plasnu: Please make cheap oil substitute next.
There already is one, hydrogen fuel cells. The problem is that car manufacturers aren't making cars to use it.
I've been a Canon shooter for a long time and Canon keeps disappointing me with their new cameras. I'm sure they have a new APS-C camera in the pipeline but in order for me to feel like it's compelling, it would have to be built like the 7D (metal body, the 19 cross type af array, and button/dial layout) and priced at this level for me to feel like it would be worth not switching. That's what I was expecting out of the 60D too, and they disappointed, and frankly I"m expecting to be disappointed again. Canon seems determined to keep all of the ergonomic features that I want out of my price range.
Mark Bochkovskiy: DPReview is a site for Nikon users. There is no more objective comparisons. Here it is: http://the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-1D-X-Digital-SLR-Camera-Review.aspx
I've felt that way for a long time about DPReview. They seem to skew towards Nikon products, reviewing them faster and with preference over everything else. I would like to see comparisons between cameras in similar categories and especially from brands other than just the big two.
The other thing that I find interesting is how anytime they review a Canon camera they remark how good it is compared to its Nikon rival (for instance 5Dmk3 vs D800). When the Canon is as good or better they are ALWAYS surprised, as if Nikon is the only company that can make a good camera. I have seen so many comparisons between the 5Dmk3 and D800 where the Canon is better in every regard except resolution (including DPReview) and it seems like no one thought there was any chance of this happening.
I love ya DPReview, but I miss the old days when there was more objectivity to your reviews.
I don't know if it's just me, but it seemed to render the colors very coolly. I get the impression that all the dock pictures were taken on a warm summer day and yet everything looks too cold. Perhaps its the white balance on the camera, but I will wait for some more advanced testing before I would think about this.
I knew that no lens reviews had been posted in a while, but I never knew they were on indefinite hiatus. Good to see them back, there are quite a few lenses I'd like to see tested. I did notice on the old testing regimen that you picked a mount for a lens like a Sigma and didn't test it on any other mounts. Personally I'd like to see some results for multiple mounts with third-party lenses. Also, I think that a standardized camera level should be chosen, and kept over a period of time, for instance Canon's 5Dmk 3 and Nikon's D600 (I chose those two because their pixel counts were similar and therefor should return more closely related results than the D800)or a 1Dx and D4, and then also given a shorter test on current consumer cameras as well so as to show the capabilities independent of a professional camera.
06m1r3m86: I bought a 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 ages ago to replace my kit zoom on my rebel XT, that lens is still going strong! I think it has even outlived my Canon 50mm f/1.4, which makes me truly sad.
For a lens that was cheap compared to its Canon equivalent, it works great and its a tough, well built lens. I will be buying more Sigmas in the future.
Hahaha, yours was newer than mine! Mine had an older noisier micro-motor and no OS. I would have loved to have OS, but I don't think it was offered at the time! I fully intend on getting OS on any zoom lens from now on though.
I bought a 18-125mm f/3.5-5.6 ages ago to replace my kit zoom on my rebel XT, that lens is still going strong! I think it has even outlived my Canon 50mm f/1.4, which makes me truly sad.
Blorf: I'm planning to upgrade soon and I've been considering the A77 which has a similar pixel count on a smaller sensor. If it has the same number of pixels on a smaller sensor shouldn't the image come out sharper? I've never seen pixel density addressed in a review and I'd like to know how it affects image quality.
The bigger the pixel is, the more light it gathers, the more light, the better the picture. I have a Canon EOS 350D which has 8 megapixels, and I have a Droid X2 and its camera has 8 megapixels. The sensor in my phone is five years newer and should from a tech perspective *should* be much better, but it's not. Because the sensor in my Rebel is much much larger, it can gather more light much easier than the smaller sensor in my phone. The larger the sensor is, the better it should be at resolving detail.
Wow, wasn't expecting first or anything like that, but 97th? That actually really hurts. Can anyone give me some feedback as to why?
Question, what if I've cropped down the the background? I have a picture that came to mind when I saw the challenge, and I still have the master image, but it just looks best with it cropped (it's blurred anyway).
I love this picture, but I have a question, does this lens always have those halo rings to them? I can't say I'm all that fond of them like that.
Also, what kind of gun is that?
Still haven't seen a MILC that appeals to me. I love my Canon 350D, but it's getting old and I want to replace it, but I haven't seen a MILC that I really feel can do the job. These things are popular, but I really feel that a camera like the Sony SLT-A55 is the best combination of size and features. This appeals to me even less than most MILCs do.