So is there maybe a full review planned this time around? I see that the D4 and 1DX only made it as far as "First Impressions" and "Overview" respectively. Maybe a "flagship" combo review?
Conspiracy theorists.. reason why this photo won:
PicOne: So.. the appeal is so one can print bigger right? They must be out there, but who orders eg. 36" portraits of themselves from their wedding day? I can't imagine having to live with a huge portrait that includes myself hanging in my living room, looking at this day after day..
Otherwise this 50mp Sony sensor is about equiv in density to 30mp on a FF dSLR which puts it right about where the industry is.
Yes, but in wedding photography (ie. the genre that this PR bit is focused on), and now with both of you saying its not about printing big.. for small prints then, how important is the minute details found in eyelashes? DOF appearance is directly affected by print size; the smaller the print the greater the apparent depth of field.
Daedbird: Unfortunately, this is just a series of camera messenger bags that continue to look like camera bags to me. Its a nice effort, but it looks like a camera bag with a flap....
I feel my only option is to buy a laptop messenger bag, and install some collapsable padded pockets inside to hold the camera.
Whatever happened to the fad of using these types of bags?
Greg VdB: So, the Pentax K-3... First impressions on October 7 last year, still no review. Despite the "explanation" R Butler once gave me (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-df?comment=1981666761), I can't shed the feeling that something went very wrong with that review(er?).
Not sure I see the point of measuring from day of announcement. Maybe more sense in looking from first day of availability in marketplace (in US since that's where DPR resides)? Manufacturers can announce a model any time they want in advance of actually producing the item.
rrccad: 1K USD sounds overkill for a CWD macro such as a 50mm 1:1 is.
macro's aren't rocket science and this seems to be you paying for the name on the lens versus the lens to a gross degree.
no one makes a bad macro and most sub 100mm are far cheaper - heck most 100mm macros are cheaper than this. and probably just as good or better especially from a functionality and usability point of view.
How well do any of those Nikon lenses work though on Fuji x-mount or Sony Nex? Isn't this what this lens is targeted at?
So.. the appeal is so one can print bigger right? They must be out there, but who orders eg. 36" portraits of themselves from their wedding day? I can't imagine having to live with a huge portrait that includes myself hanging in my living room, looking at this day after day..
PicOne: "Notably absent are four big names in professional ball heads: Acratech and Markins heads have smaller ball diameters (with 38mm and 48mm balls respectively), Manfrotto did not have their new Arca-Swiss compatible "Top Lock" quick release system ready for testing this past summer, and Kirk was a no-show."
So? Maybe qualify this with why ball diameter was used to exclude brands? And for Manfrotto, test their "top" offering that is in the market; why exclude the brand because an announced offering isn't sold yet? Kirk a no-show? You ordered one and it got lost in transit?
In the case of the Markins, the distinction was between 48mm (which caused exclusion), while 52mm was included. I understand the math (I guess), but not the criteria (I would think this should have been a review of the top brands, top offering)
"Notably absent are four big names in professional ball heads: Acratech and Markins heads have smaller ball diameters (with 38mm and 48mm balls respectively), Manfrotto did not have their new Arca-Swiss compatible "Top Lock" quick release system ready for testing this past summer, and Kirk was a no-show."
peevee1: DPR, you have a mistake in the specs, it is f/2.8-5.6 lens, not f/2.0-5.6.
Not only that, but the lens is a 4.3-215mm zoom. Or at the very least indicate that the 24-1200mm you indicate is an "EQUIVALENT"
This camera's review/rating, whether deserved or not, has led to it being banished to no-mans land.. At least I can't find it listed here, am I overlooking?
How does one digest the apparent contradictions?
"Conclusion - PROs...Good blend of traditional and contemporary controls...Fairly accessible menu system, considering the camera's complexity
Conclusion - CONs...Locking exposure comp dial is inconvenient (especially with large lenses)...Front command dial not terribly comfortable to use...No two-button card format optionNo 'live' aperture control in live view mode presents inconsistencies between lens typesNo time-lapse option (available on D610)No infrared remote trigger option"
Still no foveon support. what a surprise.
JordanAT: I'm happy they've opened it up. Right now I'm upgrading nearly every cycle for Lightroom at about $100 a pop. Until I got a (Very) cheap student version of PS 5.5, I was dropping another $50-$100 or so on PS Elements every year or two. So for the same money I'm already paying, I'm getting both with regular updates.
What happens when I leave? Well, in theory I lose my editable versions, but I still have my jpg finals. In practice most other major players support, at least to some extent, the psd format, so either I'll stop editing entirely (and the psds won't matter) or I'll go to a format where I can probably import most of the work for the rare case where I'm re-editing old photos.
Adobe doesn't say you'll get LR6 in this plan. It only says LR5 (and updates to such). LR6 wouldn't be an update to LR5.
When LR6 comes out, you'd still need to pay separately to upgrade to this, right? Since only LR5 is included in the $9.99/mo deal.
Am I right in thinking this is only for Photoshop really.. ? Even if the $10/month is held by Adobe indefinitely, this only applies to PS CC, and NOT to LR. If I read correctly, you only get updates to LR5. (eg. 5.1, 5.2, 5.3.. whatever). Once LR6 releases, this is not part of the deal.
ceaiu: Why is everyone assuming only Sigma is affected? Maybe they're the only ones (or just the first) to have a fix.
Spectro.. you do know that Nikon/Canon etc.. offer micro adjustment in their own bodies in order to work correctly with their own lenses?
dylanbarnhart: The lure of this camera is the ability to use photography Apps on a large sensor camera. For some people, like the 150 million active Instagram users, these Apps are the only way to capture/edit/share images. Swithing to a traditional camera requires a steep learning curve with an interface that doesn't make sense.
Just look at the way an image from a DSLR getting uploaded to the web. It's a big hassle and not something a non-techie can easily figure out. Same with displaying photos to a home TV without an HDMI cord (viaTV Link). After using apps for a while, the old way seem unecessary redundant.
Comparing the Galaxy NX to a DSLR, or presenting it to a traditional DSLR audience would make it look silly. Instead, it should be compared to the iPhone or the Sony QX.
Don't most apps have a megapixel limit on the file size?
cgarrard: Even I'm a bit surprised on the final score and rating with this one, and I usually agree with DPR's conclusions.
And I do mean a bit, not a lot- as in a sarcastic reply. To me I thought the GX7 would get a gold award by dpr staffers, seems to tick off a lot of what they like in a camera. No worries though, there might be some intangibles mixed in there too with that score.
Personally I think the GX7 is the best camera for m4/3 Panasonic has ever built.
Is the launch date a factor, or rather should it be.. how does it compare to other current cameras available in stores now? There is no Nex-6n yet.