terence_boylen: Could someone explain why this is a big deal (no sarcasm)? Does DPP do anything better than Lightroom/DxO/whatever?
#1 reason I use it is that it automatically applies all in camera corrections and JPEG settings to the RAW files. This saves a ton of time and your images start at the point where a JPEG would have which means most images require little editing.
#2 is that the color and quality is excellent. It takes me a lot more tweaking in other programs to match DPP default quality.
#3 is that it is FREE and doesn't want to re organize or catalog all my folders for me.
Frank C.: Taping over the apple logo makes it more obvious it's an apple, silly video
It was likely done for legal issues, not to outsmart anyone.
Suave: I sure hope they made it a bit faster.
4 seconds per image is quite fast, isn't it? I've not seen any other software that is noticeably faster.
Very disappointed that 60D is not supported. 70D and 7Dmk2 have not been out that long and the 60D is still a current product. Part of the reason I've stayed with Canon is that I really love the output quality of DPP. Very frustrating for Canon to ignore people that bought fairly high level APS-C cameras not very long ago.
whyamihere: I can't wait to see the results of this year's 'Readers Poll of Products They've Never Used But Have Deep-Seated Opinions On'!
No, that's unfair... that doesn't sufficiently encompass everyone on DPR. This is also the 'Readers Poll of Products They Are Temporarily Happy With Until The Next Shiny Thing Comes Along and Buyer's Remorse or Gear Acquisition Syndrome Kicks In'.
Either way, feel free to self-implicate.
You seem hyper critical for someone with a gear list that shows a fair amount of churn.
Kekal B Hollow: sigma dp2Q is the best camera of all time...nothing beats it, no D810, no 645Z, no NX1, no phase one, sigma is the best camera ever made
If shooting static subjects at high noon, you might be right.
Love all the sad posters pretending like they are too good to enjoy these fantastic photos.
photofan1986: Don't see the point: that's p&s quality. You'd be better off with a good bridge camera.
So I don't have to bring 3 lenses and a bag. Camera strap is my camera bag.
Can I take a the lens of a bridge camera, put on a 85mm f1.8 and take portraits with subject isolation? Can I take the lens off a bridge camera and add on MORE telephoto or wide angle? Can I trade the bridge lens for a 35mm f1.4 when the light drops?
With this lens, I can turn my DSLR into a very nice bridge camera. But I can never turn a bridge into a nice interchangeable lens camera or use a nicer lens on it
h2k: Why not mention the lens' s widest apertures in the headline or at least in the text?
It's printed on the lens - f3.5-6.3
tkbslc: Can I ask why A7 is considered "high end" but Canon 6D is not?
@Rishi: So it is on the list. Not sure how I missed it. I feel a bit silly now. I guess I shouldn't read reviews while experiencing insomnia.
Mr Olympian: I agree the D750 is not the best option for video, but the D750 video is very. very good. There are also hundreds if not a thousand lenses that work very well on the D750. They are not designed for video as many people serious about video might want. For us amateurs, they will work very well. :)
There are even plenty of F4 zooms for Nikon if that would make you feel more at home, Zeisschen
dark goob: Where is Leica on your list? Also, why limit it to just 35mm?
"Full frame" = 35mm sized sensors. You know that, I know that.
Can I ask why A7 is considered "high end" but Canon 6D is not?
tkbslc: The A7S is a great low light *camera*, but has no native lenses faster than f1.8. So it's not really a low light champion in actual use without a lens adapter and some compromises. I'd still have put a Canon in that spot due to native lenses as fast as f1.2 (And f1.0 if you can find it)
I agree, however you are pretty much the same, Zeisschen. Sony Fanboy that likes all his own posts.
When Sony gets reasonable low light action AF and a few f1.4 primes and Fast zooms, then I'd say it can claim it's crown. As for now it's a great low light body without an AF or lens system for low light.
It's very slow in the dark, so I guess it depends what you are focusing on. Canon 6D (not in the running for this review) has great AF in low light and it's pretty fast using the center point.
Again, as a CAMERA, I agree, Sony A7S probably wins. But I re-iterate that factoring in the lens, which is required to take photos, you need a good AF lens with a large aperture. Canon has a dozen or so that fit that criteria. Sony has one f1.8 lens. This limits your options as to what you can shoot.
Why do most people want super high ISO? Generally for events and sports. 55mm f1.8 is usually not going to cover that.
Manual focus is surely not practical in ultra low light, so claiming Sony has f0.95 options that are only MF doesn't really help.
Sony can't AF worth a crap in low light and you think you are going to manual focus at f0.95 DOF in light that requires ISO 400,000 at that aperture?
The A7S is a great low light *camera*, but has no native lenses faster than f1.8. So it's not really a low light champion in actual use without a lens adapter and some compromises. I'd still have put a Canon in that spot due to native lenses as fast as f1.2 (And f1.0 if you can find it)