tkbslc: Doesn't really seem that small to me with even the kit lens. It's like a normal small DSLR without a grip is all.
wait until you hold one. It's smaller, and a lot lighter.
RichRMA: Very drab, plasticky and uninspired looking camera, IMO. Yes, I know; it's the pictures that count. But then if that was all that mattered, we'd probably all be driving just one or two types of car.
I have the 5D Mk II, and I am buying this camera to use all my lenses and have something small enough to throw in my briefcase. I could care less how plastic it is... it will be with me, and that makes it far better then the magnesium alloy body of the camera that I left at home.
In the end, I most likely will buy it, as I am heavily invested in Canon glass, and I want a small backup body.
However, what I love about Sony, is they say "let's see how much I can shove into a camera", and Canon says "let's hold back so we don't compete with ourselves."
There is no reason why this camera can not have faster shooting speed, or 9 cross type focusing points. It was not a technical limitation. It's a marketing one, and I can't stand that.
Joe Ogiba: Michelle Obama's New Official Portrait taken with 5D MKIII w/EF24-70mm f/2.8L II USM at 63mm ,F4, 50iso, 1/80th sec :http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8532/8491445521_3fd1722dd7_o.jpg
You would think someone who is experienced enough to be doing presidential family portraits, would not have missed focus. Her eyes are a little soft.
JackM: "near flawless" = 87%? I don't get it.
Price. If it was flawless, but cost 30K, should it get 100%?
TomHudsonPhoto: The selected photos above are a poor representation of Sara Lewkowicz's photo essay, which is actually pretty good.
Kudos to Sara for her bravery in sticking around. That event was what we call in tornado alley a PDS (particularly dangerous situation), and she, likely no match for the US male prison physique and temperament, made the right choice not to intervene or involve herself more than she already has (at her own risk) with this body of work.
The work itself will go a lot farther toward preventing domestic abuse than if she had physically put herself in the middle of it.
For a bunch of so-called photographers, you people are too easily distracted from the purpose and power of the photographic image.
"The work itself will go a lot farther toward preventing domestic abuse than if she had physically put herself in the middle of it."
Lots of documented cases of domestic abuse. Zero research that it has done anything to prevent it.
Jonathan371: I find it odd that they spent all that time and energy and left a gaping hole in the center of the image.
That "gaping hole" is the top of one building. Not to bad, considering the thousands of others you have to look at.
Not sure I want to know what's going on here:http://btlondon2012.co.uk/pano.html?view.hlookat=-7.9802&view.vlookat=49.1900&view.fov=0.8180&imarkerath=-7.9802&imarkeratv=49.1900
Karl Summers: You lost me at 'Chinese'. Let me know when they start outsourcing to Japan.
If you boycotted everything the Chinese made, you would not have a computer to type on, a phone to talk on, a tv to watch, a car to drive... I can go on if you like.
Pritzl: I'm confused. How can you turn the Wifi on/off when it's inside the memory card compartment?
Also it's a memory card as well, so you can remove it, turn off wifi, and put it back in as just a memory card.
AngryCorgi: "The Speed Booster also promises sharper images compared to using the lens with a simple adapter."
That claim makes zero sense. If you are going to spread out ALL of the glass of a FF lens, the center may get sharper, but now you are using the edge glass too, and that is generally a weak point in FF lenses. You've effectively removed the "sweet spot" effect of cropped sensors w/ FF lenses.
100% agree. However, if you are in low light, and you get one stop faster, you might get sharper images due to faster shutter speeds, but those are isolated cases, and not something I would "promise".
Hugo808: Why does the lens shade have cut outs? There is no viewfinder to obscure, they will just run the risk of letting light onto the lens. Pointless and expensive, so very like the Leica lenshood that it mimics.
Not a lens expert, but the angle light enters might matter. If they realized light from such a wide angle does not have an effect, the cutout might be for weight.
Rick Knepper: Several issues for me.
Fixed prime at 35mm isn't wide enough for most landscapers, arguably a group that would benefit a great deal from this small nearly weightless kit since many of them hike climb scramble rough terrain to get to their subject matter. A 24-28mm fixed prime would be better.
Dovetailing into the first issue are MPs. With 36 MPs, cropping 24mm images to narrower FOVs would allow resolution to spare.
You can also do Sweep Panorama with this camera. Not sure how large a print you can get out of it, or what quality it provides with this camera, but it should do the trick.
Michael Thomas Mitchell: As usual, a lot of people are missing the point of this lens. It's NOT a replacement for the 24-105 L. If you have that lens already, Canon's not trying to sell you this one. (Though I'm sure they wouldn't mind if you bought it anyway!) This is a COMPACT L lens designed to match the COMPACT size/weight of their new 6D. Nothing more.
This lens appears roughly the same size as the old 24-85 EF f3.5-4.5 lens, a great little lens if you have a good copy. Obviously, being an L, this lens offers weather sealing and presumably superior optics. And it has image stabilization, too. Is it really worth that much money, though? Especially considering that you can buy a used 24-85 for a hundred dollars or so? I'm tempted to say not. Nonetheless, hear it is. A nice looking, compact, feature-rich lens on par with Canon's new full-frame enthusiast DSLR. Bundling with the 6D, Canon is going to sell a ton of them.
I realize to each there own, but if I was in the market to buy a DSLR, the delta in size from the 24-70 vs the 24-105 is marginal. If I didn't have either, I would still buy the 105. I suspect I am not alone.
Pierre Daigneault: Just my $0.02 worth.If I was going to carry this bit of kit around I may as well have a real camera. Why are all the "dome" pictures larger? Is there a close up lens included in the top of the dome?.....I don't get it....
What makes the iPhone camera not a "real" camera? I own a 5D Mk II, but that doesn't make my iPhone camera fake.
It still takes pretty good pictures when I need a camera and don't have my DSLR.
Steve Parkin: I used to love this site when it first started. Now its a collection area for all the cynics and know it alls in the photography world. Not to say some good folks aren't still out there. HDR - like it or hate it, is its own thing. It amazes me how arrogant people can be. Because somebody doesn't like something, it should be ridiculed and banned for not meeting their standards of what looks good. There's a ton of art out there that I don't like; but ripping people down or condemning entire types or styles because I don't agree with them? Pretty narrow minded. Do what you love your way guys. If something doesn't work for you, move on. There's nothing wrong with other people doing things outside the box. Are we all supposed to shoot the exact same way?
I agree. The funny thing is it took a while for the world to accept photography as art. Now that it has, we have photographers that wish to do to a subset of the photography world, what everyone else did to them decades ago.
Mirko123: Wow, you mean sex actually sells???
Unimaginative and unoriginal!When are people going to grow up and use their brains to sell or promote a product instead of their under used penises?
Seriously, there are far better uses for a camera than porn!
The human race exists because of two things. Food, and sex.
If you want sex to stop selling, you need to first change humanity. Let's hope that never happens.
Marty4650: This is really exciting news.
I can't wait until Dpreview starts covering ATM security cameras, car back up cameras, and endoscopes too.
Bookmarked, so when Marty in 6 years raves about pixel binning on his 400 megapixel Nikon/Canon, I can refer him back to this post ;)