Before I even opened this article I knew for sure the comments would be full of sour, sour comments about the Olympics, the camera brand and whether he is paid for his action or not. Who cares if this is advertising, fixed, he a legend or not, Canon, Nikon, black or white. It's just a cheeky action by a world known sportsman who likes to entertain. It's pretty funny if you ask me and it was really nice to see the "sportsmen view" for once.
I did not expect images this great from a communication device coupled to some binoculars. Dan Chung showed me it is actually possible. Bravo!
Zvonimir Tosic: There's a better idea to Pentax / Ricoh name dispute: 1. They can manufacture all their cameras with no name badges on them, 2. Supply them like that to parties out there who actually know - what to do with such cameras, - how to market them well, and - keep their marketing value too.
An updated K5 would be a wholly different camera if rebadged as a Canon 7D MKII. It would sell at a higher price, higher quantity, keep its resale value better and people would rave about it because it's Canon. And Canon saves tons of $$ in R&D.
I agree with you, but I'm mostly laughing about the mental image your sentence "people would rave about [a canon 7D MKII]" gave me. LOL
There is so much sense going on in here. I love the fact that almost everybody disagrees with her (just like I do). To me she sounds like a regular art-elitist.
I do not get how miss Bevan defines "real photography". Isn't photography simply "light captured on a 2D plane" in every possible way (be it processed/enhanced/retouched in any way or not)?
26081989: Although I really like the idea of video tutorials, I can't really understand why one would want to play these back on the camera itself. When I watch photo related tutorials I try out the given tips or settings on my camera. This would be hard to do if you need the camera itself to watch these files. Or would this be aimed at people who go out on the field and watch the videos?
Yes, but they are "designed to". So I'm wondering why..
Although I really like the idea of video tutorials, I can't really understand why one would want to play these back on the camera itself. When I watch photo related tutorials I try out the given tips or settings on my camera. This would be hard to do if you need the camera itself to watch these files. Or would this be aimed at people who go out on the field and watch the videos?
Chris2210: I really like what I've seen of these images. He is clearly a very technically proficient photographer and although these photographs may not have as wide an appeal as the typical staged and airbrushed 'heroic' depictions of athletes we've become accustomed to seeing, they will appeal to a minority.
If what you like is 'beer' produced to a chemically controlled specification; predictable and without variation, you're clearly in a majority. If you prefer something which is the product of individuality, with character, variation and potentially what might be seen as 'flaws' by the B_d* lovers, then you're probably in a minority.
The moral of this little tale is if you don't like it, don't drink it. Just don't condemn the rest of us to your bland tastes.
*Other varieties of chilled urine are available.
Just as you should. "If you don't like these pictures you are a mindless, bland conformist sheep".
bcalkins: Are there any Smartphones in the comparison tool? Curious how these compare to some of the better phones out there today...
Chadley, you mad?
I actually think Bcalkins has a good point. Phone camera's are getting better and better and they are used a LOT. You are implying that only "real" or "knowledged" "photographers" come here for information. I really think you are wrong here because dpreview already reviews a lot of basic and beginner camera's. Or are you trying to say they shouldn't review a Nikon D3200 because its aimed at the beginner market (let alone all the point and shoot models)?
You sound like a photographer-elitist to me.