholding features from specific offer.
My point is that Canon is quite successful and well run company. If they do not enter MILC market with a full force it is probably because their profit predictions do not justify it for them. It may be not popular among few 'enthusiasts' but it also does not mean that would lock them out of market when they think the time is right. It is not as if current MILC are perfect. There seems to be huge turnaround among MILC users.
JurijTurnsek: There is still room for A7 in Sony's line-up. Some people don't need IBIS and are happy with the low price and lower weight and bulk, excellent performance of the original A7. Maybe Sony will prolong its productions as it did with the RX100 series.
Well, A900 I use has IBIS and most of the time it is turned off. Didn't realize that I really need it.
mpgxsvcd: 4 years ago this chip was unimaginable. Now that it is here Canon is still where they were 4 years ago talking about the “Impossible”.
You sound like someone who has Sony shrine at home. A missionary for corporate entity. Rather wierd :-)
Tal Shachar: film is an environmental disaster, go digital now!
@AlanG. Seems to me we all exaggerate or take numbers from the ceiling to support our own agendas as none of us have any idea on the total energy/materials used to produce and deliver neither film nor digital cameras and accessories. I am amazed though at quantities of film used that you mentioned. It must have been full scale commercial operation. I went on 3 weeks vacation during which I used probably 12 rolls of 120 film. I have never found myself saving film, I shoot whenever I wanted. Casual photographer won't have enough opportunities or time to use that amount of film in a quarter of the year.
bmcdad: Its like saying AT&T will restart production of Rotary Phones... Art does not require a time machine. You can't reminisce evolution to a halt.
@RPJG You can use film because you may enjoy looking at 6x9, 6x17 or 4x5 transparencies on the light table. You can scan them as well. Film cameras also came down in price (even professional ones). For someone shooting moderate amount of photographs the cost may be comparable with the cost of ownership of digital 35mm camera, trading convenience for larger negative sizes and sometimes better/nicer experience. If it is just a hobby the choice of equipment does not have to be driven by efficiency and cost effectiveness.
Donnie G: Nearly 1,000 comments about a corporate ad campaign from this site alone. Ha ha ha, LOL. Seems the teaser was very successful in reminding average people and businesses that Canon is involved in a lot more than just making consumer cameras and lenses. BRILLIANT!
There is a huge difference between buying 300$ camera and 1000$ camera. I am also not sure why you assume that so different consumer groups need and want mirrorless cameras. None of my friends, casual users, even think about camera as a system. For 300$ they want complete package and do not care nor think about expanding it. Only select few casual users can and want to spend 1000$ on a camera, not to mention think about diving even deeper by buying additional lenses.
Last time I checked Canon had its own advanced compact in the form of G series. They do not focus much on interchangeable system but how large is that user group? You also say that DSLR market is saturated. What about mirrorless scene where so many players deliver similar products with little to no differentiation. Maybe Canon's strategy is sound. I do not think mirrorless is so entrenched. Current mirrorless systems have such flows that single good product would cause flood of converts.
Rick Knepper: Last thing I want is a commercial photographer and his entourage hogging up space at overlooks and other viewpoints and blocking trails. Besides, the permit is a formality. I see very few requests for permits being denied if any. What I don't like are commercial photo workshop operators and their customers. Many are respectful of non-workshop shooters but some are downright rude. And they suck up permits to places like the Wave while individuals go wanting.
You think that proposed law, as described, would change anything for the better? I strongly disagree. This is exactly permit system that makes it difficult for the individual to obtain access to Wave and other places. Commercial operator, professional photographer or a persons associated with government agencies that manage places are in an advantage caused they do it for a living, intricately know the procedure, have connections, etc. The proposed law means that the access or use of many more places will be made more difficult for an occasional users. The flood of permit requests will also require additional office work to process or it will overburden existing services. I am not sure this is what the country needs. It is rather inefficient way to increase federal income.
AV Janus: Great photos. Thanks for posting them.Love seeing the change people can make when they are given the opportunity.
Its funny how the post war "Wirtschaftswunder" never seems to take a lasting foothold in the far east and middle east. The US never seems to liberate them all the way till the end I guess. I guess they are not making the same mistakes like they did in Germany, where they just managed to stay and rebuild the country for 30-40yrs./irony ends/
@reps2. I think majority of photographs carry some hidden message. Message can also be passed through conscious selection of photo gallery. Given that I find DPR a venue to discuss various topics, just as photographs show various subjects and pass various messages. I also did not venture to argue over Kriegsschuldfrage for the simple fact that there is no frage.
In addition to question of Germany post-war rebuilt effort I simply found the selection of news/topics on that special day rather intriguing. It stimulated me to go back in news history and check June 6th. DPR does not often commemorates anniversaries of important historic events so I assume plain ignorance. Though it is rather disturbing it is in line with the level of western historiography and collective knowledge of western societies. One could only wonder if attitudes were different had German army bulldozed part of Paris rather than perform its atrocities behind the invisible curtain of Eastern Europe.
@Zerg2905. I believe you and I haven't claimed otherwise though my stand is that for every action there is a reaction. My, maybe too strong, response was partly driven by the surprising fact that on the day of 75th anniversary of most deadly war in the history (so far) DPR chose to show few mediocre pictures of the capitol of the country that started that terrible war. Pictures showed here do not create any emotions and do not give justice to so important the anniversary. When I think of this day I have that picture in mind: http://ww2db.com/image.php?image_id=8527
Falconeyes has some point. It is much easier to rebuild if you have capital and knowhow. US supplied capital, some of know how was in place. The east countries were not so lucky. US would never agree to help countries behind iron courtain and those countries, on Russian instigation, would never agree to take help if that was offered. Regarding know-how, German and Russian occupation forces made sure to mass murder that part of societes in the first place. Together with total demolition of infrastructure and breaking many social ties they left countries, poorer than western counterparts in the first place, economically devastated and moved back a century. I think the barbarians invading Roman Empire would be ashamed.
After reading few sections of that review I wonder what are the advantages of that new camera over Nex-7 and Nex-6. It looks like measured dunamic range is the same as Nex-7 and a little worse than Nex-6. The visible noise look very similar in all ISO levels. The usability may be an answer but having no experience in using any of those cameras I am not sure - A6000 has more scroll wheels than Nex-6 but it also has lower resolution EVF. Actually that new camera looks like Nex-7 rebadged as A6000. Is there any reason one would spend 800 USD for it rather than go and pick up hardly used Nex-7 for about half that price?
Nukunukoo: Now if only Canon can release a model with better DR with my PP, I'll be ready to go back to them!
Interesting. Reading between the lines it loks like you feel somewhat dissatisfied and cheated but nevertheless continue supporting dishonest practices of the manufacturer because of some minor advantage in captured dynamic range offered by its product? Really interesting.
digitalshooter: Right I can see all of the Sony faithful on the Sony forum ordering this camera!
Enthusiast camera at 12K, don't think so! Another slap in the face to the long time a mount user!
This is actually good news. I wouldn't mind offloading my A mount lenses to someone willing to pay extra. I might even be generous and ask only double regular sell price.
qwertyasdf: Fairly speaking, bad job, Hassy. It's a big step back from the Lunar and StellarWhy no marble grip, diamond knobs? I guess everybody would love a camera that weighted a tonne.
Lean times. Even in Hasselblad products one can see cost cutting. Serves well new wave of upper classes. Executive shell with BestBuy innards to show sympathy with working classes. Are you being served?
ProfHankD: Rated lowest of the full-frame cameras? I have an A7 that I'm using for very technical work and I can't agree. Aside from any IQ arguments, I think the EVF alone should justify gold, as would the fact that it can use just about any lens ever made.
However, DPReview did catch my biggest gripe: the 1/60s A mode preference. Basically, all Sony models have followed the 1/focal_length rule, but they have a long tradition of assuming unknown lenses are 50mm, hence selecting 1/60s. Allowing the user to manually set the minimum speed would be a step in the right direction, but the real fix is to let the user tell the camera about the unchipped lenses and maintain a list of such lens data to select from instead of the "shoot without lens" choice. That lens info should go into the EXIF and be used to compute 1/focal_length, or perhaps even allow a user-specified default slowest shutter speed to be registered for each lens.
Well. I thought about such firmware feature since I acquired A900 few years ago. It would be more useful to me than many camera improvements to date. It seems however that it is beyond the skills of Sony firmware developers to implement it.
NancyP: Nothing here suggests that the damage is limited to CC customers. People who bought their software outright may also be at risk.
This is a good point. If I remember correctly one must create account in order to buy software like Lightroom or PS directly from Adobe. I do not remember what credit card payment system they use but they might be storing that information too if you buy online.
Valentinian: The sculptor's work was exposed to the public the same way a song is copyrighted and published. Anybody who sings that song in concert for a profit should pay something to the author.Of course the USPS had to pay the sculptor.As someone in this forum already pointed out, it is very strange that the US government didn't reserve all rights to reproduce and use in any way the sculptor's work when his work was commissioned and he was paid.Isn't that what happens, for instance, when you enter one of your photos into a photographic contest?
I think you mentioned real issue. I also do not understand why, after spending huge sum of money, those that comissioned the sculpture did not ensure the sale agreement included all rights to its future use. I would still want the government agencies enforce the rule never to commision any future work from that artist. The predatory legal behavior should be discouraged. Unfortunately that would probably infringe some other misused law like equal opportunity or something.