Chris_in_Osaka: Mine is bigger than yours!
Well said, I've spent a while putting some comment together but you sum it up in a short and to the point paragraph.Totally agree.
I'm off to the photography show this weekend, I've been to others over the years and always start to drool over what's on show, but what blows my mind every time is the quality of the photographs on show. I don't stand looking and thinking what gear did the photographer use; Although Some info on the lens is always helpful but not essential, to me anyway. I've said it before but the camera is a box, a clever box, but just a box, the lens is the important thing so forget the gear freaks who will discuss to the minuscule degree the pros and cons of this button or that button and the tonnage of the body compared to say.....A feather...just go to a gallery or a photography show and look at the quality of the photographs it's the end Result that counts.Me, I'm going to look at some paper, inks and lovely lenses and the photos of course. Keep reading the gear freaks who want to put glass eye's to sleep and give an aspirin a headache or....go out and use the camera you've got and enjoy the end result.
The nearest competitor is the Panasonic GX7...not the G6 then, strange one that, considering they are both DSLR type cameras whereas the GX7 is more like a Olympus Pen.
yonsarh: why Hasselblad cannot make their own camera? instead borrowing technology from SONY?
Nikon use Sony made censors for their cameras and then tweak them. Hasselblad has decided to cut manufacturing costs by using an off the shelf design by Sony. Nothing wrong in that but, in this case all they are doing is pampering the people with money. A pro wouldn't fall for the hype because he/she is already using either a top of the range DSLR or a Hasselblad which are the tools of their trades. Hasselblad have always been a top marque for professional photographers and now they are trying to get into the amateur/enthusiasts market by using rebadged Sony designed cameras, be interesting to see how that pans out.Maybe their previous CEO left because he didn't believe that's the way to go regards market strategy but there will always be people who buy stuff just to hang around their necks as baubles to show how rich they are.
Something bothers me about the design behind these cameras. When you look at the spec it's a bit mouth watering...20/1200 zoom lens being the wow factor and also all the usual bangs and whistles that are now common in any new camera that comes along. But, and here's the baffling thing for me, and it's this.Sony bring out a full frame mirrorless camera. How close to the censor is the lens on these cameras compared to the super zoom bridge cameras. I would like to know because if you think about it, imagine a bridge camera with a full frame censor, surely isn't that the whole idea behind digital? an all in one camera rather than a full bag of lenses and other paraphernalia.
What's stopping the camera manufacturers from designing full frame bridge camera? Why do they bring out a camera with a huge zoom lens and put it in front of a censor the size of a knats testicle. The reason I ask this is because I read somewhere recently that a top fashion photographer took an i- Phone On his latest assignment and all the photos on it. When someone asked him about the sharpness of the pictures he said " they don't look for sharpness, they look for impact " so don't mention quality of a DSLR and a prime lens compared to a bridge camera because that doesn't come into it.
Timmbits: Is there a software hack to allow the D3x00 series to do bracketing?
Because that, which costs nothing, and the hinge on the screen, are mainly what set the D5x00 series apart from the D3x00 series.
That's $5 of manufacturing cost for $hundred$$ more in retail price. I'm not sure they'd sell any d5300s if this thing had a hinge.
I point it out, because I'm against manufacturers that have nearly identical equipment, intentionally handicapped, to make you want to sell, instead of keep, when you yearn for that little extra feature. I don't like the feeling of being scammed when I know a D5300 doesn't offer anything more with relation to the extra money it costs.
Totally agree, most manufacturers get up to that kind of scam. Personally I can do without the movie mode if they put in a bracketing facility. If I wanted to make movie's I would buy a digital camcorder. I know it's a choice thing but why bother with some unimportant gizmo for the sake of something that would be more helpful.
Some of the comments on here are so negative it makes you wonder why they bother. There is actually someone on here who has compared this entry level camera with a pro spec Cannon....WHAT!! Then you get the one who hasn't got a clue about card speeds but derates the D7100 buffer, go figure. To have an entry level DSLR with that kind of spec has got to be applauded no matter who brings it to the market so, if you're one of those who's a gear freak but never takes any photos stop boreing everyone else on here and get a life.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion but a lot of stuff on here is just childish claptrap.
Got to say, I like the way it looks. The shutter being on the top plate again would'nt bother me.Shame they had to put program and shutter priority in it. Apeture and manual would have been my choice but thats just a personal thing.Glad they've done away with the silly movie mode, and the lenses look the part.Lets see what the full review brings but for now I think I'll start saving.
Ever since (well not "ever since" ) but at least for a while since digital has got bigger and better I've been thinking why the camera manufactures out there have not brought out a fully manual DSLR?Having all the bells and whistles is all very good but the age old question comes into it "do I need all this auto stuff?The auto bracketing option, yes ok, a good meter of course ( I wonder how many out there still use a hand held meter) and good auto focus.Movie mode, personaly No. Never use it so whats the point, and some of the other auto gizmos too many to mention.Now Nikon have hopefully thought along those lines and are bringing out the 21st century version of the old Nikon FM or FE....happy days.
Brilliant, the work that went into that shoot is just amazing.What a job he's got, imagine having to get up every morning and enjoying the work that you do. Not many people can say that.
Murray Rothbard, so what you're stating is that when someone or some organisation sees an image taken by someone else they have the right just to take/use it for their own needs. They never bothered to get the equipment together, use their own transport or payed for the travel to get there. Didn't do all the hard work but think they have the right just take someone else's work and more than likely made money out of it.Yes he does own the image, he bothered to do all the hard work to get it.He stopped a moment in time, its part of history now and it most probably brought a lot of enjoyment to people who have looked at it.To your way of thinking Ansel Adams is just an insignificant little person who took some of the most iconic photographs ever seen but, realy shouldnt have bothered if he doesn't want anyone to look at them.
How on earth did you get that one in flight? Did you set it up so the wasp broke a trigger beam?Great picture
If what I'm about to write has already been put on here by another member then please accept my apologies.
I'm thinking of changeing my DSLR and have been looking at Sony SLT camera's, looking at the spec of the new A58 it seems to be right up my street.So I looked at the A57 on here just to see the differences between the two.The OLED EVF, great, more mega pixels, good and the odd tweek here and there but, hold on! what have we here? I did a silly thing and looked at the A65 and lo and behold its got a similar spec to the A58 except, its got 4.5more pixels and it has auto bracketing.So, do I buy the new A58 for £450 here in the uk or spend £50/£60 more on the A65 and get a slightly better camera.Even a bigger OR! are Sony going to kick me in the doodaas and bring out an A66.....hmm
Sony got to be congratulated for putting a full size sensor into a high-end compact camera.Love to own one and I like the 35mm lens which in my opinion is a good choice for a camera to take with you on your travels.Seems a great camera for street photography.
This is a fine camera but so is the Nikon D600 and also the Sony SLT-A99 and so on.This "my camera is better than your camera" school of thought is getting a bit boring, and yes I'm reading between the lines here and again yes, everyone is entitled to an oppinion but comments like..."makes the A-99 look like a P&S" just beggars belief. Go to a good photography gallery and before you enter you're asked to try and identify the cameras used and you will be there all day because there's no way for anyone to tell what equipment the photographer used.Todays cameras are amazing pieces of technology, end of.
Typical Murdoc newspaper, never mind how his family may feel or the public for that matter, just so long as it sells newspapers who cares.
The New York Post has no morals and for that matter niether does the rest of Murdocs gutter press.
The only thing that would worry me is the size of the screen, I mean its a good size but if the camera is good to carry around in the pocket, and it certainly looks small enough, the screen, being so large, would be prone to scratching. Or is it scratch resistant? doesn't say in the spec. Other than that I think it deserves a chance, so I await the proper review to come.
I think to use a rangefinder rather than autofocus must come down to what sort of photography the individuals into.Surely though it also comes down to how much you use your equipment, the more you use it the more you are familiar with its operation.
Don't forget the film SLR with its split screen focusing, just another form of range finder. Today's DSLRs don't need split screen because of the super fast autofocus system we have today.
Well done Sigma for bringing out a camera with nothing else on it just a pure picture taking machine.Shame about the write speeds and all that but in RAW up to 400 iso its stunning.Like others on here I rarely take my camera off its base iso so high iso speeds I can take or leave.I hope Sigma can iron out some of the problems with a firm ware update because it deserves to do well.
Joed700: It interesting to see Canon loyalists and Nikon fanboys here debating which camera is better that the other. Some are naive enough to defend the overpricing of the Canon 5D MK III for its imaginary/untested super sensor. The true to the matter is each camera has goods and bads, and so are their lenses. I think as consumers, we shouldn't defend certain brand but to demand quality from the manufacturers. We pay so much money now-a-days for lenses that are made of cheap plastics. Why should we pay over thousand dollars for small sensor cameras like the D7000 or 7D..? They should make full frame DSLRs standard and do away with all the DSLRs with crop factors. Why keep these sub standard cameras around when the technology is readily available? I guess we all know the answer; they do it because they can! Remember the days of the film cameras? Everyone used 35mm and that was the standard.
Got to agree with you there Joed700, the tec that goes into the DSLR seems to be the overriding factor on some of the latest cameras but the manufactures think that all bells and whistles is the thing that will sell.They've forgotten the enthusiast who just wants to take good pictures and doesn't need all the gizmo's that are on these beasts.On a personal level I could list a whole raft of things that I wouldn't bother putting into a camera because most of the time I wouldn't use them and I would love to know what the pros think on that count.I love to see full frame become standard and then the price come down as we all start to use the format, wonder how long it will be before we see a fully manual full frame DSLR.