borat21

3rd place is the real "winner" though it's the wrong word for such a tragedy

DPs bias towards this subpar tool baffles me

that's why photoshop now has a neural filter called colorize ;)

after years, my life became easier after buying a leica as I will never have to choose among inferior brands again (of which we all know: canon is the best, followed by nikon and no real...

the amount of detail in each image is ridiculous. the resolution (not to be confused with pixel count or sharpness) is easily on par with medium format cameras. shadow recovery is crazy same as ...

same for q2m, finally an expose for highlights mode

whenever I shoot with auto iso, no matter the lighting conditions, it doesn't start with iso 100 but with iso 200 - is that a bug somehow?

not more than snapshots

even peter lik retouches less lol but that winter monochrome picture is great!

did not mean any offense. of course the pictures are very good and better than what most people would ever produce in a lifetime. it's just a bit dommage that dpreview does not do such articles...

not that impressed by the pictures. they are good but not great. I prefer jim richardson.

if u want to compare 2 things, make a table and not a slideshow

good shot

a real work of art, thanks to leica

it's underexposed lol

it's obvious why I need a leica. no phone could take such a picture. oh sorry, I meant no camera lol

this is so ridiculous. who needs a 60mpx camera for 9k usd without any features? nobody except people who can't take pictures.

nobody wants it back, at least not in the state it was... also years ago they promised apple photos (iphoto) would be more pro, which it isn't. I had to migrate 1000s of photos away from aperture....

no, no, and no. a real artist makes any scene great. the photos above are merely pictures of the scenes, but no art.

there's one photo I really like, one. yes, u stand in front of interesting landscapes. but I don't see the art and magic in most of these photos, compared to e.g. jim richardson.