This is not macro...
zsedcft: Why is everybody not using wordpress? I understand the appeal of zenfolio etc. because you can just create a site and they will deal with selling your pictures and handling your clients, but simple portfolio sites look much better with a simple wordpress theme.
You can get a good theme for $50, Hosting for about $4 a month (or less) and your domain for about $10 a year. Once you get a little more advanced, you can add a shopping cart using woocommerce and link it to your paypal account for free. The option are pretty much limitless when you get into plugins. Wordpress.com can even host your site if you don't want to get too technical.
IMHO, if you want to be a pro photographer you pretty much need to know how to run a website. It really isn't too difficult once you get the hang of it, either. The sites on photographers.pro look extremely amateur. You can browse live sample wordpress websites at themeforest to see the difference. Just type "photography" into the search bar there.
Because media management with Wordpress is terrible.
Paul Grupp: Any serious hobbyist or professional who thinks that it's worth switching to another platform just because Adobe rents a combination of Photoshop and Lightroom for a measly $9.95/month is either just playing around or being flat-out unrealistic. I get it -- some of us would prefer to own the software. Well, that's not on the table. The question is, if you are serious, is $9.95 a month really burdensome? Not even close. And if you have invested hundreds, maybe thousands of hours in learning the ins and outs of Adobe products, switching to something else because you think $9.95 is too much to pay is being penny smart and pound foolish.
Sure, but for the moment the standalone version is still available so I'll stick to it.the thing is with our photo libraries we are kind of a captive market. But yeah I think everybody here is keeping an eye on the other available solutions, be it Capture One, Darktable, Lightzone...But migrating would/will definitely be a huge PITA...
mmann1411: With some 100,000 pictures organized in Aperture, I was seriously angry with Apple for killing it. I tried and hated Photos - a baby photo editor/organizer. So, since my Mac was getting older I signed up for Lightroom CC v5 and moved my entire library over to my newer P.C.Apple, you just lost a previously satisfied user.
Lightroom also works on Mac... just saying...
ThePhilips: "Panasonic's JPEG high ISO noise reduction continues to disappoint us."
Hehe. A trait typical to female writing: "I like it" but "it disappoints us". For positive or neutral opinion - "I", but for the (esp strong) negative one - "we". :)
Considering that it is your only slip on the whole "Shooting Experience" page, I think it highlights the biggest disappointment with the little camera you had.
It is indeed condescending - whatever the identity of the writer - to comment first thing about the writer's identity instead of commenting on what this writer wrote.Besides, do you often see comments along the lines of "typical male writing"? Isn't there anything to do really with the fact that dpreview is still by and large a male geek preserve and that, "waow a lady writing, geez!" comes as a bit unusual?
Jesus, what century do you live in mate. Going at a writer because this writer is female, please... Sad sad man... And 5 likes... Oh god get a life, get a hobby, a brain...
Hmmm... I have this great photo that I love about a friend lighting a cigarette. Is that ok?
Has the auto-tone become useable?
So am I getting this right? This is a "competition" organized so a healthcare company can get a picture for free instead of paying a photographer? Really?
Some old school photographers seem to have problems accepting m43 in the Canikon ballpark.http://www.semiocity.com/blog/2012/12/23/reponse-photo-keeps-on-snobbing-micro-43-no-top-buy-award-for-the-e-m5/(in French)
Yep, entries should be curated...
TomFL: Lack of image resize seems to be a basic missing feature. Although I understand the export resize meme, I get some files such as way too big scans or a set of large photos that really don't need to be maintained at full resolution as examples. Simply too much disk space. Round tripping to PS seems crazy just to resize a photo.
Lossy DNG may be helpful here.
Well the whole idea is non destructive editing so...
Ok but what about the editorial line? No more editorial line? If an official review says camera X is so so, a blog says it's a wonder and an article trashes it... all this within the dpreview website... what about the authoritative value of dpreview statements?
thx1138: The photos show why this camera is no better than a P&S. Every single shot has almost infinite DOF. Even at f/3.5 there is zero subject isolation. I can possibly understand the sensor size, but cannot understand the lens choice. You have to ask yourself why go to the trouble of developing this system in the first place and giving it supposedly great AF, fast shooting and then saddle it with lenses that are the reason you'd want to move on from a P&S in the first place. It's like putting a 300hp engine in a corolla but leaving it with stock tyres, brakes and suspension. The lens speed should have been in proportion to the sensor size.
I cannot see what possible niche this is wanting to fill. What person would want a camera with such high AF performance and speed, yet be totally undiscerning about lenses. What person wanting to step up from a P&S would want to pay more than products that have bigger sensors in cameras that are not bigger and are far cheaper?
100% with you on that one. This is doomed to fail...
vFunct: It looks like this is the best consumer camera on the market.
This camera instantly made the Sony & u43 systems into useless junk.
u43 and Sony NEX sucks because the sensor is too big and uncompetitive against Nikon's DX system.
You're a funny troll you know...
I actually like it that these are the guys who will be running Pentax from now on :)
Bjorn_L: *Useless review*This sort of rubbish is FAR below DPR standards.
You left off several rather important criteria.How about print quality from a printer?How about cost per page? This is the tie breaker for most printer purchases. For example, the Canon & Epson a3+ printers have nearly identical out put (edge to Epson), but the cost of ownership of the epson is 3-4 times as high.Actual print speed vs claimed?Speed in other areas (power on, etc)Is there a power consumption difference? Might be useful for small shops/home use where the internet capable printer is likely to stay on 24/7.
All you covered was scanning. I mean.. yippy, skippy! Scanning is the least used function in the digital age. Nice to have for older stuff, but this is not "what to with old analog" photo review. It is *DIGITAL* Photo review!
ps: how about more reviews relevant to this title. Why even bother branching out when lens and camera reviews only cover 10-20% of available models?
Paddy, for lens review, you have photozone.de. I believe here's is a generalist photography gear website with focus on cameras. I dıo agree, though, tyhat this review should have been more comprehensive...