Sigh - can't they just release one decent product that works for everyone? Hey look at all these choices! We'll make you feel bad if you choose the cheapest - for only a bit more money you could have this other superior product! Well I tell you what, I just won't buy any of your products because sometimes it would be nice to just have one decent option and not have to make decisions. Hey this meets all your colour calibration needs! Great I'll have it.
wolfie: This is what the J1 should have been (or even the V1) - a straightforward design instead of the offbeat offerings on most so far with odd control positions or even controls missing and buried in menus. Looks small enough, and cheap enough, to replace my Canon G12 for a compact walkabout camera.
Starwolfy - so are you saying that companies deliberately make products worse than they could do?! Sounds like a massive flaw with capitalism and suggests that if you buy anything at all you shouldn't buy a product until at least the third version when some of those features they've deliberately withheld have been finally included.
grasscatcher: There are several types of devices on the market for backing up SD cards. The cheaper ones take the form of something like this: http://www.amazon.com/EZOPower-Portable-Wireless-External-Smartphone/dp/B00EP13JBC/ref=pd_sim_sbs_p_3?ie=UTF8&refRID=0K1FRCG26R96S94C5D98 and other variations from other makes.
Should work in the field if you have an iPhone or Adroid phone. Also serves as additional storage for your smartphone/tablet.
With that being said, I don't see any issues with the WD unit being reviewed. Yes, it has been done before; however, competition is always a good thing for the consumer, so more power to them!
I'm not too worried about the spinning drive. I've had a WD Passport for about six years now that still functions great, has been carried around in various pockets many times, in the field, etc. and still shows no signs of impending failure. With that being said, an SSD would be nice, but will cost more.
Grasscatcher, Sadly my experience differs with WD external hard drives. I've had 3 fail on me. Fair enough one I dropped on a wooden floor from 3 feet but the other two were very well looked after. They were all the WD Elements type drives that really were quite flimsy / the case was a soft plastic. They seem to have improved things a bit with harder, less easily squished cases but still I don't understand why external HDD cases aren't properly durable, either very hard plastic or some form of metal - even with some shock protection inside. With flash memory so cheap in USB pen drives I don't understand why we can't buy large capacity (min 500gb) external SSDs for a reasonable price as they should be much less prone to failure.
grasscatcher: I should also mention that, at least with my Nexus 7, I can use the USB OTG port, with appropriate app, to read/copy SD cards to the device, then copy the files back from the device to a portable USB OTG flash drive.
Grasscatcher, A major reason for me buying a Nexus 7 was to back up my photos when away on holiday in March. I bought a USB OTG cable, downloaded and paid for an app and just couldn't get it to work. I thus didn't even take it with me. Why it's so complicated to hook up a camera to a Nexus 7 and copy photos to and from the device (and view them) is beyond me. Can it only work with SD cards? Why not CF?
Bit surprised at a gold award for a camera that is noisy even at low ISOs.
For me, IQ is easily the most important thing in a camera. Other things matter of course but not as much as that. I'd be very reluctant to give any camera a gold award that doesn't even have good IQ at 100.
I don't get the negativity about this. It's an interesting experiment. Obviously he's had to cheat a bit by using the binoculars, but that in itself is interesting. I didn't know that was possible. Trying different ways to get the best out of a phone cam. Showing good pics can be achieved. Most people in the crowd will be using either a compact digicam or a phone cam. This shows what can be achieved with experimentation and a good eye. There will be tens of thousands of pixel perfect images of the Olympics online for those who desire that sort of thing. This is something different. (Although it'd have been interesting to try the new Nokia Pure View 808 without the binoculars.)
Russell Fielding: Struggling to see much of interest from those three photos. Maybe they look better larger. The last two especially could've been taken by anyone with a compact camera to hand. They're snaps to me. Sure the carelessness of carrying a baby like that is semi-arresting but is the only thing that makes the picture interesting. The first one of the buildings shows perhaps some understanding of composition but the content of the photo, to me, seems humdrum. My points are not to diss the guy so much as to suggest that on the basis of those three photographs the majority of people on this website could have taken similar or better shots. And following on from that is it not luck that some photographers become famous and some don't? Or perhaps these are unrepresentative of the guy and his other stuff is far superior.
Hi Barty, thanks for your thoughts.
Oh I agree re the worth of photographing the 'banal, desolate, dreary, ugly' as well as the traditionally beautiful stuff but is the mere snapping of the everyday 'art' that deserves publication in a book? Or just documenting a certain time and place with a mere click of the shutter. To me there is no artistry with the second two photos. There is arguably more on the average Flickr or deviantart page. Where is the effort, the composition, the thought process? I like what you say about the first shot although I do think it's bigging it up a bit. The white border encourages the viewer to think 'this is art', the guy providing the perspective could have just been accidental, the 'historical' nature of the photo always adds a certain something that a similar shot today would not (until the future).
You might be right about the context thing, although consistency of style and approach don't in themselves confer quality.
Struggling to see much of interest from those three photos. Maybe they look better larger. The last two especially could've been taken by anyone with a compact camera to hand. They're snaps to me. Sure the carelessness of carrying a baby like that is semi-arresting but is the only thing that makes the picture interesting. The first one of the buildings shows perhaps some understanding of composition but the content of the photo, to me, seems humdrum. My points are not to diss the guy so much as to suggest that on the basis of those three photographs the majority of people on this website could have taken similar or better shots. And following on from that is it not luck that some photographers become famous and some don't? Or perhaps these are unrepresentative of the guy and his other stuff is far superior.