///M: WOW, Canon can spend all this R&D on matched cinema lenses (which will likely be only sold to rental houses) for this niche market, but can't come up with a viable mirrorless camera with compact lenses, really? 1/2 of the DSLR sales in Japan are mirrorless cameras, it does not matter how small the crop sensor bodies get, they are still big and bulky compared to the micro 4/3 and other systems.
@howardoark...If I may ad to your comments that the "bored photograpers" are excited by new gear specs, and new gear news only. They lack talent in such extend if a camera in all auto setting doesn't get the picture they imagine they move on to the next model and back to pixel peeping.
Puh!! why this wasn't a 17-350 f1.8 full frame lens!!! do they think this is interesting? yawn, Nikon suck...
Some of the comments here are insult to human intelligence. When someone talks about ''the good old days'' which period of photography do they refer to? The beginning? Glass slides etc...? or 40's, 50's. Every generation gear is generally better than previous one.If you just take landscapes you have as much time as you want and one can use the camera one wants including the ''Glass slides'' ''Catching action with manual focus cameras'' possible. But when the photographer next to you is continuously shooting action without being bothered with focus adjustments, pre-focusing etc. considering talent levels are similar the one with the faster gear will laugh all the way to the bank and you might have to wait for the next game to get a winning shot. Silly isn't it. Not to mention the slower guy's pictures will be scrutinized by gear heads like you for minute focus adjustments, focus points, misses etc. And you'll continue living as very bitter, unhappy and un-fulfilled gear heads
After all this is a fast zoom lens with inevitable compromises. But what it's capable of producing comfortably outweighs any complaints. There is no such a thing as perfect zoom design or it would be extremely expensive to produce, at least this day and age. What you get with this zoom lens is a collection of weather sealed f2.8 primes with performances close to good primes. I know it is expensive but I'm not a pro photographer and not in the position to judge it's price/function/value combination. To have a zoom lens of this quality can be priceless at times.
Marek07: From a professional working environment, I have had this lens for over 5 months now, and is in constant use, I shoot Fashion and Portraiture and have to say it has become the workhorse in my kit even leaving my 50mm 1.2 to gather dust it's that good, of course there is always going to be distortion and vignetting with any zoom but the new 24-70 is the sharpest, fastest zoom I have used and has great bokeh.
I use it with the new 5d mk3 which now has lens correction, and shoot studio, location, front lit, backlit...
Initially I went into a camera store with a few flash cards and tried a variety of 24-70 lenses including the nikon d800e with it's 24-70 and the new canon easily came top.
@ Ken Johnes...You are wasting you time replying people like "shamhain" they have nothing to do with photography, or a function of a particular lens, are only interested in numbers, newest gear, and think in terms of few cliche they've picked up in gear reviews.
bossa: So where is this 'opinion'?
Marketing/Endorsing is the new opinion
Russell Evans: Is "Editors Opinion" going to be attached to all like articles in the future? It would be really helpful if it were, so I could easily avoid ever clicking through one of these again.
This not an opinion by any standards. It just repeats what the lens is. Did they test it, used it on a camera, where are the samples? This is just anaother MARKETING attempt by Dpreview. Once again this is a Nikon/Sony endorsing website.
Raist3d: Nikon got the size right. And no AA? Sounds interesting. But 28mm is not my preferred focal length.
Erm...actually "28mm equivalent F2.8 prime lens" means 28mm FF. It's 18,5mm in APS-C (Dx) format.
topstuff: There are a lot of strange angry tribal gear heads here today.
The Nikonistas rant, the Canonites whine and hoorah, the Sonyettes bitch and the Olympusonians whimper.
Any photographers visiting just leave the site and go somewhere else.
I would respectfully disagree about ISO 3200 being sufficient for low light photography. In my experience even with some ambient light(Street lights, shop windows etc.) subject moderately mobile f2.8 doesn't give you enough speed to reasonably freeze the action or well lit subject. I think ISO 6400 is needed for street photography at night.
These forums are outlets for, barring few photography enthusiasts, forever adolescents who are in to bashing, beating, walking all over something who would other wise have been serial killers.
Charles Babbage: It still puzzles me that none seems to "remember" the K5-IIs! Not even the dpreview people. Do I smell something bad or is it my imagination?
What a sad response by Dpreview...While this is a good web site for up to date info on gear one should ignore the ratings and evaluation given here. There are enough photos and technical info here and elswhere to make up your mind about which camera suits your needs and preferences not to mention your budget best. Don't be fooled by misleading double-edged wording with diversions and insertions which are carefully managed marketing tricks.Once again this is a Nikon, Sony endorsing website and there are other websites endorse other brands too.
oselimg: Since it's meaningless to pass premature comments on these two lenses I think that it's equally meaningless to call lenses of this type full frame. Are the other sensor formats half/quarter frame. Aren't there bigger formats than 35mm format then, what should we call them? I know this term's found it's way in everyday photographic language but many people who own cameras of any kind don't even know what it stands for. It's non-descriptive. At least, when 35mm film ruled everybody(almost) knew what it was and how big it was. What now called full frame is same size as single 35mm film frame. Can you guys at the Dpreview at least start to challenge the current misleading and non-descriptive trend, may I kindly ask?
When Medium and Large format were called what they were called 35mm format was called 35mm. if now 35mm is the full frame what should 6X4,5 and 6X6 be called. Larger than 35mm formats in film form co-existed when when 35mm digital was produced even 35mm film co-habited the photography world in digital age. Also thank you for informing me about the names of other/bigger formats. Perhaps I should've mentioned my age.
rusticus: Häääähhhhh - Gold Award?why???
Because this is a Sony/Nikon endorsing website ;-)
Since it's meaningless to pass premature comments on these two lenses I think that it's equally meaningless to call lenses of this type full frame. Are the other sensor formats half/quarter frame. Aren't there bigger formats than 35mm format then, what should we call them? I know this term's found it's way in everyday photographic language but many people who own cameras of any kind don't even know what it stands for. It's non-descriptive. At least, when 35mm film ruled everybody(almost) knew what it was and how big it was. What now called full frame is same size as single 35mm film frame. Can you guys at the Dpreview at least start to challenge the current misleading and non-descriptive trend, may I kindly ask?
The summary is; Panasonic want to re-invent the wheel under the Panasonic brand but want it in square form. They sound very confused to me and following on this particular point most Dpreview forum writers appeared to be confused too. If a compact camera is going to do the job buy that, if a m4/3 will do the job buy that why everybody including manufacturers like Panasonic want to convince people they don't need bigger sensors than what they have or make. If I want to work with 35mm format-for obvious reasons-I'll buy that. Some smaller sensors maybe almost but not as good as the next bigger sensor but, for example, the camera size difference between G/GH and most modern APSc cameras isn't huge and can be negligible if you take in to account the sensor performance. Again the users of APSc and G/GH series cameras are likely to be amateurs who can make reasonably informed choices on cameras.Panasonic want enthusiasts behave like compact users and be happy with what Panasonic offer.
Current events tell us there are two main groups of people taking photographs 1. Smart phone shooters(convenience, portability, availability) who are not under pressure to achieve big prints albeit with limited technical ability of the device 2. People who want the ultimate ability to take pictures in most of the conditions( full frame, APSc and to a degree m43). IMHO as the full frame prices come down and with the choice of good and cheaper lens alternatives from independent brands APSc will become obsolete because of full frame being far superior in terms of low light performance and DOF control. I think that m43 will become the format alternative or/and supporting act to the full frame experience. For the compact segment, if they produce models with fast lenses with minimum reach for 200mm for a superior low light photography and flexibility they might be the viable alternatives to smart phones. Also there will always be a room for superzooms for people who want-kind of-all in one
Barring several on this forum rest of you self absorbed technology junkies never get tired of repeating yourselves. No matter how many times you write here the camera manufactures don't take any notice of your adolescent idiocy. The proof is that each time a new camera comes out you complain and whinge like a spoiled child who didn't get the toy s/he wanted.
Pitt&Jolie Co. would need one to entertain the family and friends in their 250m2 living room. Bless their socks...
Because these forums give you the chance to say anything you want to now you've assessed and valued McCurry's work as well and you must be feeling very important about yourselves. Well done! Anybody who is slightly interested in improving their compositional skills will know about some golden principals that work most of the time though not in all cases. But this is only one part of the art. Is it very difficult to see the story his pictures tell or a statement he makes, far removed from petty consciousness about "lines converging in perpetual movement" in a Geisha in Subway picture. I'm sure he was thinking about "how nice and aesthetically pleasing can I shoot this one so the petty critics will approve of it" when shooting the girl in flood waters.
By the way results are best looking jpegs by Sony and even better raw IMHO so far. But isn't the price very silly for a camera and one lens forever? Maybe it's primarily produced for boosting the brands image. Who knows...