Just see this blog article and I have to agree with most of the opinions and comments of that guy who has eagle eyes!
http://www.kareldonk.com/karel/2009/11/08/canon-eos-7d-review-noisier-than-40d/
Actually, I had similar observations and comments when the DPR K-7 review is out. I have to say that DPR staff and crew have done great jobs for their recent reviews, in which their comments and conclusions drawn and made are really quite different from what their own testing pictures would say and tell! Well Done, Phil and guys! :-D
Monday, November 16, 2009
Logging you in...
Comments by IntenseDebate
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Soul man · 799 weeks ago
http://www.kareldonk.com/karel/2008/04/27/canon-q...
.........................................................
"After receiving a lot of feedback from my previous post on Canon Quality Control sucking bigtime, I thought it would be good to write an update. Before you read on, please read my previous post including the comments to make sure you know where I’m coming from.
A day after my previous post, I noticed that I got banned from the forums at DPReview. And my thread on that forum where I discussed my blog post got deleted as well. Apparently the moderator(s) there, whoever they are (Phil Askey?), don’t like the fact that I seemed to have enough courage to question the many issues Canon seems to have with their DSLR products."
.......................................................
Vytautas · 799 weeks ago
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk7/page16.a...
K-7 and K20D pictures are simply much more detailed. Nikon and Canon ones are dull. By 3200 there is basically nothing left to see in the N and C images. On the other hand, Pentax images would probably be not much different after smoothing the noise. The lower RAW noise tests are shown and they clearly indicate K20D as the leader.
So, there is NO wonder that the K-7 is given "highly recommended". At least, it is no worse than N and C.