Still thinkin why the background is that fruit and not robot or no phone promotion at all but just the card itself.
Stevie Boy Blue: I like this image. Whilst I sympathise that some questionable voting may be going on (which is something I’m attempting to look into), it appears to be occurring only in a minority of cases.
Maybe, just maybe, some of those responsible for giving low votes here recognise this image from other challenges. Although there’s arguably nothing wrong with entering the same pic multiple times, I can see you’ve now used this (or a very similar) photo on five occasions.
Whilst you and I may feel it’s fine to do so, there’s an idea that some voters don’t like to see repeats and such people could be inclined to give low votes to specific shots just on that basis. Of the four challenges in which you’ve entered this image beforehand, you’ve taken 2 x 5th and 2 x 3rd spots, so 4th position here is something I wouldn’t be disappointed about. Well done.
That's a lame reason to give a photo with 0.5 or 1.0 vote. My photo did not win a challenge from the past. My best guess is someone doesn't like my photo to win or they are simply stupid voters.
There is no rule that you MUST not submit your photo from previous challenges and I don't see a reason why you must not because this photo is my best photo. I've been in this festival once and only once. If you don't like the photo then don't vote. I am not saying I could have won this challenge. I just don't like that some will give you the lowest vote to pull you down. I even gave 1.5 as the lowest vote in this challenge, 3x higher than the lowest vote my entry received here. Branding or personal history, you should take it aside and vote appropriately or don't vote at all.
Great challenge but once again somebody got spanked by idiot voters. You don't vote the brand but the photo. You don't look at the exif and vote your favorite camera. You don't give 0.5 vote to pull down someone. It has been a great pleasure joining your challenges Stevie. This will be my last as I feel voting system is still full of magic.
My entry don't deserve 0.5 votes. I hope you are happy you stupid voters.
Congrats! To those stupid voters who gave 0.5 to my entry, happy?
MP is not enough considering the sensor size. 20MP should be fine with this one to allow cropping of distant subject.
Moto-slow and dark lens physically and technically. We are doomed Sony!
If you want to be serious in photographic business, build a real camera that doesn't need lousy accesories. Why would I waste money on a phone cam with mediocre sensor and capabilities and spend hundred+ to make it half-decent camera.
John Miles: FZ50 rating (-3) http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52339583
A dedicated front wheel would allow instantaneous EV adjustment whilst the right thumb assisted in steadying the camera. A hot shoe for standard accessories does not appear to be present. The screen does not look to articulate to allow waist height composition.
The first Non Fuji 2/3" sensored superzoom camera of this generation. This camera has enormous potential, with broadly speaking double the typical superzoom sensor area. An excellent contender for the superzoom enthusiasts cash; a fitting "camera bag in a camera" release.
John, have you tried shooting with X-S1 or HS50? It will change your perception about what is best.
kimchiflower: Has anyone tried to shoot 1200mm at f/5.6 on a small sensor?
It cannot be pleasant.
How about f/6.5 from SX50 or f/5.9 from FZ70 at 1200mm EFL?
mpgxsvcd: An F2.9-6.5 lens is not bright. Especially not with these tiny sensor cameras.
It is f/2.8 - f/5.6 and it is brighter than FZ70 or SX50 FWIW. Mid FL will go somewhere around f/4.x cross your fingers...
Even a 50$ P&S can trounce iPhone5s so I am not sure why even bother with that phone?
G16, X20, P7800 and many more pocketable premium cam will match or trounce Nokia 1020 and put the iPhone 5s back to children's toy bin.
Way better and more useful than instacrap photos and plastic filters for smartphone.
Lets see, I will bring this ring flash, macro lens, telephoto lens, tripod, WA lens and many more plastic accessories.
Good Lord, I might as well bring a backpack for my iPhony's useless accessories.
What you are going to print a squared photo with horrible IQ and filters on a wood straight from your smartphone? =D
madmaxmedia: Um guys, we're talking about an anamorphic adapter here, not some sort of standard zoom or tele attachment. You can't do this with any pocket camera. You can do it with adapters mounted on mirror less cameras and DSLR's (typically on rails because the adapters tend to be big and heavy), but its not cheap or easy.
For around $100 this is a pretty cool adapter to mess around with, if the image quality is decent. You can't really tell from the video, but my guess is that it's a mirror adapter (to get the price low.)
Well most pocketable cams start at 24mm which is still wider than a crappy iPhone with this adapter? Why spend more on a crippled device who does half-decent pictures in daylight?
webrunner5: Not much love here. But I think it is pretty darn neat. iPhones take better video than you think. Hey you have a phone with you all the time. Why not have a little pouch with a few adapters in it. Beats carrying a phone and a camera. It is the future like it or not.
How about if you put you inexpensive phone that does the job better if not as good as iPhone in one pocket and the other pocketable decent P&S in the other pocket?
I will pick the phone only if I have calls or sms or need to browse. I will pick the pocketable p&s for my photographic needs.
So I don't have a bulging pocket full of plastic accessories.
mikiev: Because I am already bring my iPhone, so I just have to carry an additional adapter, or two, and not a "travelzoom" camera. If I was trying to be "serious" I would bring my NEX-7 and lenses.
Now put those 100$ plastic accesories in your pocket with the iPhone. For sure at the end of the day, you will have to PP the image to death and put lousy filters for intacrap uploads. Where is the mobility there?
There are tons of premium compacts and travelzoom with FL from 24-720mm which is 10x better than iPhone in IQ and flexibility. And they cost around 250-500 only. Much better than a trying hard cameraphone.
Lemme guess, a common Joe will have to bring iPhone, some plastic adapters for macro, tele and wide and many more. Why not just carry a much better travelzoom that has FL from 24-600mm and forget about the misery and disastrous result from using iPhone? Trying to be serious? Get a serious tool and not a toy.