Olivier GALLEN

Ditch your calculators and get a real computer : Amiga! :)

For people who can't get the f-number equivalency : drop the focal length as well and stay to the real thing: 4.3-172mm f/3.3-6.9.

Agreed. But computational photography improves so fast and on so many fields… that it drives the future of photography (whether you like it or not).

I like Cold storage for backup. Amazon Glacier charges me $1 for 200GB. If I wanted more, I would switch to BackBlaze ($5 unlimited).

Why upgrade lenses that don't need upgrades? (both are already top-notch)

This will be a hit!

So... what Sharp is really showing here:
1. Increased saturation helps sell smartphones.
2. Correct framing is important (and has nothing to do with using an ultra-wide-angle lens in the examples...

You can use ACR standalone (without licensing Photoshop CC)?

@Kandid: I agree with you (even if international accounting standards make things clearer for stock-listed companies).

Adding HDR and Panorama to Lightroom CC would make the 1TB plan at $10 very tempting. No here yet, unfortunately :-(

@north w : you would benefit from understanding others before saying they are wrong.

Point in case: you are right.... and Full Stop is right as well.

Example:
- A : 2.000 units at $500
- B : 1.000 units at $5.000

Would you really dare to say "A at $1M revenue and 2.000 units outperformed B at $5M and 1.000 units"? I would not.

PS: I work in a...

Because selling 10.000 cameras at $5.000 makes you a player on the market whereas selling 10.000 cameras at $500 makes you a nobody.

Revenues are objective (as units are) and there is a reason why...

CIPA(&co) and journalists, including dpreview, should really focus on revenue figures instead of units when making analysis.

Website suggestion: you'd better use PNG for charts instead of JPEGs.

@north w : what you shared doesn't contradict what Full Stop said.

He didn't say a lower MP sensor would have better DR, he said that a low resolution output will have better DR thanks to reducing...

"Canon" + "15 stops of dynamic range"... it sounds so out of place!

Reminds me of Vincent Munier's work (which I actually prefer): http://photaubrac.com/vincent-munier/

Canon is so (unremarkably) unpredictable... that I don't even want to predict anything from this.

Here: https://www.facebook.com/FocusNordic/posts/1578752078911327 Difficult to assess anything from those samples... but I see quite some blur on the bottom-left edge of the 200mm sample...