Strange. The Video Stills Comparison select list does not include the D500.
SmilerGrogan: When is Sony going to produce a sensor that does 16-bit images. We're never going to compete with the medium-format people using our mediocre 14-bit pictures.
How can a small camera ever compete with Hasselblad's latest model with 100MP, 53x41mm sensor?
jonikon: Only a small percentage of buyers of the 6300 will ever use prime lenses with it, so why are only prime lenses used in the reviews of the Sony APS-C cameras? Answer: The Sony APS-C zoom lenses are junk glass that get terrible reviews. If Sony ever produces a good quality native APS-C zoom lens for this camera, I would seriously consider buying one, (despite it's poorly designed grip and ergonomics). I keep waiting and hoping Sony wakes up some day and gets the news that optical quality is important to serious amateur photographers and the vast majority of sub FF sensor ILC owners (me included), rarely use or even own prime lenses. Poor lens selection for APS-C is one of the major reasons I left the Sony A mount, and six years later nothing has changed, unfortunately.
Sony could still surprise us with a relatively inexpensive APS-C 2.8 zoom but it doesn't look likely with the new full frame 2.8 zoom at over $2K. It certainly not easier or cheaper to manufacture a top-quality APS-C 2.8/16-70 model compared to the 24-70 full-frame.
"I'm not sure they could be called "premium" zooms." Premium prices compare to the kit zoom.
A weather-sealed, corner-to-corner sharp 2.8/16-70 would probably cost $2000 and have a small market. Not very likely but who know what Sony is planning.
Two premium APS-C zooms already exist but the OP is not happy. What about "only a few people would buy f:2.8/16-50 and longer bright zooms for the 6300 as the zooms would cost well over $1000".
To DPR: What is the cause of image distortion (wave-like image of straight lines) in samples #50-#55, taken at maximum focal length?
What type of distortion is the wave-like straight lines in samples #50-#55?
You don't have to try. This is actually one of the best photos
Well done DPR for the live updates on these announcements!
"which consists of" or "which comprises" more than 73,000 items ...
Leo "Zoom": If they seek for truth - then it is impossible. Even straight from the camera picture can lie - it can be staged, can be framed to hide unwanted things, etc. IMO contests should seek evaluate the photos, not the event behind them. That's why manipulation shouldn't be disqualified.
Many photos are 'staged' like the photo above with the red background. Would the man be normally standing there staring at the camera? But what if the photo of the man was taken elsewhere and superimposed on the photo of the background? These are two different issues.
I have seen the pattern in the left photo on the plastic "glass" of unused slide frames that were stored in unsealed boxes. This is possibly caused by fungus. Any camera should be stored in a dry environment to avoid this.
ZoranHR: Big attention this camera gets. I would like Sony system continue to improve,there is a space. So far I m not interested. Battery life is poor. Also I would like to have an oportunity and see how it feels in hand with some proper glass. I m afraid FF lenses are heavy and whole package is akward to hold. But that I would have to see.
A 1970's fully mechanical SLR film camera is just the tool for places with lots of sand and wind, etc. Anything with sensors and electronics is likely to break in those conditions.
This is actually one of the cutest entries.
120 to 35: The photos are conceptual art.
Copyright belongs to the artist. In conceptual art, the artist does not usually create the work himself. He provides the concept, gets his associates to produce the work, and presents the end results as his work. The photographer is the conceptual artist who made the monkey take the pictures with his camera. He therefore owns the copyright.
The essential point is: "In conceptual art, the artist does not usually create the work himself." Apart from works produces by hired assistants, there are works that are created randomly. For example setting up a camera to take pictures which some random changes in temperature or light. Exactly because the monkey cannot claim copyright, it becomes a mere tool in the production of the work by the artist.
It doesn't matter. The release of the pictures by the photographer establishes them as his work.
The photos are conceptual art.
To DPR: You cannot find anything about the modified camera and photos when you follow the link to the source of the photos, which is a blog covering Fuji cameras.
NEX-5R autofocus with the 16-50 kit lens is not bad at all.
A relatively modern Fujifile 6x9 medium format film camera with a 90mm lens costing around $500 is a more practical choice.