Drab images in the name of high dynamic range, particularly on the beach front photos.
It's a trend I am seeing more and more. Everything grey. No snap.
I have a theory some of it is considered more acceptable due to the fact that looking at your images on an iPhone or iPad actually gives them extra artificial snap.
And it seems to be creeping even into the latest Canons like the G7X.
I seem to be in the minority though.
lemonadedrinker: Never heard of them until I saw this item....find some other band to photograph is my thought.
I'm not talking about the Stones, who are great, but the commenters who are still back there.
Niala2: I don't get it how one can possibly judge if the camera is doing a good job (better or worse then other cameras) by looking at - how ever good sounding concept of - "real-world samples" here on DPreview.
Maybe that's what most people actually photograph.
... or you could use your eyes and look at the photos.
Let me guess. Early sixties?
I love how people think their lack of knowledge is something to be proud of on the internet.
Neither the band, nor Dave Grohl, is exactly unknown. You may have heard of a band called Nirvana. Dave Grohl was in it. He founded Foo Fighters.
If the tabloids told you about a star who broke his leg but kept on playing recently, that was Grohl.
justmeMN: $948, and no touch screen?
"All it will take is for a few (more) Pros to endorse touch - screens and all the nay - sayers will jump on board like rats"
No. All it will take is for Sony to add one. And then they will have always been vital.
Fredy Ross: Ilove my sony rxii but would think about an upgrade but the focal length is too short.
Here comes Howie speaking for "most" again.
"Most" buy other cameras.
Jennyhappy2: The more negative comments on the RX100 IV, the popular it becomes. Everyone seems to be an expert Of which probably none of them don't even own a RX100 I, II, or II. Let alone a Sony camera.
If I recall, many felt the same thing when the original RX100 came out.
"Every time people spot a flaw in this camera, other people want it more."
Yes, and there's a name for them.
That is perhaps one of the least mature comments of the year. Congratulations.
I long for the day people fall out of love with the grey on grey HDR look. Where's the "snap"?
Lee Jay: No AA filter = no sale.No OVF = no sale.I suspect I'll never own a Sony camera since they'll never produce something I'd buy.
"Sony is simply doing what the majority of people want" The majority of people are NOT buying Sony cameras. This is one of the most specious arguments of all.
This camera may well turn out to be the best thing since sliced bread or the second coming, and I am even open to getting one, but my god, I really do feel like I have fallen into an Apple fanboy parallel universe from ten years ago.
Not just from the article, but also the comments. Woe to anyone who dares to feel it might not best meet their needs.
The difference is the Apple religion has become a little less zealous.
paul simon king: Just been told that LR6 perpetual licence won't get any upgrades should any be released
Can anyone corroborate this this?
Barry sure is, on EVERY issue, dedicated to saving Adobe from the slings and arrows of outraged customers.
Or, as Adobe considers us, mugs.
Helle: I am getting pretty tired of Adobes CC policy - keep charging money from me endlessly. I wonder if there is another software that will do what Lightroom do and NOT as a subscription? Pay once - and update when I can afford it?
It all hinges on how much one can trust a software manufacturer. And that depends on how upfront they are with us. For me, the record here is not good.
GaryJP: Funny that Adobe and Apple hated each other so long, when they are increasingly becoming mirror images in terms of imposing their will on consumers.
Adobe has its evangelists, Samsung has been caught paying forum contributors, many companies have online marketers who do not declare who they are.
Anyone who thinks they do not operate in these fora is naive to the point of insanity. Or reads posts VERY selectively.
vadims: Standalone Lightroom 6 is still missing on adobe.ru... But one can, of course, conveniently buy Lightroom CC 6. (Yes, there is http://www.adobe.com/ru/products/photoshop-lightroom.html which has a "Lightroom 6 - Buy" link at the very bottom, but that leads to store selector that causes infinite page loop in Chrome and FF [and hangs browsers, eventually], and leads to Lightroom 5 in IE).
Their sales in Russia are handled by Softkey.ru. Their site does have LR6, but only full version, not upgrade. Just got off the call with their customer support, they confirmed -- no upgrades.
Now ignoramuses like David Rossberg would say that's whining... OK, Mr. Smarty Pants, tell me how I can upgrade LR5 to 6 w/o signing up to CC.
<sigh> That's monopoly for you...
The difference is you presumably have invested ZERO effort or resources into those products.
Anyone who thinks the subscription model is a gift to consumers is a clown.
TheDman: Will all the whiners please switch to Capture 1 already (like you keep threatening to do, but don't) so these comments sections can actually discuss the new product and not be filled with complaining about something that happened 2 years ago?
TheDman, since when is this an Adobe website? If you want your own fan website where no one ever says anything bad about Adobe, why not open one?
MarcMedios: This is such bad timing for Canon!!!!
They remove the ONE thing that made the G-Series great: the viewfinder, offering one as an option and having the viewfinder increase the footprint of the camera.
Then they still haven't solved the issue of shutter lag.
Sony 100-III anyone?????
Ha ha ha. Good luck with that.
MarcMedios, I think you should try it for yourself before speaking of shutter lag. Having tried, but not bought, one now, this is one aspect of the DPReview review that completely baffles me.
Ken Heid: I see a lot of post comparing the G1X to the Sony RX100 M2.
I wonder how many of them actually used both of them.
I used to be a Canon only person. I had the G1XI picked up an RX 100 M2. I was totally impressed.
The Canon G series had only one advantage to me over the others in their class. That was the built-in viewfinder.
Now that is gone.
I sold Canon G1X and kept the RX100 M2
The G series are not pocket-able like the RX100's They don't have interchangeable lens. It was a camera that I rarely used.
Now when I am going out, I tend to grab the RX100 M2. The pictures and Videos I get are great.
Like the G1X M2, an optional EVF is available for the RX100 M2. I never got one. It is expensive and changes the camera profile.
I agree that Canon missed the mark with the optional EVF ( $300) for the G1X M2. It failed with the RX100 M2 and it will Fail with the G1x M2.
The future is the pop-up EVF on the RX100 M3.
You can keep the G1XM2. My Rx100 M3 is on pre-order.
I have used both. And, having looked at the studio samples, and the new drab outdoor gallery of the RX100 Mk3, I'd have to say you are welcome.
It is interesting how quickly the comments on that camera have gone from enthusiasm and fervor to extreme defensiveness.
Among the comments now are those that say "These pictures should not be considered relevant because ..." and "It is not fair to compare it with the G1 X MkII" because ...
The cold hard light of reality seems to be setting in.