Top 10 sample galleries of the year #1: the Nikon D850

Define 'unique.'

Not like all the others.

smart ass.

What I like about the Fuji "look" is that they don't look digital and don't have that smooth, all over artificial texture. The more random pixel placement makes the pics look "filmish" to me (and others I imagine) It was more noticeable with the old Fuji 16mp sensor but the new 24mp job in my XT2 has a good look too, especially when converted to B&W.

All other digital camera pics look the same to me.

Hugo808 My father in law was a pro landscape photographer and did some amazing journeys to get some incredible shots of China in the 60's to 80's.

I look at his photo prints now and the image quality is just awful by any modern standard.

When he saw the prints from my 2003 Sony F828 8mp 1/2.3" sensor, he was literally speechless and put away his film camera forever.

I am glad you enjoy the "filmish" look and the "random pixel placement". To each their own I guess.

I love the accuracy and reproduction of digital.

This is what I mean:

https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/8715980348/photos/3576009/the-trees

That's what they call the "organic" look. Works for portraits but not so much for landscapes, IMO. I'd like the crispness that digital provides with landscapes.

Try harder Sandy b, show me a twins lens DSLR kit from nikon for 250

https://shop.usa.canon.com/shop/en/catalog/eos-rebel-t6-ef-s-18-55-with-ef-75-300mm-f-4-56-iii-refurbished

OP has been officially.... SCHOOLED. Class dismissed.

You're missing the point. There is nothing of interest coming out of Canon - perpetually failing to innovate is getting them a poor reputation on delivery. The DOA 6DMKII being just the latest incarnation of lack-lustre regurgitated aged tech, and everyone knows it. Canon don't hold any advantage anywhere anymore - this is exactly how it went for companies like Nokia just before they were eaten alive by Apple. The bigger they come, the harder they fall, and Canon are going to fall hard.

@russbarnes: Not sure if your comment about "nothing interesting coming out of Canon" is necessarily a true statement (and that's obviously subjective). Maybe to you and Me, there isn't, but if that was the case, they wouldn't be in the top #1 or Top #2 camera brand spot now would they? They must be doing something right.

Although, perhaps DPR should have made lists for various categories (ie. cameras, lenses, although sometimes people seem them as a whole--such as an 85mm on a D850 body).

A top ten of cameras sold per these categories might be enlightening. If such numbers are available

None are cameraphones, that tells you something, doesn't it ?
I personally look at galleries of gear I will NEVER buy, just because I am curious. So I do not give any serious meaning to this kind of top 10 list. They are not market share or sale figures.

Actually Canon's M series is getting better and better. The very first iteration was laughed at, even DPR wrote it off as a novelty. Now read the M5 review and it's a legit build. Once Canon shores up a few issues, namely the lack of a full E shutter, 4k video, and better battery life, it will be a real force in ML.

Yes we get it you hate Canon, doesn't matter. Sony's first ML were pretty bad, yet people insist they keep getting better and better. Same with MFT, Fuji, ect. Canon keeps making steps each generation. They already have the best video AF, once they put 4k in an M body, they start to take over the video field.

4k and dual pixel on apsc (or FF eventually) with full control of EF glass? They will crush video sales. Canikon are taking their time to do it right, learning from the growing pains of the others. But hey feel free to not buy them once they launch.

Max Iso and when will we see lenses for those M series? Of course canon will fix all the issues, but when? And canon will put 4k with the same codec they used on the 5DIV? That will make videographers happy...

It's not as simple as doing a ML camera and canon will be great again... Right now, if the 5DIV was ML, the A7RIII would still kick it's ass. If canon decides to do a new mount for mirrorless FF, they're years behind...

They have to do a camera that is better than the 5DIV in a mirrorless pack that they've never done before... and cheaper than the 5D as well... That's insane...

It's not about liking or disliking canon.. It's just looking at the task and realize how improbable it is.... And if the first ML FF canon camera is a fail, it can well be another 2 or 3 years until they try again. Can they really give 3 more years to sony without competition?

I'm not sure people will buy a canon FF ML... Most people don't buy the aps version from canon... People change from a 70D to a Xt-2 or a 6500, not to the M5...

If they're not a real option on the aps market, will they be on the FF? I've never seen anyone going from a fuji x-t2 to a M5...

I think there's a wide range of needs. For you it's Sony or Fuji. My issue with both of those is price and selection of lenses, and the bodies seem a bit overpriced. In time that may improve. In fairness MFT is the same with most body prices. Their lenses are a bit better in selection.

Canon isn't perfect overall but they have a much bigger range of glass, and video AF i can actually use. Now if we are talking C-AF, dual pixel doesn't have the sheer speed of an A6500 but if i were buying for that, i'd still buy a DSLR.

If i were to buy another ML, it would be probably for a video cam and a backup stills cam. For video an M5 or M6 would be an actual improvement over my Nikon, but i prefer a DSLR over any ML for stills still. You may feel different, some agree with you, some with me.

That's the beauty of choice, and many will choose Canon for their own reasons.

CCD FTW

GH5 is great for stills, it isn't all about just pixel peeping you know? The fact you can shoot 4K 60p at 10bit and then shoot 20mp photos all in a small package with plenty of adaptors and stunning anamorphic lenses or even your beloved leica glass means it is a much more interesting proposition in my books. The Leica M10 is expensive and feature poor. I am not saying the GH5 takes better photos, but for £1500 it does a whole lot more and for a professional photographer could open up a new avenue of income with very decent video. Not so simple, nice attitude you have there pal.

I don't understand why m43 fanboys keep saying their cameras like the GH5 are a "small package".

"plenty of adaptors and stunning anamorphic lenses or even your beloved leica glass" That applies to basically any mirrorless camera, including Sony A7.

ZeBebito

For what the GH5 does, it is a small camera for the price, the equivalent A7 is almost double

@ Graham Austin - Someone seems a little hurt. I guess your comprehension isn't that great or just get defensive over anyone who says anything about the GH5 (or perhaps m43's) as some kind of personal insult.

Let me be VERY clear: The GH5 is a very capable hybrid camera and as your own post proves, is REALLY interesting for it's video capabilities. However the still are 'fine' and perfectly acceptable for many use cases, hardly anyone looking at the GH5 does / was getting terribly excited about it for STILLS (ie doing lots of looking at the sample gallery).

Again never compared the Leica to the GH5, had absolutely nothing to do with it. This is an article about traffic to sample galleries, nothing more. Plenty of people like to bash Leica and so trawling through the gallery to find 'issues' is certainly not uncommon.

As a result I suggested that the Leica M10 sample gallery was viewed more than the GH5 gallery. I don't understand how this is complicated or an attack on the GH5?

It is also a FACT the M10 gallery had more visitors than the GH5 gallery. I was merely offering an explanation as to why that might be given the volume of GH5 buyers to M10 buyers one could expect it to be the other way around.

7D III - 80D sensor in a 7D body with 5D IV AF... everyone will be scrambling to see that gallery!

5DSr II - 80D sensor cut to FF size... amazing! The pixels will be exactly the same as the 80D. But this time they won’t skimp on the DPAF.

Canon Full Frame mirrorless... chock full of 6D II-ness. Extraordinary!!!

@ photomedium - True. Canon could just do a ‘mirrorless’ as in ‘just remove the mirror’... actually that seems like the kind of half-hearted attempt Canon would do.

As a long time Canon user (dealing with with Nikon USA being far worse than reduced dynamic range) I don't expect your prediction to come true. But if Canon doesn't find a better sensor by Photokina, it's hard to imagine what they will offer.

The trouble with you guys is you don't think anything through. A mirrorless FF requires new lenses. Even if M-mount is suitable there are no lenses that image a full frame sensor, so Canon has to introduce a whole new lens line for this camera. As soon as that happens, existing Canon shooters with baulk at the prospect of having to buy their lenses again - and not at the the low prices of designs that have been on the market for 25 years, like the 85mm 1.8. :)

If you have to start again - why stick with Canon? Canon simply will not risk testing their customer's loyalty in this way.

This is assuming they find a way to offer 4K video with an mpeg codec and IBIS, let alone 20fps silent shooting with no blackout or a 42mp camera with 10fps mechanical shutter.

Mirorless does not NEED new lenses but it can use new lenses.

I am very happy with my 5DS R. Was out yesterday in very bright and contrasty light. Performed very well. No lost highlights and raising the shadows was OK. I don't think Canon users have much to complain about as it is.

@Jacs
A mirrorless camera that uses EF lenses would be compromised in terms of performance and would make Canon a laughing stock. Canon will not do it.

Canon has spent more than 30 years building up its EOS range to near-supernatural proportions in terms of reputation. What is their 'crown jewels' as a DSLR maker is an albatross in terms of mirrorless development.

There are lots of things that they can do, but the least financially attractive of them is to try to develop a competitor to the A9 or A7rII/III. There is probably more economy for them in spending money on marketing and astroturfing against Sony.

Digital cameras are essentially video cameras and Sony is stronger than anyone in this area. Their dominance is foretold.

sofukinwhat you're right.. They may be really bad cameras, but they're all canon parts... Wait, that's pointless... I don't care if my camera is a mix of brands.. I just want it to be as good as it can....

Coming from somebody with two Canon bodies and no Nikon one in his gear list...

zzz...