Marksphoto

I'll be the first one in line for this beauty.

Thumbs up for Sigma!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Today's street photography shot with digital cameras will never envoke emotions of true photos which film era brought to us.

The quality is there but the character is missing and since digital is so cheap and available practically to everyone there is nothing unique about today's photographs and since supply and demand still exists, digital photos will never have value to people who appreciate true art.

I can do the same quality with my old Nikon D50. The new sensor may impress at low ISO shots but daylight shots look all the same.

Where are the high ISO samples? and why hasn't the quality changed much since 10 years ago. Looks good on paper but we need real dynamic range improvements now, stop waisting our time on pixel count and insignificant improvements Nikon and Canon.

I guess speed and ruggedness makes up for image quality improvements but for the real photographers D7000 is still the king.

Thank goodness I didn't buy the D7000 a week ago as I planned. Now I will probably find it even cheaper on craigslist.

Thank you Nikon for premature obsolescence :)

Finally I would be able to take a wedding photograph with myself included in it cuz guests always say you have been taking photos all day long, let me take a picture of you.

It may make me rething on what to wear on the day of the photoshoot. The possibilities are limitless ;)

now we need a 360 degree fill flash cuz I like to be lit properly

do you shoot passport photos?

I think landscape artists will benefit from a new breed of cameras which will be like Leica Monochrome but shoots 3 consecutive shot through 3 RGB color filters, which will be combined with internal camera software into a color image.

The grey highlights and unnatural colors of today's digital cameras make me not want to photograph landscapes these days.

Just a thought...

image quality looks the same as from all digital canon's I ever owned starting from my Canon 10d.

These samples don't say anything about improvement in image quality to me. But we are buying them for comfort and speed nowadays...

The only thing to hope for in the future is that the dynamic range will improve drastically and I still prefer the look of film. Digital photography has improved insignificantly in the past 10 years and still has a long way to go.

Perhaps an entire sensor re-design is long-time due instead of chasing more pixel counts.

hey nikon, I have a few nikon film cameras and a nikon 5000 ed coolscan scanner. Just out of curiousity. Would I qualify?
or lets say I have a few nikon digital cameras, can I get 20gb per camera I own?

Or lets say I own a pentax, does that mean I am not worthy of your web space at all?

as a wedding photographer I need terabytes of storage.

Nikon storage offering is only for family photos storage, nothing new. I have been using photobucket for that for a long long time now.

can't justify paying $500 less and get an inferior product. Sorry Tamron, I cannot afford you that's why I chose Canon

1. I would love to try whale meat and i feel sorry for all conservationists who think that a whale should have more rights than a pig. It's all food to me as far as I am concerned!

2. 1.4 is interesting but I would love to see an opinion on the functionality of this camera once the most hated photography celebrity writes a review on it. I hope he also placed an order on it already. Especially I would like to see a review comparison with S100 speed and ease of use before I even make a decision to buy this instrument.

3. Cameras will be available and better ones will follow, no sense in premature rushing on the purchase. I would rather wait at least for the first firmware upgrade to see if everything is kosher :) and in my case I will wait for Canon's counter- response

4. My name is Mark Konkolski and I live in Beatiful British Columbia

why does everything from canon has to look so gray. The highlights and mid tones are pasty gray. Looks icky. 5D Mark 3 is no exception. I wish their jpegs were a little bit cheerful

I can make better pictures with film and if I were a hobbyist I wouldn't even bother with digital photography. Who would want to have the same crap on their hard drives as the other million photographers do?

if you want to stand out upgrade yourself a Canon Elan for pennies on ebay and your photos will look so much better than anything digital can offer and if you have the extra $2000 to burn get yourself a decent film scanner like I did. Even scanned film is preferred to my 5D Mark2 files when shot side by side, I won't even comment how much better the prints look overall.

If you are a wedding photographer and shoot thousands of photos than an upgrade to mark3 maybe worth it to you. The rest are just equipment junkies and not photographers

pictures look ugly, skintones are gray and lifeless. Looks as if there was a piece of transparent plastic placed in front of the lens while shooting.

another reason to shoot raw and if you are a raw shooter the upgrade from Mark 2 is irrelevant.

I can't tell the difference in image quality improvement. I can do the same in jpeg mode with 5D Mark2 and just tell everyone I shot it with the new camera.

Something tells me that you are not doing your comparison tests correctly. Maybe you are using a different lens, I don't know, on a 12x18 print you shouldn't see any difference from 8mp to 16 mp other than exposure/white balance variables. Are you shooting jpegs or raw?

If they are both 1.5 crop you wouldn't be able to tell one is better than the other in almost any reasonable print size up to 24x30" print and even in mural sized prints I doubt if you did a proper side by side that you would be able to tell which one is which.

My name is Mark and I live in beautiful British Columbia

for dpreview test charts I want to know

1. are they using one lens to make these tests and if not then these tests are bogus.

2. why is the white balance and density on jpegs is different from test to test. This tells me the tests are bogus

3. if all raw files compared sided by side were done in ACR then for those people who use capture and dpp these tests are bogus

4. if all raw files compared side by side were done in capture against dpp then for people who use ACR these tests are irrelevant

5. these tests don't represent the quality that this camera is capable of outputing because each of us use different methods of post production and for each of us we need to see a similar process of post processing in order to claim these test charts to be relevant to our needs.

6. dpreview is a website that makes a profit, therefore we don't know if the samples were fabricated in favour of manufacturers in order to make more money.

i can go on and on but I think everyone got the point.

I shoot weddings for a living and most of my portfolio is still made up of images made with my 20D, D70, and some from 5D mark 2. If you review them all in a slideshow or printed at reasonable sizes and by reasonable I mean 24x30 prints nobody can ever tell the difference. So the idiots are those who think the tool is what sucks. None of my clients have ever said anything about one picture looking inferior to another when seeing them on my 50" HDTV during my presentation and that tells me that I can still shoot weddings with 10d and D70's if I was broke and nobody would ever notice especially the idiots that fall for dpreview's test charts.

I got some 24x30 printed from my 20D canons and if anybody has a lot of time on their hands to come to beautiful British Columbia and view them and tell me that they would look better on 5D Mark 2 or on D800 I dare you but be aware, I might have shot them on Mark 2 and just told u it was 300D in which case you are the idiot twice!

These are the silliest test ideas ever which have nothing to do with the quality you should expect out of your nikons and canons. Are these guys joking me? I have no clue if they use the same lenses or different lenses but we should be raising red flags that we are being duped!

I can fabricate a better sample image from my rebel 300d than the Nikon D800 and never tell anybody and everybody will be discussing how 300d takes better photos than D800. These tests are solely for marketing purposes to trick people who subscribe to glossy magazines.

I do beleive that Canon, Nikon, Pentax is all the same, given the same sensor size, everything else is just hype.

And sorry to say, if you already own canon's lenses and thinking of jumping to Nikon in hopes that your photography will improve that just makes you an idiot.

My name is Mark and I live in beautiful British Columbia.

it tell u that u never tried to experiment yourself