Amazing, someone had the gall to give this the lowest possible score? I don't care what the reason was there is no way this is a poor shot. This kind of disheartening voting is why I gave up entering these challenges 18 months ago. You have a super photo there and you can be very proud of it.
Joel, while I don't seem to often get to the forums where you post I did look at your new photos and this one was a standout. I particularly like the people in silhouette. It's a very fine shot, one I would print and hang on the wall if I were you. Maybe it's just that the forums you visit respond most to the most frequent posters? There's usually a clique of posters who seem to set themselves a bit apart.
BTW you mentioned that the Avalon and the ES are on the same chassis, and I believe that is correct - also the Camry is as well only there are differences in the length of the cars, maybe also in the wheelbases. I know that back in 2005 the Avalon was a foot longer than my Lexus. An Avalon with all the Lexus goodies (and they are just about all available) would be a darned nice car with lots of room. My wife and I had a rental Avalon in FL several years ago and I really liked it.
Easily my favorite shot of this challenge. Love the composition, the color, a shot to be proud of.
QuantumPhysics: 12 months after buying a Canon 6D, being disappointed with Canon, I bought a Sony Alpha 7 MII and LOVE IT!
Economy is not achieved by hobbling the video, autofocus, HDR and other features as Canon has done. I feel as if Canon punished me for not buying the more expensive rig!
Having taken my licks, it's time for some fresh air. With Sony, so far, so good. Video is definitely pro quality. It does everything well. Native 16:9 delivers the same size image as a 6D and is nearly a 2X panorama. Image quality is sumptuous at 24 MP and the kit lens, contrary to my expectations, delivers excellent contrast, color, and resolution.
Using a Metabones adapter (fairly expensive) my Canon EF lenses are all image stabilized by the body. I can also use my old FD lenses, including an FD 300mm f/2.8L lens, and Sony is on the right track with clear 2X zoom, which is more than a sales feature--it draws on CPU power to interpolate pixels by unique algorithms.
6d has fallen into disuse.
Chances are the new 7D2 would beat all those cameras at AF speed, and it is able to AF in very low light as well. And not just AF speed but tracking as well. Canon is not 'punishing' anyone for not spending more than the entry level model costs any more than Toyota 'punishes' you for buying a Corolla instead of an Avalon. If the Corolla isn't good enough for the money, you find something else that is.
Such a great shot even the sandbaggers couldn't bear to give it less than 2.5 stars. I really like a shot like this; you can just let your imagination fill in the blanks as to the story behind it. Patticake said it well - this is a powerful image.
Roland Karlsson: @Midwest. Almost all images in almost al challenges gets a number of low points. Even incredible good ones. I can only speculate about the reasons for that strange fact. It could be that some puts high scores on the ones the like and low scores on all other. It could also be that some low scores are deliberately put on good images in order to make another good image win. Or it could be that the taste differs so much. There do exist photographers that deliberately make "tasteless" images and dislikes beautiful ones. And some of those photographers are very good. Such a person would put a 1 on a beautiful image.
I've found those low scores so annoying and frustrating I gave up entering these challenges. To me, the lowest possible marks belong on photos that either do not even belong in the challenge (but the entrant is determined to enter SOMEthing), or those which are just utterly bad. Seems to me in most challenges the top photos, which are good, have still garnered some 1/2 star and 1 star votes. Pearls before swine. I think a low vote ought to be accompanied by the voter's ID.
Wonderful photo, but apparently a couple of folks thought it was awful and only gave it 1/2 or 1 star. Wonder if they'd have been so brave if their user ID's had accompanied those votes...?
As a Canon shooter I think Samsung has come up with a great effort here. OTOH the same people who will downrate (say) the 7D2 over ISO100 DR are the same ones who will completely give a pass to this Samsung's AF tracking and low light AF that's not so great. I wish 'em luck with it though, it looks like the best mirrorless action shooter I've seen so far.
Tom Goodman: I could not help notice the camera body sells for $1300 and the "kit" lens for $1500. Yikes.
Canon does have a 17-55 f/2.8 zoom which I don't think could be called a 'kit' lens... it's not weather sealed but it's less than $900 new. Even that is well out of my tight financial range and I make do with an 18-55 f3.5-5.6 kit zoom (stabilized) that can be had new for under $200. It would help a lot for Samsung to have some less expensive options than $1500. Not everyone needs weather sealing for example. This Samsung is probably the first mirrorless camera I would seriously look at for shooting action - but the lens situation rules it out. So near, so far.
Of course some childish nitwit had to give it a half-star rating, the worst possible - well there is no way on Earth it deserves anything near that but the sandbaggers want to win, how does not matter.
brycesteiner: This is seriously considered a sport?
Years ago (I mean 50 or 60 years) I'm told that the scores actually got reported in the sports section of the daily paper.
justmeMN: I guess Real Photographers aren't supposed to use articulated LCD screens. I don't understand why.
(The Nikon D5500 has one, but this camera doesn't.)
They let their wives take photos of the cat with their phones.
Seriously, hello, look at the back of the camera. Where that big stinkin' hinge would go there are a lot of direct-control buttons which would have to be combined or removed or shifted into menus someplace, all much less convenient. Not everyone prizes a flippy screen over better handling and convenience. There are plenty of flippy screen cameras available, not every camera has to have one.
phoenix15: What a fantastic camera... Not !Sorry Nikon, you can't compete with Canon EOS 7D II. Even the 2 years old pentax K-3 beats you in many aspect. With that price tag, if I have money I will buy Olympus OMD 5 II.
"10 year old sensor technology in the 7D2"??? LOL! People arguing about cameras say some really dumb things.
virtualkyr: From a stills perspective - the D7200 is an awesome camera, and a likely good upgrade from my D90.
However, I believe Nikon has really missed a great opportunity to attract video shooters by not incorporating some 4K into this one. They really would have done something Canon hasn't done yet and provide a larger sensor alternative with better low light performance and DR than the Panasonic GH4.
Why would the 7200 'run rings around' the 7D2 at IQ and dynamic range? (At least, if you look beyond the single-number simplistic scoring of DxO.) Other than at the lowest ISO's there is little difference between the sensors and at higher ISO's the Canons are equal or better.
mpgxsvcd: I am so glad I bought the Olympus E-M5 MK II last weekend. It runs circles around every A-PSC camera that Nikon and Canon make in this price range. The E-M5 MK II has better video capabilities, better features like 5 stop IBIS, Live Time, 63 megapixel mode, Great AFC tracking, and better burst speeds. Not to mention that it is much smaller, lighter, and less expensive.
Nikon and Canon both need to realize that mirrorless will be the future whether they like it or not.
IBIS does not make sense on a DSLR if you think about it for even a few seconds. DSLR's are still superior for some things and some of us prefer an OVF to an EVF, like it or not. I've got a lot fewer complaints with my OIS lenses than I would have with a laggy freezing slideshow EVF.
mpgxsvcd: The D7200 is announced almost 1 month after the Canon T6s and yet the D7200 will probably ship before the T6s in April. I have a feeling that Canon doesn’t have their HDR video mode working yet.
How? Crystal ball? Tea leaves? Wishful / hopeful thinking? :)
dcolak: NIKON! Put an EVF in this camera and you'll have a winner!
Put an EVF in this camera and you'd throw away most of what makes a DSLR superior to mirrorless. (And yes there is another side to that coin, but a DSLR should be a DSLR.)
Sad Joe: I am sure that this new camera will fine - it's only with cheaper FF cameras that Nikon's QC seems to have gone of a cliff - having said that the main improvement over the D7100 seems to be a decent sized buffer ( at last) - which I am not 100 % certain Nikon could not have done via a decent software update…then again they need to flog new kit….FLARE test coming DPR ???
I don't know how Canon did it but in the original 7D, a firmware upgrade raised the RAW buffer from about 15 frames to about 25. Not that this is always possible to do but in that case it was.
HeyItsJoel: No articulating screen. Just brilliant.
Look at the back of the camera. That big hinge would wipe out a large number of direct body controls for something most people would use to take photos of the cat. That same argument was used on the 7D2, which has controls virtually matching those of the 5DIII. But people say 'Never mind making it a system camera, where is the flippy screen?!' Maybe they wanted the deep new buffer to let them burst shoot ol' Puss lying on the floor. Really, there ARE other cameras available with that flippy screen if it's desired.
I have had and used cameras with that feature and while it can come in handy, it's something I myself found not as valuable as I expected.
whatta: In general I wonder why a dedicated camera is not better in almost all aspects than a phone.
https://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/1080p 60 fps720p 240 fps
10fps still (without autofocus)
timelapse and gsp as already mentioned.
these are missing from these canons.
Assuming "GSP" means "GPS", phones do not have GPS. They locate by triangulation from cell phone towers, completely different.