whyamihere: Dear Canon,
Cute camera. If this were Photokina 2012, I'm sure everyone would have been excited. Today, it's just the Canon 70D, Spray & Pray Edition.
I'm sure you'll sell tons, anyway, because: Canon.
Lassoni: There are other manufacturers out there besides Canikon.
Joseph Black: Yes, Canon does need to excite if they want to stem their falling DSLR sales. If they released this camera in 2012 or '13 before the 70D, it would have been amazing. They would have sold tons more, and they would have sold a bunch more 70D's as a 'pedestrian' 7D Mk II. Now, it's just rehashed technology stuck in a tougher body with moar framez that nobody really asked for or needed.
Remembering the advent of the iPod, it was successful because it held more than 32MB worth of songs and didn't require burning a CD. You could pick one of a thousand songs and play it at will. It wasn't a status symbol when I bought one - 90% of the world didn't even know what an MP3 player was when it came out.
Canon is good at marketing, and that's about as much as they have in common with Apple. After that, Canon supports their pro customers and occasionally innovates, which can be pretty much said for Nikon.
chlamchowder: I'm a Nikon user, and this camera looks awesome, even for the rather high price. It has everything a daylight action shooter/birder could ask for - an excellent AF system, a high burst rate without having to crop, and a deep buffer. This thing would be awesome for shooting soccer/football, or pretty much any outdoor sport where a large field is involved. I wish it had a Nikon mount.
And for those of you complaining that it doesn't have FF ISO performance - the best FF for action you can get at that price is the D610. It doesn't shoot at 10 fps, and doesn't have the 7D II's pixel density for telephoto reach.
As a photographer who shoots Nikon for daylight action and birds, nothing on offer here really has me excited. Nobody - and I do mean 'nobody' - needs 10 fps to get good photos. You could instead learn to do weird things like compose without cropping, anticipate action, and take shots that are worth keeping instead of taking 200 in hopes that 1 or 2 are decent.
I'd honestly rather have the 70D and pocket the change for a good telephoto lens, even if the ISO performance of the 7D Mk II is somehow magically better, despite it likely having the same sensor. From Nikon, the D7100 or the D610 would probably do it for most people.
joe6pack: 300mm without stabilization is going to be tough to use!
Trying to remind people that cameras with the lens mounts where OS was not included have in-body stabilization is about as tough.
DrLogic: No stabilization for Sony? The extra reach is useless without stabilization... And this is a very large range kit lens - the single IQ compromise range somebody takes on a holiday to replace a whole a whole bunch of lenses, so they aren't likely to be using a tripod. Doesn't make sense.
The specs list is wrong. This is for A mount, not FE. Releasing a lens for APS-C sensors for the FE mount would make less sense than releasing an un-stabilized telephoto lens for a body that doesn't feature IBIS.
Even if they did release it with OS so one could put it on a small E-mount camera, the thing significantly outweighs the average mirrorless Alpha, and getting the right adapter to regain AF adds even more weight. Saying Sigma is somehow missing out on a larger market by cutting out E-mount camera owners is nonsense.
Also, I've tried IBIS vs OS. Hardly a difference. People who say there is one are crazy. Charging differently to make an entirely separate line of product for a smaller overall market is equally as crazy.
AJorger: Only 1/4000s?1/200s sync?
What to serve fast lenses with this camera? Nikon is regressing. Do not play with people's moneyCanon does not have cameras with 1/4000 sec...
"Canon does not have cameras with 1/4000 sec..."
Sure they do. It's called the EOS 6D, and it only has 1/180s sync.
Quit your moaning and get your facts straight, son.
ekaton: Nice, but 24MP would have been it.
Because nobody can photograph a thing with anything less than 6000 x 4000 pixels.
Heck, Fuji may as well have released an iPhone with a shutter speed dial and a manual aperture ring.
captura: POW! Take that, Sony!
Yeah, take that, Sony, with your products that evidently don't compete in the same category as this camera!......POW!
BarnET: D5300 what we don't like about it."18-140mm is large and expensive"Then get it with another lens!
"Needs good lenses to make the most of the sensor"Yeah let's dislike an camera for it's ability to out resolve some lenses
No touchscreen well the canon has it so fair point.
I have to agree. If the complaint with the D3300 is the 18-55mm kit lens is degrading the performance of the 24MP sensor, one really shouldn't opine that the D5300 lacks the ability of being packaged along with the very same lens they just denigrated.
mike winslow: does having a floppy mirror make anything better? good riddance, and we can use the glass on our mirrorless cameras.. lol Sorry if this was supposed to be an SLR only party.. :P
It's getting harder to recommend an entry level DSLR camera over a mirrorless model, especially when compactness and equivalent image qualities are concerned.
(See, Mike Winslow, that's what a considerate opinion looks like. One of these days, you'll graduate from being a ham-fisted, self-gratifying internet troll, and you'll be able to write something like that. Oh, the possibilities.)
VadymA: I just don't get it. I always thought the main reason people switch to Apple is for such crative and user friendly tools like iPhoto, Aperture, iMovie, FinalCut, etc. But now they are ditching everything what made Apple such a success. How are they going to differentiate themselves if not for those applications? Personally, I don't see any reason to upgrade to another iMac now. If I owned Apple stock, I would sell it now. I haven't seen anything over the last three years from Apple to boost my confidence in their furture. I think it is going to be a repeat of Apple's collapse just like when Steve left it first time in the 90th.
Anybody who thinks that has their head stuck in the late 90's & early 00's when that may have been true. You probably could have made the switch to Windows at anytime in the last several years & been just as well off. Apple's stock, however, will be just fine without Aperture, I'm sure. They've been differentiating themselves with their music business, their tablet & phone business, their app business, and all the money they make off of the licensing that allows other companies to use all of the above.
Timbukto: What is happening is that the Apple platform has *long* shifted from a platform of mostly creative developers, to a platform of mostly brain-dead consumerism. Most of the money is now from consumers of images, movies, music, and apps, and not necessarily the development of them (although in that case it would be plain to see that its by far the apps and content providers that profit share here). But independent developers of content? Not much $$ there and an infinitesimally small piece of the pie Apple currently has compared to the bread-dead consumerism market.
Everyone over-inflates how much the 'creative community' supported Apple during their non-Steve Jobs days. Apple diversified their offerings too much in the early to late 90's, and they nearly imploded because of it. It took them nearly a decade to return to profitability, and it wasn't because of their support of creatives. It's because they had a dumb business strategy, and it took them a really long time to right their ship.
DotCom Editor: Here's the question no reporter has yet asked, so I will: What incentive did Adobe offer to Apple to get Aperture killed off?
Probably none. Apple probably did what they usually did: Math. Install base x competitive price ≠ Cost of separate development. (Yes, I am largely implying that the install base for Aperture is a lot smaller than what people think it is.)
They did the same thing when they killed off their Xserve division.
You may be shocked to know that computing, in general, has been rapidly trending towards consumerism since the early 1980's when the term 'personal computer' was coined. We're just seeing the tail end of that, at this point. If you're going to call out Apple for enabling 'brain-dead consumerism', don't forget to give Microsoft, Google, every mobile phone company, every wireless carrier, every ISP, and every manufacturer on the planet that has anything to do with modern computing, equal amounts of blame.
jaykumarr: Dpreview, There should be a measure at 500mm. After 400mm jumping 200 mm to 600 does not cut it.
My opinion is, for the price this lens is very good. But 600mm is mere feel good, since at 600mm it just provides 10%-15% more resolution than a 400mm prime. (even comparing with this lens itself, it will bring about 20-25% more detail only zooming from 400 -> 600)
The canon 200-400mm resolves 15% more throughout the range, but too pricey.
So, your complaint is it's not as good as a 400mm prime that would cost about as much - if not significantly more - than this lens? And, at 600mm, it's just not as good if you took a crop from said expensive 400mm lens? A $10,000 zoom lens out resolves a $1,000 lens?
Absolutely shocking. Do tell us more.
Nikon expects about $200 more for effectively the same thing, and Canon wants nearly $2,000 more. What's your point?
eastwestphoto: Unfortunately After market lens makers like Tamron banked all there sales on DSLR kings Nikon & Canon. When the Mirrorless cameras of m4/3 rds arrived in 2009 the lenses did NOT! Its been that way for years, Sigma, Tamron, etc. third party m4/3 rds and Sony e-mount FF series lenses are far and few between. maybe they didn't realize Mirrorless DSLM cameras were so terrific; whatever there EXCUSE is, there still FIVE years behind the sales curves. maybe they didn't WANT to pay the licensing fees? Never the less the marketplace is huge for Aftermarket in m4/3 rd's & Sony FE series, so its about time; well i been saying and posting this for five years! Even at the Javis center trade show of latest and greatest in NYC once a year, I told tamron, & Sigma too wake up! All I got was Blank stares from the sales Reps. Maybe its NOT a free marketplace and the KINGS are controlling optical capitalism? Don@Eastwestphoto
Sigma & Tamron probably gave you blank stares for a number of reasons:
• They both design lenses that are branded by Oly & Panny. They don't necessarily have to produce their own branded lenses to survive/thrive.• Sony, Oly, and Panny, all have proprietary technologies that they absolutely refuse to share. Sigma has mentioned this in more than one recent interview, especially re: Sony, and Panasonic mentioned this outright re: Their new DFD AF tech.• Getting large camera & software companies to build lens profiles for Tamron & Sigma has been an uphill battle. Nothing makes a competitor look trigger-shy than ensuring their lenses consistently look like garbage when attached to your cameras.
Good luck with your conspiracy theories & lack of facts, though. I hear they pair well with a fashionable tin foil hat.
chiane: Fuji needs to stop crying wolf with the words, 'fast AF'.
I'm sure they will... just as soon as Panasonic, Olympus, Samsung, Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Pentax, all do the same. Because, y'know, marketing.
jonikon: Richard,You missed the Nikkor 18.5mm f1.8 in your list of enthusiast lenses. It's hard to take your opinions seriously Richard, when you don't even bother to vet your research before you go about bashing a camera system you don't use and know so little about. You are missing something else Richard: Journalist objectivity.
You are missing something, as well, and it was likely the part at the top of the page where it says "Articles > Opinions".
Objectivity was never the point.
Mystery Gardener: 'Canon and Nikon executives both mentioned that their professional users are increasingly focused on video, and as such they're very aware that they’ll have to react to that need when planning the next generation of high-end cameras.'
Obviously Canikon and the others would like to sell you 4k video or at least the idea of 4k video. Not dissing 4k video or video in general but I seldom see anybody actually shooting video with their prosumer cameras. Even less do I hear someone who is actually shooting video with their prosumer cam wishing aloud it was 4k video :-)
I know plenty of local professionals who shoot video with their DSLRs. I went to an AV convention in Las Vegas last June, and the company hired to do all of the video recording for the forums & meetings used nothing but 5D's and 7D's. Certain angle shots in Showtime's 'Dexter' were captured on Nikon DSLRs.
Rank amateurs & prosumers may never use the video functions on a DSLR, but pros do all the time.