rfsIII

Yahoo and Google strip metadata!!!? That's fairly shocking. Why don't more people know about this? I work really hard putting all that metadata in and now it's just getting deleted? That's crazy!

For the love of Jaysus lads, before ye post a picture of a lass, ye must, must, must go over her skin with the healing brush. There's no call to be throwing photos of your womenfolk up onto the internet with their flaws out there for the world to see. It's not gentlemanly and can only end in tears.

The fact that she didn't understand how her remarks might offend a big part of the user base shows that she is just another CEO completely out of touch with reality. It is the executive class that is killing our country.

It has been my understanding that the Japanese camera and lens companies have for decades worked together in the traditional keiretsu system of mutual obligation and benefit. So my question is, has that system broken down? Or are we seeing a new face of the keiretsu?

You have obviously not been around high school students much. As they grow their body fat goes nuts. There's more, there's less, suddenly they have fat on their back, then it's their abdomen, then they have no fat at all, and it's all about physical maturation. This girl is probably 16 and that's just how she looks right now. If you saw her six months ago or six months from now her body fat percentage would be completely different.

There are lots of girls who are naturally skinny and tall with pipe-cleaner arms and legs and flat tummies. You can't hate them for it, they'll gain weight in their 20s and 30s and that will be that. What's the big issue? It's not a conspiracy, it's biology
And from my reading it sounds like the NYT only allows normal retouching in their style section—zits and boogers—but not much more. So again what's the big deal?
And in answer to IvanM, the reason that the fashion industry has settled on a certain look is because it sells clothes. They're selling a dream of looking better. If they could move more shmattas by putting them on kangaroos, they would. Capitalism may be evil, but it's not ideological.

It's a quality revolution. First there were the Sigma 35 and 50 1.4s, and now this.
Do any of you experts know what has changed in either the lens industry that is allowing these second-tier companies to suddenly come out with lenses that equal or beat the big two?
I know that there is a lot of cross pollination and that the second-tier firms make components and sometimes whole lenses for Canon, Nikon, and the rest, but there seems to be a shift in what has always been a very "cooperative" industry. In years past I don't think that Canikon would have allowed their subcontractors to make lenses that directly competed with their bread and butter products.
Has something changed in the industry culture? Are we seeing a new breed of corporate executive who rejects the collusive practices of times past? Are new design algorithms or computer programs making this possible?
Or have Sigma and Tamron just kicked their optical engineers into high gear?

I use live view all the time and I'm old enough to be able to thread a Nikkor reel in the pitch black. So these guys are using sound thinking in this regard. Some people enjoy discovering and using all the features on their camera, otherwise why buy a camera with features?

Amadou,
I'm sure you have customer data to back up the lukewarm stance on video, but that policy is very shortsighted and shuts out a big potential audience. I am ancient demographically, yet I am a one of the many photojournalists who has switched to combining video and stills to create my stories (blame Ken Burns). And then there is the whole group who have added iPhone and GoPro video to their artistic endeavors (seen the Snow Monkey commercial?) So while your most vocal group of DPReview users may hate video, the world at large is converging at an ever-increasing rate.
Get with the times and get aggressive about video, you're too valuable a resource to be left behind.

Who doesn't use mirror lockup on a camera whenever possible? Why would you even buy a high-MP camera and then throw away half your resolution?

We're supposed to be living in a customer-driven world and what the customer is saying is that the link on your front page should go to
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d5200
not to
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/05/16/nikon-d5200-review

So get on it boys. The customer--not some arcane IT policy-- is king.

What is an ABP/estimate?

@marike6 Don't be so down on wireless flash. On my D7000 it works like magic and the exposure accuracy is breathtaking. And when it stumbles, you can manually control speedlights in 1/3 stop increments from your camera. It doesn't work too well in broad daylight, but it works with umbrellas and softboxes as well as behind big silks. The only other thing you need is the $15 SG-31R IR Panel which shields your subject from direct flash.

The one question I have is why does everyone denigrate articulated LED screens like they are only for video shooters and amateurs?
It is a truth oft repeated that all the really good photographs exist at very awkward angles; greatness can only be achieved when the camera is either too high, too low, too sideways, but definitely not at normal eye level 1.5 meters above the ground.
So why the hating of a feature that makes it easier to stand out from the mediocre photos crowd?
Is it that people are too inhibited artistically to look beyond their normal field of view? Are they afraid that using unique and compelling angles would make them look foolish to their peers? Are they ashamed of producing something truly beautiful?

When IS Pocketwizard coming out with an iPhone-compatible trigger? Strobe compatibility is the last barrier standing between the iPhone and (photo) world domination

Yes. In my kingdom it is medium format digital or m4/3 or CX. Full frame is punishable by death. There is no need for full frame anymore. It is too compromised in relation to MF digital.
Also, if you willfully misunderstand the exposure triangle like so many here: death.

What I want to know is when we're going to see the benefit of the strengthening dollar against the yen. By my arithmetic, it's about 10 percent difference versus last year.

Full frame is only for insecure amateurs and video people. If you're a true artist you shoot medium format. Or if you're really secure in your skills, you shoot with micro four-thirds or one of these things.

I never thought of it that way, but you're right about inexpensive full frame sensors being a loss leader. With an aps-c camera you can get adequate reach and shutter speeds with a 180 or 200mm f/2.8 lens. But to get the equivalent magnification on a full-frame you need at least a 300mm and those lenses are almost $6,000. If you want a 400mm, it's like $9,000.

What do birds have to do with this camera? Half the comments below are about ibis this and ibis that. I don't understand the connection between coastal bird species and Olympus. What am I missing.