Lee Jay: "3m Coudé Refractor"
It would be news to me if such an instrument existed. I think this is a reflector, not a refractor.
it is a refractor. It is 3m focal length. Diameter is 28.5 cm.
I had a look through one of those lenses at an event some years ago. I had no idea they were that rare.
The Name is Bond: Gimmickry, not photography.
And just who exactly are you to decide that someone else's work is pointless?
DaveE1: His "work has garnered a lot of attention in the past couple of years"...
I'm not surprised. Popular sites, such as DPReview, are posting his photos on their sites for no other reason than others seem to be posting his photos too. Nothing attracts a crowd quite like a crowd.
I wish I hadn't thrown away all my old photos that I thought were too bland. I could have been on this page :-)
Please define real photography.
I am switching to full frame since 6 months (bodies, then lenses, one by one); and plan to have medium-format within 2 years for portraiture.
645z is already available for pre order in Canada. (Henry's).
D 503: Why did she not have a gun ?
Yeah I'm pretty sure she would have pointed a gun at someone she thought was protecting her.
OMG eh....I predict this one will be a great hit with teenage girls.
sh10453: Many of the images can't be described by words. Of course there is always room for "critique"; a professional critique, that is, for those who learned it in college.
Incredible captures of the harmony between the children and the animals, staged or not, regardless of post-processing, which, in some cases, may not have been suitable to everyone's taste. But it is her art, and her taste.If you don't like her art, remember that not everyone likes YOURS either!
For me, many of these images really explain the meaning of "A picture is worth a thousand words"!
kimchiflower: Has anyone tried to shoot 1200mm at f/5.6 on a small sensor?
It cannot be pleasant.
Yep....I bet 1/3 of a stop makes a huge difference.
Merry Christmas everyone!
Just a Photographer: A nice camera, but way overpriced for what you get.
How foolish must one be to buy this camera in Europe where it is still $500 MORE expensive then a D800E?
This in a time where the dollar is worth just 0.65 cents to the Euro.
@ Shamael:Enlighten me, why does a sensor "draw" any better in a mirrorless design?
HBowman: That's not fair NIKON ...
Why is it not fair?
Lab D: I can't believe how small the thing is! Imagine carring it in one pocket with a couple pancake lenses in another. With the 20mm F/1.7 it would be a great P&S camera to compliment a different micro four thirds camera.
It could be to me.
Morpho Hunter: Looks great ...I guess word must have got around that Olympus's "retro" cameras are selling (why do other manufacturers copy, or should I say, try to copy what they do?) It will be interesting to see if Canon also copies ..er..innovates. I quite like the idea of a digital A1 or F1 (remember those, guys?)
Nikon had a prototype of a similar camera years ago. Apparently they feel the market is ready now.
jcmarfilph: In real-life scenario, only the 808 and 1020 should produce usable results. The rest of the phones will produce mediocre results at best.
Mediocre results would be quite a step up for some of the "experts " that plague the DPR site.
I will be interested to see how much this actually brings at auction.
Jim in Hudson: My recollection is the iPhone DID have a two-stage shutter button under iOS 6. First stage was touching the button icon and second stage (capturing the photo) was releasing your finger from the button. Doesn't seem that way with iOS 7 unless I'm missing something.
I just tried my iPod touch 5th generation with iOS 7.1 on it . Holding the shutter creates a burst on it too.
Jim Evidon: To DPReview:
IMO, you are spending too much space on cell phones and other gadgets whose primary purpose is not photography.Leave the phone and other gadget reviews to sites that specialize in those things and are better suited to review all aspects of he product. Cell phones may take amazing pictures for what they are, but they are not serious cameras.Better images are available from most simple and inexpensive point and shoot cameras. Please stick to cameras. That is what built your site and your reader base.
Given that there's many more people that use phones than "serious cameras" for imaging, I'm sure these reviews are of interest to a great many people. And really; how many "serious cameras" come along any more? Most "new" releases are just warmed over versions of last year's.
There was a time I wouldn't have taken a Sigma lens for a gift. Those days are long gone though, they have some great products now.
Sam Carriere: The simple answer to the question asked in this title is "nothing". Real photographers do not do serious work with phones.
@jcmarfilph.....anyone who insists that the Fuji HS series "superzooms" or any other "superzoom" has good image quality, really has very little room to criticize the output of any other device, be it phone or be it dedicated camera. Full disclosure: I do own a "superzoom". It's a fun camera, but at 11x14 print size, it's no better than my 5mp iPod.