I Scanned This One Page Article, Take A Look. Main take away: "But our lab testing reveals that a stand-alone camera - even one that costs $500 or less - still produces higher-quality photos...". The rationales are things we all already know about.
Bill_de wrote:
Man, I was afraid we weren't gonna get a new threa... (
show quote)
That's why I posted it, because CR is not B&H, or a Camera Magazine. No spin to actually sell anything by CR. But true they may look at cameras differently than a photographer. This article was about Types, not Brands. And I know CR can be controversial to some people. Different strokes for different folks. And remember some UHH novices don't even know what a MILC is. It would have been nice if they had described terms, but I said it was brief.
Anything that takes pictures counts.
Why knock it? It shows another valid viewpoint, which is always interesting!
Bill_de wrote:
Man, I was afraid we weren't gonna get a new threa... (
show quote)
Cell phone users are bringing it up. They don't care about DSLR's. They don't suffer the need to diminish other people who take pictures.
Why does anyone care what anyone else uses to take photos with? Are you really that insecure about your own choice?
LFingar wrote:
Why does anyone care what anyone else uses to take photos with? Are you really that insecure about your own choice?
Exactly. We generally don’t hear customers in a restaurant ask, “What type of equipment did you use to prepare this meal?”
Whatever camera works for the intended result is fine. I normally won’t ask...
Bill_de wrote:
Man, I was afraid we weren't gonna get a new threa... (
show quote)
If you don’t like the thread, don’t read it. I have never seen this subject presented in this manner and find it very interesting. It’s not always about You. If you have something constructive to add do so, otherwise leave us alone. That is all I have to say about that.
lamiaceae wrote:
That's why I posted it, because CR is not B&H,... (
show quote)
CR has some funky scoring system that generally doesn't tell you much.
Let’s just face it as photographers. Lots of people don’t take pictures to have the best possible picture quality. Period. It sounds sacrilegious I know but it’s true. 😜😜
lamiaceae wrote:
I Scanned This One Page Article, Take A Look. Main take away: "But our lab testing reveals that a stand-alone camera - even one that costs $500 or less - still produces higher-quality photos...". The rationales are things we all already know about.
Main point about this CR report. There essentially is no report in the magazine. Look closely and you'll see that to get full report you need to be member of CR digital club which cost another $40/yr. Cr is starting to use the paper magazine as a teaser to get signups for their digital information. Sad.
LFingar wrote:
Why does anyone care what anyone else uses to take photos with? Are you really that insecure about your own choice?
Obviously a lot of people care as I saw many posts regarding the demise of DSLR. For me I don't care as I don't work in making or selling either phones or cameras.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.