I have pre-ordered one already; expected delivery April 1st, 2015.
Please avoid submitting parts of a building. The photo is of a building not part of it; it needs to depict a substantially large part of it, at minimum.
RStyga: This is getting worse for Nikon and unlucky D600 owners alike. Nikon is a small company compared to, say, Canon. Heads will roll there: engineers, managers the lot.
Nikon is smaller than Canon not just in terms of market cap. Of course, Nikon belongs to the Mitsubishi Group but I won't count that since it is independent.
One building, not multiple, please.
This is getting worse for Nikon and unlucky D600 owners alike. Nikon is a small company compared to, say, Canon. Heads will roll there: engineers, managers the lot.
I doubt but remain hopeful that the new Kodak brand will improve where the original Kodak eventually failed in the digital camera market. Revival of a brand name is not always futile; see Voigtlander under Cosina.
Please avoid submitting tiny moons. Crop!
Buzz Lightyear: Given that there is so little room for creative presentations, I predict that the person with the most expensive, very sharp, long telephoto lens who knows how to do focus stacking will be the winner - or perhaps someone who attaches their camera to a capable, powerful telescope. An astro-photographer I'm not.
I disagree. Look at the submissions.... Better shots with lesser gear. Not to mention the framing even in such a simple theme.
Taking a photo using good gear does not guarantee a good result at all.
Online does not exclude having a physical store. Many online stores have physical stores. Sometimes I buy camera gear online, other times in store; sometimes the prices in physical stores are as good, minus shipping, waiting, having to return it via post if something is wrong etc etc. Retail is inherently brutal and, I'm afraid, rarely ethical.
@MarkBylandI had a look again. If you are referring to the closeup photo of a segment of a tree trunk, then that's certainly not a tree.
MarkByland: The second of my two now disqualified entries clearly satisfied every "rule" for this challenge. I would like to DQ the host.
I don't remember which one you are referring to but I did not DQ valid entries. I'm sure no one likes it when others step on one's ego. You can certainly DQ me by not submitting entries in the future.
As tough as the crowd is, I'm sure everyone loves your reviews.
I'd like to share an idea. Time & budget permitting, I was wondering if you guys would entertain the thought of including a 'Tips and Tricks' section for the particular camera - the best settings and uses for certain types of shots (portrait, landscape, night time, increase in body sharpness to prevent, etc).
Now I know this adds an additional layer of work and time - but no other review web site does this (and probably because it would be so exhaustive) but since you guys already do a pretty comprehensive review, you guys might have insights that others may not. Could help and differentiate it from the other websites that do exactly the same thing.
Just a thought,4054
Cut cut cut ! No one will complain. All complaints come from the lack of timely reviews!
bobbarber: I like these Fuji cameras. I like this system. It just seems a little pricey to me, even though the lenses are first-rate. If I were starting, and didn't have to start over to go with Fuji, this is a system I would take a close look at.
The problem with Pentax (well, on of them, anyway) is that it does not offer a DSLM solution to its customers. The K-01 was a great opportunity with unique characteristics but the company seems to have abandoned that road. The Q system is simply not good enough for anything but certain types of street and travel-light shooting.
@ R Butler
On the same note, I do second the need to reduce the review time ASAP. I'm sure the readers would not mind a smaller in length review, perhaps even dropping testing certain less-essential but time-consuming aspects, all in favour of delivering reviews for more cameras in less time. For instance, exhaustive testing of JPG output parameters might be an overkill when RAW shooting bypasses them; after all, most JPG shooters are not that demanding.
Just a suggestion.
RStyga: I think Pentax 645D is still the cost/performance king *by far*.
@nicolaiThe advantage of MF is primarily enlargement tolerance. I've seen how a significant number of "professionals" think and work and what sort of "contracts" they run. So, please, spare me the fancy BS argument. What 645D enable a photographer to do is equally good and very much cheaper than the Hasselblad offer. There will be photographers who will benefit from the Hasselblad's established system but a great deal of them will be equally fine with the Pentax.
I think Pentax 645D is still the cost/performance king *by far*.
I will extend it to 60 entries. It's time consuming to check a large number of entries, especially when 1/5 of the original entries were violating the rules.
Please read the rules carefully before submitting an entry!
It seems that the reason for not reaching its estimated value was the lack of image stabilisation.