michael19843: Computers were in a similar mess until Apple revolutionised the market with innovative products. Please stop releasing 18 Megapixel DSLR's Canon. It will be the death of you. Twenty seven DSLR's all with 18 Megapixel sensors. It's a bit like the old Power Macintosh models of the 1990's: overpriced and not cool to use.
Michael, you live in a fantasy world. Apple did NOT revolutionize the computer market with innovative products, any more than Microsoft did. They simply made good, but expensive products.
ornitho1: I am not a professional photographerThis tripod is sure eye-catching but you would have to give me solid reasons to convince me to pay that much money for a tripodConvince me!!
Ornitho1, that's a good question ... even more so with the prevalence of Image Stabilization. I have a Gitzo tripod that cost more than this. I don't use it often, but use it when there may be camera sway or movement and sharpness is critical. Since IS mitigates the same camera movement, I wonder if IS will eventually render the tripod obsolete. There is one unavoidable fact: tripods are a pain in the ass to carry and somewhat time-consuming to set-up.
Devin -- you repeatedly refer to connections to an iPad, rather than tablet. Are you saying that Sandisk Connect ONLY works with an Apple product? Or, instead, are you simply an iTard that doesn't recognize there is a universe outside of Apple products?
Kotecinho: I'd like to share a panoramic composition made with iPhone 5
I don't understand mania and hysteria about average snapshots with mundane composition (not "fantastic") and overexposed skies. Don't knowledgeable photographers frequent this DPreview section?
Artistico: It's better than the performance of many a compact camera. An iPhone truly eliminates the need for a low-end compact for snapshots, and I do believe that at times, you can get a shot with an iPhone that you simply couldn't with a bigger camera, either because it's always with you, or because it's unintrusive and doesn't cause a change in your subject's behaviour before you get the picture, as particularly large cameras with big lenses do have a tendency to do at times.
It might just be my next phone. I just have to wear out, lose or accidentally break my current one first...
Barney, I believe Marty's comments are worthwhile, and most certainly not "disingenuous". It's not simply a matter of you taking only a little of your own personal time to publish this. It's also a matter of devoting a large percentage of the publicity of DPreview to the Apple iPhone. It's not simply a matter of diverting attention to camera phones. It's also a matter of adding more publicity for the one brand's cult. The converse of this is that some people are sick of listening to the howling of fanboys of brand X , and there isn't a balancing act of comparing the panorama capabilities of the iPhone 5s vs. top competitors. This article, while mildly informative, isn't a review, as you already stated, and additionally it isn't a comparison. It seems like it is an advertisement for an iPhone. To be helpful, fair, and objective in this product segment, compare the iPhone panos to the Lumia 1020 , Lumia 900 series phones, Sony and HTC phones, the Galaxy S4, & the LG G2.
Mirrorless Crusader: DPR why are you giving almost every half-decent camera a gold star now? Literally a large a majority of $600+ cameras now are getting gold stars, it completely dilutes the rating system and makes it look like you are just using it as a marketing ploy to sell cameras at Gear Shop. Can't you come up with a system where only a few cameras at most each year get the top award? Then we would actually know which you really think are best, because right now it looks like you're just trying to satisfy everybody and as a result satisfying nobody.
An additional perspective is that, perhaps, there is truly no single camera that is better for everyone. Perhaps many of the cameras are equally good, but have different strengths and different weaknesses. What is "gold" for one user might not be "gold" for another.
DenWil: In an America of clinical obesity the cameras get smaller and smaller. I have medium to smaller hands and I can't pick up one of these without wondering where my fingers go. What does a fat man or a man with large hands do? At 180#, 2 or 3 lbs of camera is just not a problem. I feel bad for all the sickly folks who depend on these soap bar sized bodies for a chance at photography. Particularly ironic direction for camera makers since the phones get bigger and bigger.
DenWil -- The purpose of downsizing a camera is not to make it more or less hand-holdable. The purpose is to make it easier to carry with accessories in a pocket, purse, or small bag. Your critique totally misses the point.
It works only in conjunction with Apple products? Does it work standalone for the majority of people who use other smartphones or no smartphone? Am I missing something here?
jcmarfilph: You don't inspect pictures on a tiny credit card size display no matter what resolution it is. Retina display on iPhone is a crap and so as this. Bring this resolution to desktop monitors.
Joe, you don't get it. It's not about the desktop monitors, nor is it about bragging. It's about the relevance of high rez on a teeny 5" screen.
AbrasiveReducer: I can see a future Nikon with SLRs and phones. They have the name recognition and product placement down. I rarely see anybody with a Nikon point and shoot, so why fight for a bigger share of something that's going away?
BTW, in the second line that's supposed to be "manufacturers".
I don't see ANY tourists with Nikon Coolpix cameras ... and I live in a tourist destination.
Sam Carriere: How is this interesting, relevant or important?DPReview just seems to get hoplesser and hopelesser.I now consult it once or twice a week just to see how crazy or useless the most recent content is ... which puts you in the same league as Ken Rockwell.
Innovative? I disagree. It is simply wireless flash with master and slave. Using a wimpy phone-camera flash as the slave doesn't change the concept. It's absolutely arrogant and delusional of Apple to think they invented something ... again.
moimoi: 18 is not wide enough on APS-C. But Sigma is clearly putting an interesting new set of lenses.
APS-C 18-35mm actually works for Nikon (FF equiv. 27-52.5mm. OTOH, it doesn't work for Canon, where the FF equiv. is 29-55mm. The wide angle difference between FF 27mm and FF 29mm is significant for the majority of shooters. I would buy a 27-52.5mm/1.8, but NOT a 29-55mm/1.8.
Lajos Hajdu: Small point: the title is wrong.
"Sigma to start shipping USB dock IN May"or"Sigma to ship USB dock FROM May"
Heh heh. That small little island sure has a very big atitude. We have "The Open", as if there is no other "Open". Then there is "The Championships". Same thing. I've also heard Brits call their English as "International English" vs. "Amaerican English". BTW, that former Empire was pretty big ... and pretty long ago. Now, weren't we talking about some kind of lens?
IcyVeins: The Sony A99 is going to utterly destroy this camera and the D800
I hope Sony comes out with a competitive full-frame update at a good price, plus an array of new lenses. Both Canon and Nikon seem to think that full-frame automatically means $$$$$.
jimread: OK so one can get a 4ft X 3ft print off this, whose got the room to display it and whose got 16 gig of ram to process the files?
To "rrr_hhh" -- Actually, architecture shooters do go with Canon lenses specifically for theirTS-E 24mm and 17mm lenses. Nikon's offerings have nothing that comes close for this specific application, and architects would welcome some competition here. I am an architect and have done a lot of architectural photography over the last 30 years.
MPA1: As a professional, what I would dearly like is a small easily carried camera that offers good IQ, good AF and a useful variety of lenses. I do not need or want scene recognition, video, face detection, auto ISO or any other of the latest fripperies.
The Leica M9P with autofocus as fast as a D3s would be my dream small camera I think.
Dapple, I'm always a little puzzled by comments like yours. Whilst the features can be turned off, they certainly add to the complexity of the menus, making them less intuitive and more cumbersome. Further, they add unnecessary cost to the camera. MPA's comments are certainly valid for him and many others. MPA apparently wants a simple still camera. This is not puzzling at all.