DPreview commits fraud in favor of Canon 40D !!!!

STill not sure about DPreview:
Take a critical look at these pictures:
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...0d_iso0100.JPG
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...00_iso0100.JPG

http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...00-raw-acr.jpg
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...00-raw-acr.jpg

The first two are camera made jpg´s, the last two are from RAW.

In Firefox you can open tabs so you switch very quick between 2 pics.
The picuture for the Canon and the picture for the Nikon are NOT THE SAME!!

Look and see:
Bottom left: in the Canon pic the old Leitz is standing straight, but in the
Nikon it stands tilted to the right and hanging forward. The Baileys bottle
makes no sense: if you switch from Nikon to Canon, the label on the neck
starts to turn !!

The lighting seems very favorable for Canon. ;-)) Look total left and right
bottom at the crack and the background.
The angle with the Canon is dead on straight, but the Nikon is placed at a
higher angle.
Clearly to see at the bottom with the piece of paper.
Stupidly enough, they forgot to change the watch, because now it shows some
strange things in the Canon picture between the 4 and the 5.
The mirror effect is different on the watch and on the BMW, especially on
the window.

It may seem like little, but if you look at the crops that they show you and
add comment, it makes a HUGE difference if you see the globe from straight
on or from a slight angle.
Not to be taken serious, these scam artists. Obiously heavily funded by
Canon.
I knew something was wrong, now you can see it for yourself.

--
"I don´t need a camera,
I have a photographic memory..."
Sosumi

"Rita Ä Berkowitz" ritaberk2O04 @aol.com wrote in message
...
Sosumi wrote:

STill not sure about DPreview:
Take a critical look at these pictures:
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...0d_iso0100.JPG
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...00_iso0100.JPG

http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...00-raw-acr.jpg
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...00-raw-acr.jpg

The first two are camera made jpg´s, the last two are from RAW.

That's nothing new. The 40D is a toy and pretty much a noise box.


Annika1980 seems to think it´s a tampon: you can dance, swim, walk, run,
heck, you can do anything with it....


--
"I don´t need a camera,
I have a photographic memory..."
Sosumi

Sosumi wrote:
STill not sure about DPreview:
Take a critical look at these pictures:
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...0d_iso0100.JPG
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...00_iso0100.JPG

http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...00-raw-acr.jpg
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...00-raw-acr.jpg

The first two are camera made jpg´s, the last two are from RAW.

I think the issue is more with the lens.

They used the Canon EF 50 mm F1.4 but the Nikon 50 mm F1.8, claiming
that the Nikon 50 mm F1.4 is less sharp than the Nikon 50mm F1.8. Left
unsaid by dpreview is that the EF 50m F1.4 is a sharper lens than the
Nikon 50mm F1.8. OTOH, the Canon EF 50mm F1.4 has more barrel distortion
than the Canon 50mm F1.8.

I think that they should be using the same type of lens, rather than
picking and choosing. Maybe they should just use a Sigma lens on all the
tests, where only the mount is different.

So, can you tell me where George Bush was when he was supposed to be in the
National Guard?

SMS wrote:

I think that they should be using the same type of lens, rather than
picking and choosing. Maybe they should just use a Sigma lens on all the
tests, where only the mount is different.

But then even the same-design Sigma lens could have variable quality
from mount to mount, or sample to sample. Sigma is (in)famous for this.

Sosumi wrote:
STill not sure about DPreview:
Take a critical look at these pictures:
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...0d_iso0100.JPG
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...00_iso0100.JPG

http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...00-raw-acr.jpg
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...00-raw-acr.jpg

The first two are camera made jpg´s, the last two are from RAW.

In Firefox you can open tabs so you switch very quick between 2 pics.
The picuture for the Canon and the picture for the Nikon are NOT THE SAME!!

Look and see:
Bottom left: in the Canon pic the old Leitz is standing straight, but in the
Nikon it stands tilted to the right and hanging forward. The Baileys bottle
makes no sense: if you switch from Nikon to Canon, the label on the neck
starts to turn !!


I also noticed that the bottle in the middle the ring below the cap
falls when you switch to the D200. I guess the photographer got
thirsty. In defense of the photographer, he did not touch the Martini
Rosso. The camera fall from its perch between the two shots and the
two images were taken from two slightly different elevations.

-G

"Rita Ä Berkowitz" ritaberk2O04 @aol.com wrote in message
...
Sosumi wrote:

STill not sure about DPreview:
Take a critical look at these pictures:
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...0d_iso0100.JPG
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...00_iso0100.JPG

http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...00-raw-acr.jpg
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...00-raw-acr.jpg

The first two are camera made jpg´s, the last two are from RAW.

That's nothing new. The 40D is a toy and pretty much a noise box.

Pretty funny; they should have named it "Rita."

"Rita Ä Berkowitz" ritaberk2O04 @aol.com wrote in message
...
Sosumi wrote:

That's nothing new. The 40D is a toy and pretty much a noise box.


Annika1980 seems to think it´s a tampon: you can dance, swim, walk,
run, heck, you can do anything with it....

So that's why Canon camera straps are like the ripcord on a tampon? I
like
my D200 strap on the old Mk III. I must say in the tampon's defense that
it
has more usefulness than a 40D. I mean the noise that are in the 40D
images
almost reminds you of the crap that came out of the 20D. No wonder you
have
to Photoshop whatever comes out of it.

I bet nobody could argue that a tampon is more useful to you than the 40D,
or any camera for that matter.

"Sosumi" wrote in message
...
STill not sure about DPreview:
Take a critical look at these pictures:
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...0d_iso0100.JPG
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...00_iso0100.JPG

http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...00-raw-acr.jpg
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Ca...00-raw-acr.jpg

The first two are camera made jpg´s, the last two are from RAW.

In Firefox you can open tabs so you switch very quick between 2 pics.
The picuture for the Canon and the picture for the Nikon are NOT THE
SAME!!

Look and see:
Bottom left: in the Canon pic the old Leitz is standing straight, but in
the Nikon it stands tilted to the right and hanging forward. The Baileys
bottle makes no sense: if you switch from Nikon to Canon, the label on the
neck starts to turn !!

The lighting seems very favorable for Canon. ;-)) Look total left and
right bottom at the crack and the background.
The angle with the Canon is dead on straight, but the Nikon is placed at a
higher angle.
Clearly to see at the bottom with the piece of paper.
Stupidly enough, they forgot to change the watch, because now it shows
some strange things in the Canon picture between the 4 and the 5.
The mirror effect is different on the watch and on the BMW, especially on
the window.

It may seem like little, but if you look at the crops that they show you
and add comment, it makes a HUGE difference if you see the globe from
straight on or from a slight angle.
Not to be taken serious, these scam artists. Obiously heavily funded by
Canon.
I knew something was wrong, now you can see it for yourself.

If I were you, I ask for my money back on the review.

Seriously, the photos were taken many months apart, so maythe display was
moved and recreated? Aren't they in a new studio now?

Kinon O'Cann wrote:

Seriously, the photos were taken many months apart, so maythe display
was moved and recreated? Aren't they in a new studio now?

Very different cameras with very different sensors, using very different
lenses.

The D200 is a relatively noisy camera, and the lens they used on the
Nikon wasn't as good as the lens they used on the Canon. Maybe this is
fair because a purchaser will be presumably using Nikon lenses on the
Nikon and Canon lenses on the Canon. If they insist on using prime
lenses then maybe they should be using lenses that are as close as
possible in optical quality. I suggested using a Sigma lens with the
proper mount, but as someone pointed out, Sigma lenses vary widely in
quality from lens to lens.