Look before you...never mind, the photos are awesome.
Francis Carver: Sculptors of the World -- Beware !!!!
Anyhow, one things is obvious here for all: the good people of Japan have too much -- no, make that way too much idle time on their hands.
We were the sculptors of the Space Shuttle!
JakeB: So, after having carefully studied all the graphs and analysed Roger's conclusions, it looks like [insert my favorite brand here] wins, right?
I think it's best to concentrate on the likelihood of getting a really good lens or mediocre copy, not about winning.
Vlad S: It's worth remembering, that the only reason there's something to photograph at the Tayor Swift's show is that her creative team and investors put their imagination, labor, and finances into the production. The photographers are simply riding on Swift's coattails, and the show management is entitled to control how people, who did not contribute to their show, use it to their own ends.
What would happen if nobody took pictures of her show?
groucher: Not bad in the centre of the frame but the edges and corners are shockingly bad. Think I'll stick with my old metal Nikon primes - much better.
I think you need more megapixels so you can render out of focus bokeh with more detail.
1Dx4me: i have about 13 "L" lenses plus ef85 f1.8 and i have never experienced purchasing a canon lens and it was not performing excellent right out of the box. i have never done any micro-adjustment on my lenses at all. so, what is this "different copy" talk all about? am i the only one on earth to be so "fortunate"? sounds "fishy" to me ;-)
Buy some Rokinon lenses or some of the cheaper Sigmas and see if they're all identical.
iAPX: Great work, that explain why some are satisfied and some other not so, having same body and lens model.
Exactly. Some people obsess over DxO numbers as if the lens in the test was the one they own. Most variations are too small to worry about, but not all.
Roger's self-deprecating tone aside, lens variation is about as un-geeky as you can get. Sure, the charts are pure DxO, but the conclusions--how likely is it that your lens will be good--are pretty important.
turvyT: Canon 5ds gallery tells you something about the camera. These ones, barely. Someone had a nice trip. Good.
No DxO numbers?
Is the sky over the Space Needle really that color? I would like to see some images that really require 50mp but that aside, these look fine.
Terrific shots. Number 8 has the Peter Lik thing going; light rays and a sort of inspirational or maybe religious vibe. Print it very large and it should be worth millions. What computer company wouldn't want this in their lobby? Seriously, these are great photos.
All this technology. But it seems that when they try to get the best quality from a compact camera it still ends up pretty big.
AbrasiveReducer: Three elements?
I still think a 3-element design is closer to an extension tube than a telextender but maybe Tokina knows something everybody else doesn't.
AP Hovasse: Lost the Plot?I come here for photography, not for movie making, and when I bought the first version of this camera, it was all about the awesome digital raw files it came up with. NOT video! All i hear about is 4K and 60fps, and frankly, that's not why I purchased this beautiful camera . Could we maybe just get back to that, you know the photography aspect of this camera? How does this stacked sensor affect the photos?????? Are the files better than before? How? Is low light photography about to advance past the Nikon low light abilities? With this camera, can I continue to crop inside the frame and still come up with terrific images? Are the colours real? Can we please see the RAW files? Dpreview, I've been a fan for many many years, but this obsession with video over still images really disappoints me.
I'm not interested in video either but realistically, what's left to add in the way of useful features? Really extended dynamic range without smoky HDR is not here yet and other than that, plenty of cameras will make great 8x10 or 11x14 prints so what's left besides video?
Perhaps this is a poor comparison but one reason Adobe switched to subscriptions is that they ran out of features to add that people would pay for.
Jennyhappy2: Looks to be a hit...selling at #1 on Amazon.com
Why wouldn't it be? Check back in 90 days and see if its #1.
Other than the sharpness, looks like a great lens.
Well, it's better than The Interview. But even in 360 degree panorama, it doesn't appear to be much fun, IMO.
nRequimM: On what matters: look at the image quality - RX100 IV is marginally worse than Rx100v3 at high resolution setting; it's slightly softer and more noisy. One could guess that innovations e.g. stacked sensor needs time to optimise, and that RX100 is in the 3rd version. Though I'm amazed that the Sony marketing machine has brainwashed dpreview readers.
Innovation is what matters. If you just want a camera with great photo quality, there were plenty before this camera.
Tieu Ngao: Overpriced and "made-in-China"!!!No, thanks. I'm happy with my Nikon Coolpix A (APS-C sensor & made in Japan).
Just one reason why Apple is so incredibly profitable.