Great shots mate! Forget about the negative reactions. Being a pro myself, I can only say "Top job!"
MrTaikitso: In 1995 or so whilst living in California, I had a Logitech Pixtura digital camera (740 x 648 resolution). I flew my mum out from the UK for a once in a lifetime holiday where we hit Yosemite. Took some amazing photos, 144 in fact, filling up the in built memory. In all my life as a photographer, the most amazing shot was of a chipmunk staring direct into the lens at 1" or so.
I wanted to take one or two additional photos on our last day, so hit the erase frame button to delete a few of the most recent images and free up the in built memory. (There was no built in preview display, just a mono LCD frame counter.) After hitting [Delete] the hourglass remained on the screen for quite a while, which was odd. It then finished erasing what I assumed was the last picture I had taken.
To my horror, the frames remaining counter showed 144/144.
I plugged the camera into my PowerBook and there was nothing on the memory in the camera. I had hit [Erase All] in error losing ALL the photos. Cried.
In the film days - 1972 or there about, my sister got married. My brother in law, too cheap that time to get a REAL photographer,asked his brother (a very good friend of mine) to take pictures. His brother being a nice guy said "ok, I'll do that but I haven't got a clue!!" "No problem, my in law said, just take my camera and start making pictures!" So he did, he took the camera and all day long he shot the pictures! He must have shot hundreds!!! The next morning my brother in law said to him" Now give me the films so we can have them developed. Then my friend said" Film's....?? You didn't put ......
stevelilly: I remember walking in to the Comp USA store in Tyson's Corner, Virginia and seeing this camera. I decided I had to have it. $1000 later and it was my first digital camera. I still have it and if functions as new.
I also remember shooting a car show in Ocean City, Maryland walking around with a box of 100 3 1/2 inch floppy's.
Here is a link to the first pictures I took with the camera in 1999 and some from the OC Car Show.
Very very nice Steve! Wish we had these shows in the Netherlands.And the (digital)quality of the pictures don't seem too bad either aye?
bootsofspanishleather: I am a rather new member and I must say that the few dopey questions I have asked have usually been answered with great information and a lack of sarcasm and judgement. They were not dopey on purpose. If anyone would like to visit the images in my portfolio you will at least know that I am not just obsessed with cameras but sing them to shoot, share, publish et. So without further ado, just purchased a new Fuji X Pro1 and bam I read the rumor page and it says Fuji X Pro2 verified rumor will be introduced this year. Besides offering the advice, "just shut up and shoot', What would you do? Is this even the right spot to leave my qesriom
Don't worry too much about it.I also just bought the X Pro 1,well aware of the rumors. It's all about IQ right?I can assure you,you wont be disappointed! Far away from it.And I really wonder whether the IQ(mind you, IQ!)will be very different from this one.All else, yes for sure.
Okay...... Minolta, come back!
not coming to the US...... no review then either..... ????
SHANU: how is canon eos m ? good or not good ?
Goodday Shanu,if you can live with the "slowish" Af (which is not that slow really)it is a great camera!Takes wonderfull pictures.RegardsG
I know it wont happen, yet I'll try once again: An in depth review?
Mirrorless Crusader: DPR why are you giving almost every half-decent camera a gold star now? Literally a large a majority of $600+ cameras now are getting gold stars, it completely dilutes the rating system and makes it look like you are just using it as a marketing ploy to sell cameras at Gear Shop. Can't you come up with a system where only a few cameras at most each year get the top award? Then we would actually know which you really think are best, because right now it looks like you're just trying to satisfy everybody and as a result satisfying nobody.
@mapgraphs: just my thoughts, I will try again, DPR,where's the eos m review? Please, any kind of answer! Thank you.
DanK7: I would have thought that "no eye level viewfinder" would have been listed in the "cons." This must be an oversight on the part of the reviewer, since "no electronic level" is listed.
And I wonder, all these people with their: NO VF and " no this and no that (usually small things) a deal breaker for me", I wonder, do these people actually own ANY camera and most importantly DO they TAKE pictures?
NickL01: I bought an EOS-M at the discounted price about 3 weeks ago.
It's a superb little camera. I read all the comments about autofocus speed, but it's not an issue for me. It might be a tad slower on the spec sheets than other cameras, I know not, but in real world use it's fine. No signs of it having to hunt significantly more often than any other autofocus I've owned (rather too many...). It happily locked on to the Red Arrows screaming over my house at a few hundred feet, which is a reasonable challenge. (I'd updated the firmware by then, but it was OK before)
Not having a viewfinder has always been a deal breaker for me, because of screen visibility. Not an issue. It's entirely usable with unshaded sunlight falling directly on the screen.
I'm amazed at how easy it is to grip and hold steady - with big hands I usually struggle with small cameras.
I envisage my DSLRs staying home more often. I think I may finally have found my ideal walk round camera... Absolutely delighted!
Agree with you totally! It has an amazing IQ, with the slow AF one can learn to live.Just set it on your favorite position and start taking pictures. I just wonder, will there EVER be a review?
Chusito1: Pentax have been making extremely good cameras almost from the start and they, IMHO do not have nothing to envy to Nikon, Canon or else. If you know how to take pictures and know the abilities and limitations of your equipment you can take first order/quality pictures and do not have to complaint about non-issues. This forum like all others appears populated by non-photographers. I know a guy from Indonesia named Rarindra Prakarsa that has been using 3 MP and 6 MP Canon DSLR cameras since their inception and he does a magnificent use of their capabilities and he is not thinking in OLPF, lens selection (He has used old lenses with lens adapters from Pentax and others), noise, AF selection, high ISO performance, FF nor anything else. HE just take PICTURES. I wonder how many people here are real photographers, there is so much bull written here.
Pentax k100D with 135mm f/2.8 Super MC TakumarNikkor 55mm f/1.2 with Pentax mount adapterYashinon 75-230mm F/4.5 with K mount adapter
couldn't agree more! Well said mate!Greetings.
sean000: Interesting story to juxtapose with Kate Bevan's anti-Instagram rant. It's a wonderful photograph. But does the art filter make the photograph better or worse? I like the photo and I like the look and mood the filter creates. I would probably like the photo without the filter effect as well. Any time you use effects like these you run the risk of alienating some viewers who find it gimmicky, but you may also wow some viewers who think it is really cool. Either way the photograph needs to be a good one, and this one definitely is in my opinion.
But as Luke Kaven commented, I would think that most journalistic photo editors would reject this shot because of the filter. New York Times Magazine is of course a features publication, so it can get away with obviously manipulated images. For straight news reporting, the audience might wonder if the contents have been altered as well as the colors. Was that kit really there, or did the photographer add it?
one could still use Photoshop ....
Dr Gal: While the NYT photos have interesting subjects and are very well composed, the technical faults are such that I find myself unable to enjoy watching them. These are shots taken with a lo-fi camera and filtered with a lo-fi app. The colors are unreal (in a bad sense), dynamic range is non existant, and one can find more details in a Kodak disc camera shots. Sorry for being harsh, but some shots are so bad I would be embressed to have my own name on them (and I don't make a living from this stuff).
I can see, you're a real enthusiast
Michael Uschold: With all those million dollar algorithms and super fast processors coming as a freebie, how about something mind-blowingly trivial: a interval timer for timelapse photography? No, instead we have to pay a lot of extra money for a not very small and light bit of kit. What a pain! The argument that few people use that feature is poor - there are many features on every camera and every computer and every piece of sophisticated software that few people use, but they are very important to the ones that do!
End rant. Other wise a happy Canon customer.
Interval timer. One of the reasons why I am still very happy with my D200!
After having been "taking pictures" and schlepping around pro "stuff" for over 30 years (starting off soon with the most fantastic F2+motor and a bag full of lenses and other gear - at one time we had the bag on a scale - it went over 20 kilograms ! - ending with the 5DMKII+ 24-105...) I recently bought - in spite of and not wanting to wait any longer on DP for a proper review - a NX 200+ 20mm pancake!And I am sooo happy!
carpediem007: Still no Ricoh GXR support... :-(
And no DNG either... :-( :-( :-(
neither nowhere Samsung NX etc etc
King YONG: Dear DPreview,
May I humbly ask for the time of a formal NX200 review? Thanks,
I wonder dear Dpreview, do you have issues with Samsung?No review on NX 100, nor NX11, NX 200 ....?
rjx: Please NO 4/3!!!
I wanted an Olympus DSLR so bad but the 4/3 killed it for me.
I know this will never happen, but just imagine if it was full frame. The Olympus colors and glass in a small FF package. OMG.
Can we at least get 1.3x??? Please.
or just buy a Pentax K5
Steven Micallef: I for one am so excited for this camera. I own a GF1 (and GF2 and GH2) and the one thing I've wanted all along was a high-res live viewfinder just like Olympus users had available. It doesn't have to be built-in NEX7 or X100-style in my opinion.
However, I'm surprised that this hasn't been brought up by others. The GX1 looks closer cosmetically to the GF2 than the GF1 (which is no bad thing because that too is a wonderful camera.)
Essentially, the GX1 is a GF2 with a mode dial. I like in the review where they say the flash unit is "very similar to the one found in the GF1." That it may be, but, it is IDENTICAL to the design found on the GF2, same for the placement of the flash release button being further left. And the HDMI outlet on the right. It even has the silly IA button in the same spot. I wish there were some side-by-side comparisons of the GX1 and GF2(perhaps in the full review). Or maybe they won't since so many want to pretend the GF2 never existed. Lol, weird.
@yabokkie: And you were born when? Yesterday?