tyb: What a tease article, I'm so dissapointed! I saw the headline and started reading and reading and only finally get to the end to read that you'll publish your buyers guide in a few weeks. Hello, Christmas is what two weeks away, do you know many people have bought or be buying that compact or mirrorless camera in the next week? How many reviews are already out there on the most recent mirrorless. I used to come here to read about things first, these days come here and read for possible validation, but you guys are so behind the times on lens and this is an example of so late on a body review. Whats up with you guys?
@CBestwick: keepreal doesn't want these articles in DP. I agree that's we have the choice of not reading them if we don't want to read about "another Apple" topic.
The point I'm trying to make is that there are other products out there that DP could be paying attention (reviews, news) to besides the "dominant" Apple product. By your logic (fact: Apple is the dominant product, therefore DP also reflects this), then DP would have a lot more news/reviews on Canon or Nikon since they are the dominant selling cameras. But DP still has plenty of topics on Oly, Panny, Sigma, Samsung, Sony etc.
You're ignoring the signs if you don't see the favoritism. There is an abundance of tablets now (Kindle Fire, Galaxy, Xoom). Where is an article on what tablets are "worthy" of photo viewing (IPS, AMOLED displays, resolution). I welcome these articles that touch the realm of photography (even if some don't consider it so), but I just want diversity. DP isn't showing that with tablets and phones/apps.
@CBestwick: Problem is, favoritism seems afoot. We can choose what articles we read on here, but there are more phones than just the iPhone. Seeing "best app" and "Apple chooses blah" articles when the Nokia N8 and N9 have much better/faster cameras, with no "dedicated" articles around them. Plus the lack of Android topics.
It's not really a "choice" if you only have one choice. Favoritism tends to hinder selections (favoritism=censorship).
Please don't seek censorship!
S.A.: Shouldn't have gotten that number considering the auto focus system/price. Autofocus is fundamental. It should be considered as one of the most important features, just behind image quality. The rest is icing. Especially when you are reviewing a 1300 dollar system. The camera doesn't deserve that number. 81 and gold my azz.
@CFynn: Yes, AF is fundamental, by today's standard. The OP never said anything about manual cameras/lenses being "useless". Nearly every camera has AF and are partly rated on how well they use it. That doesn't negate the quality of older or non-AF lenses, just when you WANT to use the AF feature.
Having digital inputs on an audio amp/receiver (optical, HDMI) is fundamental by today's standard. Does that mean old solid state or tube amps from the 60's or 70's are useless? Absolutely not (most even sound better). But they lack the digital inputs WHEN you want to listen to Blu-Ray movies or SACD.
"You can use your eyes"...that's assuming you have good vision to properly focus accurately. Not all of have perfect vision and wind up ending with the nose or ears in focus on shallow DOF (I personally use a 2x right angle VF for critical focusing).
JackM: I think I'll stick with my 7D for real AF and 8fps at full res. I think I'll stick with my 5DII for the low light and shooting with primes. And both for the selection of lenses. If I want something smaller, I'll get a camera that fits in my pocket.
@BBViet: The NEX series misses the "opposite end".
You're missing the point of many of us that want a "pocket-able" alternative. We will accept trade-offs: more noise, no/useless OVF, etc.
But we want it smaller. Not a "fit-in-a-fanny-pack" small. The NEX's lenses and primes defeat the whole purpose of the NEX small footprint. I'm not going to spend $2000 on a camera body and attach bulky, 1st party mediocre lenses. You can use an adapter to use fast glass, but that makes things even more bulkier.
Right now (until Sony gets more faster/pancake/prime lenses), other smaller size cameras are looking tastier. To counter your analogy: If we drive Hummers, then the NEX is handing us a 4-wheeler with a Hemi. Too big, we'd like the speed and compactness of a Honda motorcycle, please.
larrytusaz: I have seen such images prominent, & I'm sure whether I like them or not. You see this a lot in portraits, as an 87 year old pro photographer said to me recently (he's still shooting & highly in demand by the way), he finds the whole thing "faddish and gimmicky," as if a quality portrait isn't good enough anymore. I tend to agree with him somewhat, although I admit I have been applying such "jazz" to people photos I've taken lately.
And yes, more Apple idolatry. Ugh. Further, I DON'T CARE that the iPhone 4S it the most popular "camera" on Flickr, it isn't a real camera, period. McDonald's may be the most popular fast food establishment in the world, but I wouldn't expect a site or magazine devoted to chefs aspiring to fine cuisine to talk about the golden arches & justify it based on their popularity. If the "lo-fi" look is something to experiment with, though, why not an article on how to do this with your d-SLR images at the PC? That would be FAR more appropriate for here.
The best tripod is the one you have with you: any table/counter. The best food is the one in your house: Peanut Butter sandwiches. The best friend is the one next to you:go ahead, talk to some random stranger about your cheating wife.
Let's reverse this, shall we?
The worst camera is the one not on you. The worst food is the one you don't have. The worst pet is the one that's gone and passed over the rainbow bridge. The worst mother is the one that kicked you out of the house and forced you to grow up, because she's not with you. Thanks, Mom.
RazorTM: Why don't you ask Adobe instead?
Actually, the new profiles for the readme file did state the "D3000s" (D3000 plural) and they state the D300S later. But the webpage conflicts with both of those by stating the D3s.
It doesn't really, but you do point out a good problem with Adobe's conflicting notes.
AD in KC: This is the dumbest thing! Spend thousands on the latest digital camera, computer, programs, etc, etc and then use it all to reproduce the look of film! Why not write a program that makes your phone sound line tin cans and string? Or makes your HD flatscreen TV look like hand-shadows on a cave wall?
Actually, most aren't spending thousands. Some of these kids are given a phone (so free). For the ones that do buy the iPhone, that's only $99-$299. They may not even have a computer/laptop of their own (family computer, again free). They may not have CS5 to fake the film look. Just $.99 for the app...that's no where near thousands.
Now that we have digital cinema cameras that can do 60fps, I expect 60fps (or 120fps for proper 3D) for smooth action and motion in movies. So why are they still making movies in the lowly 24fps to mimic that "film" look? Let's go on a tirade about that!
Greg VdB: I for one am so tired of all these 'photgraphic tools' that give inexperienced photographers the idea that such gadgets are all they need to take catchy photographs. Instead of finding out for themselves about composition, exposure, dof, color rendition,... they just point-and-shoot, press the button for one filter, and are happy with the results-that-always-look-the-same.
@king_arthur: You're making assumptions on the OP. He never mentioned anything about what gear constitutes as "real photography". You make money with your 550D. That is a (D)SLR. It may not be a 5DmkII, but it gets the job done and clients will take you seriously. Next time you get a gig, walk in with just your iPhone and see if the client pays you.
You are blatantly taking offense to some fabricated attack the OP didn't make. All photographers have to start somewhere...but an iPhone and it's apps aren't going to bring home much bacon.
techmine: Good Job Tamron. You know right you can't make everyone happy? Its a good start to bring in some lower cost alternatives to otherwise pricey Sony.
You may have heard: high sales decides. Nex is losing prospect buyers because of lack of selection of fast and smaller lenses. Regardless of how good the Nex "could be", they aren't producing much results (right now).
Tamron isn't really helping much with this lens, but not everyone will/can spend money on a Canon 70-200 2.8L IS. So they opt for a 3rd party f/4 non-IS lens.
Don't mix "cheap glass" with glass that is still good and "reasonably priced". You don't need a Zeiss 50mm 1.4 to make good portraits of people.
I like all these "it's too plastic/barbie doll look" comments. This tute actually retains a lot of the original detail unlike most magazines or ads do.
I too like natural. That's why I don't let any of my 3 wives wear lipstick, foundation, eye liner, and other makeup. They just have to deal with the perpetual downward spiral of lookin' like an old hag. There's no reason for them to "pretty it up" for any occasion.
Whitening toothpaste is made from the devil. Regular toothpaste is fine...
D1N0: Basically a small SSD and not a card at all. Speeds wil also depend on how fast a camera can interface.
The "controller" is what separates a regular flash card from a "proper" SSD (it tends to yield higher read/write rates).
I'm not exactly sure how the newer SD cards are doing the high transfer rates, but the newer controllers for SSDs (at least the ones for computers) are getting faster and faster and extend the longevity of each cell.
OliverCardona: I though they were developing CFast as the next gen CF cards?
I'm not keen on a new format... I hope this will fail. CF and SD cards is already too much choice.
The reason why there are mini/micro versions is for even smaller devices that could use the extra room for jam-packing electronics. Cell phones would be a little bulkier if they used CF or regular size SD cards.
And how often do you take that microSD card out of your cell phone? Probably rarely since you can just hook it up via USB to sync files (less chance of losing it).
You don't have use for a super small flash card. Some do. Some may have use for a huge pick-up truck. Some don't, so they offer the Smart car. By your logic, we should only have a truck, 4-door sedan, or a bicycle offered for transportation (forget all the nonsense in-between vehicles).
CameraLabTester: The captured file is in a RAW format.
Provide a way for the user to output the user tweaked file into a JPG file and this would be really super cool.
If Lytro won't allow that simple thing, I am not a bit interested. Sorry.
@R Butler: save 2D of a 3D image?
It wouldn't be too unlike having a new camera that could do "bracketed" exposures, so that way you could have one photo of the 9 exposures you like best. Let's pretend no program can open up more than one photo at a time. So you have to use the company's server to "view" the 9 set photos.
We just want the ability (freedom if you want to call it) to be able to have a single photo from hardware that makes it easier (bracketing or Light Field).
I don't think you'd be too keen on not being able to save a page (let alone a whole book) out of an "interactive novel" you typed onto a "cloud" server from a special typewriter.
Two options are too much "choice" for you? Really?
SD types have SD/HC/XC and Regular/Mini/Micro sizes and Class 2/4/6/10 speeds. CF cards have Type I&II. Clearly SD is the offender for too many unnecessary versions.
It's getting just as bad with video connections: HDMI/Mini/Micro v. 1.2/.3/.4 and Display Port/Mini.
The big advantage here is that this XQD is Solid State Drive (SSD) that some of us use in our computers for the main OS (read/write speeds of 250 MB/s, 170 MB/s). We already have DSLRs that use Dual-core processors and the advent of 4K cameras/camcorders, Class 10 SD cards just won't cut it.
Andreas Stuebs: Nice... But is this still photography?
Is animation still "animation" if computers were thrown in to render CG parts and not "100%" hand drawn or stop-motion animation. It's still photography since its still wholly relying on the photo as the main focus of the piece. The texture is an accenting factor (like post-pro vignetting to photos).
A calendar is still a calendar even if you throw photos in for each month. A newspaper is still a newspaper with or w/out photos for each article. Why wouldn't a photo with a few alterations or additions still not be considered "photography"?
If some people think adding things takes away from a photo, how is adding a black border or stamping your name any different? Those don't come "straight out of the camera".
newe: Why is this stated as an "unusual step" if there are still this many problems to fix? Seems to me Nikon should upgrade the firmware on an on-going basis as this is not a throw-away camera...or is it?
It's unusual in certain products (cameras and small electronic devices) where they roll out a new version and expect/force you to buy one because the old one isn't "supported" any more.
That said, there are some fields where updates are frequent and lasts for years. AMD (the CPU company) has retained the AM/2/3+ socket for a long time. Some early AM socket (single core) motherboards have had firmware updates that allows for even the newest AM3+ CPUs (8-cores) for a motherboard that is 5+ years old.
yukonchris: At least Olympus is being cleaned up. Given the right management, they may come back with renewed vigour. Does anyone remember Apple during the "death watch days" in the late 90's? They were on their knees and down for the count but a new management vision brought them from that to the head of the class. There's no reason Olympus couldn't do the same.
I hope Olympus does turn around. I hope they continue to pursue m4/3rds and initiate a second line of cameras to compete with the full-frame models offered by Canon and Nikon. I think we really need someone else in that market space to shake it up. What actually happens though, is anyone guess right now.
Oly/Panny is currently the only promising answer to smaller form factor cameras (NEX series doesn't have enough "good" lenses, yet). It would be bad if Panny loses momentum too and the whole m4/3 dies. Like Betamax, I'd hate for Nikon's or Pentax's Q to become the only option because of "better marketing" strategies for inferior products. We have too many proprietary small camera systems and lens mounts. At least m4/3 lenses could be used on any m4/3 camera (upgrading camera bodies even between brands would be nice).
gl2k: In Europe the NEX-5 with kit lens is cheaper than the Ricoh.So ... who buys the Ricoh P&S ?omg ... are customers really that stupid ?
Plus the Ricoh can fit on your pants pocket a bit easier than the "stock" lens on the Nex. You could probably still fit a Nex in your pocket, but it would look kind of rude and norty...
Musiclady: Interesting reading, but also filled with some hot air. Solder in a circuit that doesn't conduct as well as some other brand or type of solder? The amounts of solder used in these boards is so small as to have no significant or measurable effect on conductivity.
With lenses as with cameras, you usually do get what pay for, including tighter tolerances. Plus or minus 20% is probably way beyond the tolerance range for Leica glass and probably wider than Canon's L lenses. Also, the better lenses are made of materials that have a similar co-efficient of expansion and contraction so that the critical alignments are held in position regardless of whether it's cold or warm/hot weather.
For me, the bottom line is that the "soft" or inaccurate lens is the rarity compared to the lenses that perform just the way they're supposed to. I also think out-of-focus or front/rear focus issues have more to do with human error and/or a maladjusted camera AF system than they do with the lens itself.
It's not questioning if errors exist or not, it's about which errors are going to factor considerably the end result. A sniper shooting a soda can from 300ft is probably going to notice scope error first over trigger wobble. Trigger wobble error exists and will incur shake, but not noticeable at 300ft. And atoms do exist. Without Atom and Eve, we wouldn't be here...
Frank C.: silly pointless article, this read isn't going to change people's behavior one iota, his time would have been better spent reviewing some photo gear
I hope you don't watch movies, then. Watching them and then discussing what problems you had with friends and family over said movie isn't going to change one iota of why family member B thinks it's still a great movie. Instead of watching pointless movies (any movie) could be better spent taking photos. Because we all know that addressing/discussing certain topics is not worth ANY time than it being spent on being productive. Sleep is overrated.