I don't reply to private messages.
pacnwhobbyist: Nikon has always made one of the better kit lenses, IMO. These results are not bad. I don't think though that the lens shows what the D5300 is truly capable of. But as a starter lens, it's perfectly satisfactory.
Which one would that be? Nikon has some very good affordable lenses, like 18-105mm, for example. But this kit lens doesn't look like something to dream about.
photofan1986: Impressive quality, I must say!
What's impressive about them? -- looks just like any other average kit lens.
Nothing is said how the pictures were post-processed, whether they were shot in raw, etc.
DonSantos: wow. worst design I've seen in a long time.
This camera is designed for shooting selfies, nothing more.
mpgxsvcd: Hasselbad wishes they had thought of this first. And that is not a good thing.
One day we'll see a freak camera display on DPR. This one will be in a good company with Pentax K-01 and that Frankenblad.
ChrisKramer1: A most tastefully styled camera (or should I say"camerang"?)
Well done Sigma, I can just imagine people queuing up to buy one...
Check you spelling. I'm sure you meant to say: "the most distastefully styled camera"
As far as I remember this patent was discussed more than a year ago. Finally it got into production.Though Sigma says it won't affect resolution, it will. The most sensitive color when it comes to determining resolution is green, but the sensor has quad blue layer. Though every layer in Foveon sensor is sensitive to the whole spectrum, the absorption is different. The thin blue layer with quad pixels won't make much difference in real life, the performance will be very similar to the 3 layer 4.9M dot design, except for strong contrast BW test charts.
1) Why is non-kit lens used? Isn't DPR policy when reviewing cameras to use the standard equipment?2) Why nothing is said if the images were post processed, whether they were converted from raw, etc.?
I'm starting wondering how useful the new studio test tool is. There are so little visible differences between various cameras, that one may think they all produce the same image quality, until you start shooting them side by side or even look at various sample photos to understand how vastly image quality varies between them. Just last year I tested 6 different cameras, all of them look very similar on this test scene, all of them have very different image quality in real shooting.I think the old comparison tool was a lot more representative.
And now a trivia question: name at least one superzoom lens that isn't a cr@p.
So slooow, hardly usable. The FF version is so much better.
This FF lens is far superior to the APS-C version. It's APS-C equivalent is 18-200mm f/2.3-4.2, which is quite usable, unlike the slow f/3.5-6.3. Or if you are using APS-C mirrorless put it on a focal reducer and get the same benefits. The APS-C version is just boring and slow.And as an observation, despite all those ignorant posts that crop sensor somehow means smaller lenses, because of smaller image circle, this is just another demonstration that image circle has little or no effect on the lens size.
Robert Garcia NYC: skin texture does not look good at iso 800. Is there a way to disable NR on X-T1?
Yes, but they you'll be complaining about the noise :-)
xue24: "getting a pro to shot the samples!!" are all over the real world samples gallery here in dpreview. personally, i think dpreview is doing a good job in fact, by mistake or not. cause over 90% of us out there will shot exactly like this. a pro will make all sample galleries here look amazing even if it is by a $100 p&s, but is it true for the rest of us? the camera don't make a better photographer.
is dpreview real world samples gallery any good...personally, yes!! cause it is real for many, including myself :P
any camera could be good if it is in the right hand
That thought occurred to me also.
It might be good to have two sections to the review, one like the existing one that would show what an average Joe the photographer could get from the camera. That would cool down the unhealthy hysteria about the new gear. And another section showing what the best efforts from a highly competent person. That would give an idea to the advanced photographers if there is something the camera can do better than what they currently have.
Max De Martino: Somebody is not satisfied of these images, so will be not satisfied also of mine, the first wedding shot with a X-T1...http://maxdemartinocom.wordpress.com/2014/02/04/il-primo-matrimonio-al-mondo-scattato-con-una-fuji-x-t1/
what are those ugly green hallos? http://maxdemartinocom.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/dscf9259.jpg
Thou shalt never shoot people in the back.
jeremybarton: I own the E-M 5 it does everything i need it to do! i sold my2 Nikon because of that ! Olympus E-M 10 is on order!
Man, you're not in the shrink's office, it's DPR here!
The Pentax has great colors. Sony has reasonably good colors. The rest? -- just your average P&S.
digiart: All photos on the first page of the gallery are taken @ ISO 400 or higher. The nighttime photos I can understand why, but why use noisier ISO 400 and high shutter speed on so many photos in daytime when you are using a fast lens?
DR200%, etc. only prevents blowing highlights, it has no beneficial effect on shadows, only increasing noise and adding smearing. That's not a gimmick one would want to use in real life shooting.
That's not a samples gallery. It's a collection of random snapshots that demonstrate nothing.The only common theme to all these pictures is cool tones, which may or may not be specific to this camera.