taotoo: I see more than a building..
I probably shouldn't mention the far wall...
I see more than a building..
More like the "eyes of resentment of the comfortable guy with camera who'd sooner exploit me than buy me some food".
balios: How many people did those photos and the ad campaign help? How many people did this article on DPreview help? None directly. But it raised awareness of the issues, just like "liking" a Facebook page does. Not everyone has the time, money, or desire to help every good cause in the world. But by helping to spread the word then maybe somebody who does will get the message.
"spread what word ?That people are suffering ? We know already.We just can't be bothered to actually do anything about that.In fact we need charities, not to help people but to show how much we care.We need them for the tax breaks they offer."
Nail on the head.
The disparity between the (overly) processed flowers and natural sky is jarring. Even more so than the flouting of the rules.
Stacey_K: Imagine how small the likelihood of these being preserved in a digital format would have been. Does anyone actually believe the digital files we have today will still exist or be readable in 50 years?
Today these photos would be insignificant as they would be dozens out of millions.
That's a beauty
In a different league to the winner.
Very nice, feel like my screen isn't big enough to do it justice.
Nice shot, though the HDR perhaps a bit too subtle for my tastes.
It's a really nice shot but I'm distracted by the degree of processing.
Looks like it should have been discontinued in 1984.
Makes me ashamed to be a human.
Julian: Tatoo - I really think you don't understand what motivates this kind of photograph at all. Perhaps you think its best that the public don't get to learn about the plight of these 2 dead children, that we don't get to learn about the dire situation that lead to their deaths, that we remain ignorant?
Well she would be keen to point that out wouldn't she...
I would argue that i do indeed understand what motivates this kind of photograph. Our primary interest is ourselves. The common reasoning you've given is simply a story invented by the mind in order to justify our actions as being 'good'.
Bet those two dead children would be overjoyed to learn some photographer is furthering their career on the back of their corpses.
duqov: Can somebody point me to a website/formula where I could calculate which aperture I need if I want: 1) 1/2.3 sensor, 2) equivalent of 85mm FF view angle and 3) equivalent of 85mm FF, f=2.0 depth of field? Would it be about f=0.2? How big would such glass be? Still smaller than FF 85mm f=2.0 Why is nobody making such things?
Maybe it's too hard to bend the light that much.
Really like this.
taotoo: I thought this was a very well written article. Seemingly gone are the days of rating cameras on the numbers that they produce in a laboratory. Great efforts are made to explain that an individual's specific circumstances may make any or all of these cameras a good or poor choice for them. Well done DPReview.
Now what I would like to see is a massive diagram illustrating the depth of field obtainable in real world situations with various classes of camera/lens, from 3x compacts to full frame cameras with fast telephoto lenses. Just like the photos on the first page, but with many more cameras. It can be 5000 pixels high if necessary. We need to see that if your particular requirements are to photograph your kid at 10 metres with a wall 2 metres further afield, e.g. f/2.5 or f/4.0 on a small sensor are much of a muchness. EDIT: and what you really want is a FF camera with a 135mm f/2.0 lens.
Nice article, but what I am looking for is real world examples with a variety of cameras. It could also include low light indoor photography too. The idea is somebody might think if they get a compact with a f/2.0 lens all their problems will be solved, when in reality they may still be struggling..
topstuff: Having been through a similar selection process myself, I chose the Sony RX100.
Oh my, it is better than I ever imagined.
All the hype around the RX100 is IMO justified. I have printed out decent sized prints that are better than files taken with a Nikon D300 a couple of years ago.
A truly outstanding camera.
Try taking a photo of a dog running around with it.