louslens: I would question a little more closely any of your recommendations. If you expect us to believe that they will not be skewed in favor of products you are trying to sell, I have a bridge to sell. BAD DECISION on the part on the part of DPR
In the future letting people down, having them not read the site and never buying from gearshop will become a good decision?
Those look stylish?
Dave Knadler: Wish I had waited a bit longer before buying the 20mm f/1.7. Now I suppose eBay will be filling up with the Pannies.
Yeah, mine's going up. The handling of the 17 f1.8 is just wonderful, better bokeh and better contrast. The 20 is sharper.
f.google to f.googleplex.
Lee Jay: When clicking on the image, the default should be 1:1 view. JMO.
Please no. Fit to screen is a nice way point.
Kirk Tuck: Just used the a99 for a three day conference here in Austin. The EVF was perfect for "pre-chimping" in mixed lighting for stage shots, etc. The 3200 and 6400 were very clean and the body and controls felt just right in my medium sized hands. I think it's a remarkably good camera for any professional who does not shoot fast moving sports stuff. Don't underestimate the appeal to working professionals of the EVF. It's a great addition for me. And the front dial on the camera, set to exposure compensation, means you never have to take your finger off the shutter to mess with EC when actively shooting speeches, etc.
Bonus, the EVF is much better than OVF under very low light.
Thing I thought I would never used that came in handy? The Smart Teleconverter.
I think DP Review's rating is just right. You buy this camera for the sensor and the EVF. If you are dropping $3000 you know why your are buying it and those features outweigh all the anti-fanboy rhetoric.
A pro only photographs the current U.S. President.
SunnyFlorida: 3 Super zooms in a row???
Could you explain how they lose credibility by reviewing super zooms?
Kodachrome200: do people who buy superzooms even care? why not review lenses that there is some question of the optical quality. A sigma superzoom is bound to be optically weak. maybe it will be good compared to its class. but again i ask when people buy these lenses we know are weak do they really care.
It isn't a question of those who buy them but those who are thinking about buying them. They're better than they used to be. Some day they might be "good enough."
Pikme: Question for dpreview - The camera has been selling since the beginning of June, your photos were taken in July and August ---- why are we just now seeing them in mid-November? Sincere question, not meant to be a snarky comment.
oselimg: ".... what an unbelievably pathetic and insulting explanation. ..."
What part of it is unbelievable? And how is it insulting? It is kind of pathetic but who hasn't had a low priority project they've kicked along forever?
featherwear: Is there any chance you guys going to give K-30 a full review? Can't wait to have a look at your opinion on this camera.
It would be cool if they did. Get parts of the review earlier.
Roland Karlsson: God Jul och Gott nytt år från Sverige.(Merry Chrismas and a Happy New Year from Sweden)
Now, where have you hidden ol grumpy Phil, Simon?
It would be fun if he popped in some time and said hello! He can be ol grumpy himself for all I care.
Happy New Year Phil!
He runs this place (see link below) these days, right?
pami24: Instead of new lens reviews we now get this nonsense
Perhaps you should put the "This article is not by the review staff. No reviews were harmed by the publication of this article." disclaimer at the top of all the contracted content like this. Might prevent 10% of comments like the above.
Any camera gear that looks that cool has a home on my cameras. Maybe not the e-pl1...
therickman: You people just don't get it.
Would you spend 3-10 hours of your time writing, researching, re-writing, editing, proofreading, re-writing some more, and taking photos to submit an article to a major newspaper or magazine... and not get paid?
DPReview - as much as they want to label themselves simply as an online photography resource and discussion forum - is actually a magazine. It's a magazine in the form of a website. It's a webzine. Seriously, what's the difference between DPReview and "Digital Photo Magazine" other than that the latter is available in print form? They both carry news, product reviews, editorials, articles, contests and advertisements. It's just that DPReview isn't printed. That's it. That's the only difference, no matter how DPR markets itself. So again I ask you, would you spend your valuable time, talent and creative writing skills to contribute articles to "Digital Photo Magazine" and not get paid? There's no difference between the two.
Have you ever seen "wizfaq" on any of Joseph Wisniewski's forum posts? He's giving that away for free now....
"no cost"? Really? They built an entire infrastructure to allow visitors to do this. This involves hiring people like me. And I cost a lot more than a writer.
Is that Arthur Dent in the first image?