The past year has seen a dramatic increase in staff at dpreview, but less new 'features' than many expected. Why? What have we been doing? I thought I'd inaugurate the dpreview dev blog by shedding a little light on the dev situation here at dpreview over the past year and in the immediate future.
Oct '07 to Jan '08 - Lens Reviews
Aside from the addition of Andy, Lars & Richard to the editorial team, October 1st 2007 saw the addition of myself (Jaysen)
as dpreview's first ever full-time developer (Phil retains his role as hacker-in-chief). By November 2007 we'd
handled the transition and knuckled down to begin the lens review
project in earnest. Reviewing lenses is a complicated business and
we're pretty proud of the proprietary charts, analysis pipeline and interactive UI we've developed for the job. Andy, Phil, Simon and I put some long hours of R&D into that project, which came to fruition when the first lens reviews debuted on 28th Jan 2008. The majority of the subsequent lens review feedback
can be described as polite congratulation, with the remainder divided
between demands for more reviews (praise of a kind) and confused folk
looking for the pre-2008 lens reviews (there are none!).
Feb to Jun '08 - Infrastructure & Search
When we sat down to plan our followup to lens reviews, it became clear that
the majority of our future plans required some serious renovation of
the site's foundations. So, with a tear in our eye, we shelved our
beloved feature ideas and marched into the salt-mines of infrastructure
development. The following 5 months saw dpreview transition to a new
hosting provider with more bandwidth, hardware and redundancy. The
associated hardware/software upgrades also necessitated an overhaul of our search system with some expanded features to boot (any problems with search? let me know) but went largely unnoticed (aside from the occasional yawn).
Jul to Oct '08 - 'Camera Database' overhaul
With the hardware and hosting infrastructure sorted, we turned our attention
to a collection of components loosely referred to as 'the camera
database'. In an ironic twist for a public-facing web development team
(now a bona fide 'team' with the addition of Jan in September)
we've spent the past few months developing a new suite of internal
tools for data entry, analysis and reporting. Besides dramatically
improving the 'quality' of the specs data, the overhaul saw the addition of the 'live view' and 'USB' query parameters to the feature search.
To the lab!
This week we've begun development work for a new, exciting and very public feature of dpreview. I can't say what the new project is yet, but it will be of interest to all dpreview visitors, especially our forum community. What I can say is that we're planning to change the way in which we launch new features onto the site. While past updates have been rolled out silently (or with a quick forum post), future feature releases will be available (initially) in a new 'labs' area of the site (on an 'opt-in' basis). Corresponding announcements and discussion of labs roll-outs and site tweaks will be coordinated through the dpreview dev blog.
We hope to throw this mysterious new project into labs early Q1 '09 for feedback (but as ever, we're operating on a 'when it's ready' basis). In the meantime, in the spirit of the new blog, I'd like to encourage feedback through the feedback channel and the appropriate dev blog comment threads. (discussing bugs/features in the forums is fine, but may not find the right ear). If you're interested in the progress of the site I'd also encourage you to subscribe to the dev blog feed.

Yeah, we need more lens reviews :-) I see the shortlist contains quite a few items already, but including the shortlist you're missing the super wideangle segment so far. Working on Canon myself, I'd obviously love to see the comparison between the Canon 10-22 and the Tokina 11-16, but of course the segment is bigger than that... I like your reviews as I find them to be quite balanced, but one wish (goes for the camera reviews as well): modify (slightly) the layout so that I can spot the text where you're actually giving your opinion and reasoning or where stuff is new compared with the previous model. By volume, a big part of the reviews is just describing the lens/camera, and I'd like to be able to quickly skip this often. (Reading the Canon 50D review is quite boring for a 40D owner, but I still do it because I value your opinion. The point by point listing of all the features already present in the 40D is a lot of text to skip...)
Posted by: cmot | Nov 6, 2008 3:07:51 PM
I'd love to be able to search the database using battery type, so I can identify cameras that use ready available batteries (AA etc) as compared to rechargeable packs, as I'm often traveling away from a power source to recharge them.
Posted by: Nick | Nov 6, 2008 3:33:42 PM
Wow - I clicked through to the comments to add a request for searching by battery type (i.e. AA) and found some genius has already requested it... way to go Nick.
p.s. the comment box I'm typing this into is about the size of my wristwatch - neat idea to keep the comments short I guess.
p.p.s. the dpreview site is a great design - does what it says on the tin - but the concept of the main page (any *camera* page, not the homepage) is a bit diluted - i.e. there's a few different pages for the same camera (review, specs, press announcement) and they're not consistently linked together. *Brand* isn't consistently linked either (for a couple of suggestions). For the best example I know of try imdb.com for *movies* and *actors* (I know they're not cameras and brands but hey, the web's the web so extemporise - see how there's a homepage for each and they're consistently linked.) Now I think about it aren't you and imdb part of the same empire? Good luck.
Ian
Posted by: Ian | Nov 6, 2008 10:34:44 PM
Hi Folks
Great ideas, both of them.
Can we have a "known trolls/troublemakers" listing ... beats vigilante groups hands-down ...
BTW, the new search engine is great, congrats!
regards John
Posted by: John | Nov 7, 2008 2:25:07 AM
More tests on fixed focal length lenses please, especially full frame wide angle Nikon lenses.
It would be nice to see some tests of the Leica lenses for the M8, as this will be on my short list when it has a full frame sensor (if it ever happens!).
Posted by: Bruce Richardson | Nov 7, 2008 11:59:44 AM
Fan of dpreview for a long time - this is an important next step in communicating - and learning - what your users want to see and do. Thank you.
On the Features search (buying guide), in spelling out search criteria, it is frustrating not to be able to include multiple items in any dropdown list. For instance, you (or the market) have segregated size so much that I would want to see Compact, UltraCompact, or RuggedCompact - but I can't see them all on a single search; doing 3 searches is not feasible, defeats the purpose. Same is true of other search criteria like Effective Pixels (I might be OK with 2 or 3 of these), or ZoomWide (I might want both <24 and <28. One way to do this w/be allow Ctrl-click for discontinuous selections on the dropdown list. But you'll figure out the best way.
It is great that one can easily remove cameras from the list once presented.
Keep up the great work!
Posted by: Stew M | Nov 7, 2008 3:50:31 PM
What I still miss in lens reviews is a resolution rating that tells you if the lens under test would be a good match to a certain sensor.
Don't you think that would be very useful information? For instance, one lens may resolve up to (an equivalent of) only 14 MP on a full-frame sensor, and another 30 MP. The latter would be overkill for a 10 MP camera and the former would not do justice to a new 24 MP camera. I know there are 'ifs' and 'buts' involved, but I'd still appreciate hearing if you'll consider adding this to your lens reviews.
Posted by: Daniel | Nov 7, 2008 4:26:55 PM
Would love to see some in-depth reviews of medium format digital cameras.
Posted by: roger urban | Nov 7, 2008 5:31:59 PM
Well I did shout a "Yay!" to myself after the search was updated. Didn't know you would've liked to hear that; you should've gotten yourselves a blog if you wanted to record fan praise.
And the lens widget... Oh man! It was like a nerd orgasm to me!
Posted by: MisoMan | Nov 8, 2008 12:54:22 AM
mmm, on second thought, and since now it's so easy to complain, let me add: I really hate that the page (the main menu on the left) does not respond to my wheel click (third mouse button) when using internet explorer 7; it's the way I like to open new navigation tabs, it's easy and I do it a lot elsewhere in the web.
Posted by: MisoMan | Nov 8, 2008 12:57:33 AM
Infrastructure work is very important and there’s no need for excuse for lack of new features. Personally I don’t need any new features, I want quality, I want reliability, and I want convenience. DPReview is probably the only web site I’ve never seen down ever since I started visiting it regularly in 1997. Thank you, and keep up your good work!
P.S. Why do you need that horrid JavaScript for posting and why do you use typepad.com??? I don’t trust it!
Posted by: Dmitry | Nov 8, 2008 10:08:56 AM
I think the comments should be sorted so as the newest comment is at the top.
Posted by: talepictures.com | Nov 8, 2008 7:52:03 PM
In the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Review, I looked for the dimensions of the sensor in milimeters and couldn't find the information.
Camera makers insist on that awkward and outdated inch pattern, from TV tubes, that doesn't mean nothing to us.
Camera sensors should be measured by the diagonal in mm, just that.
Could you please tell me this dimension in mm?
Posted by: Tiago | Nov 9, 2008 4:07:19 PM
I would like to suggest an improvement to your lens test widget. In the sharpness chart you have a dashed line representing the "Nyquest Limit". I suggest that you add another line indicating the Diffraction Limit. This limit depends on apperture and sensor size. I've played with numbers from Cambridge in Colour (http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm ) and calculated diffraction limits for 1,6x crop sensors:
apperture dif limit (lp/pw)
f5,6 1977
f6,3 1761
f7,1 1569
f8 1398
f9 1245
f10 1110
f11 988
f13 880
f14 785
f16 699
This insight changes the way you look at test results. For instance, you tested the Sigma 50/1,4 on the EOS 450D (Nyquist: 1424 lp) and the lens resolved 750 lp at f16; this looks poor but the diffraction limit (699 lp) shows that no lens can do better at this apperture.
The EOS 50D (Nyquist limit: 1584 lp) is limited by diffraction for appertures smaller than f7,1.
Regards,
Posted by: Anonimo | Nov 9, 2008 9:11:48 PM
White text on a black background is hard on the eyes. Why not have black or dark grey text on a white or very light grey background, which would be much easier on the eyes?
Posted by: Peter White | Nov 10, 2008 5:02:59 PM
I'd love to see the camera reviews to in clude a standardized test sequence of camera's AF sytem performance, especially its tracking capabilities of moving subjects. I am sure you folks are experienced and innovative enough to com up with the best solution to handle this.
Thnaks & Cheers,
George
Posted by: G. Sturm | Nov 11, 2008 10:09:58 PM
I have to say, while your content is among the best on the internet regarding cameras and digital photography tech, your site design hurts. TWO BLOGS? how better to alienate readers than give them an option of whose blog to read.
PLEASE conglomerate the two. And the up to date news is why I go to Dpreview. Even better, MERGE the blog and the updates to the site. You are not a library, you are more of a current event.
ok, yes, i'm cracking another beer.
cheers.
Posted by: Linus | Nov 14, 2008 4:49:31 AM
Why are you exluding software from your reviews? Photoediting is as much part of digital photograohy as are cameras and lenses.
Posted by: A.L. | Nov 14, 2008 3:55:34 PM
From a (pure) design perspective: black/white background is a matter of personal preference, and it happens to work best for images; if (as a dev) you're tempted to swich to black text / white background, at least do it in a way so people can choose. Still preference, but as a photographer I prefer to work in dimmed light.
And while on the topic of site design: fixed width is kinda old, especially now when a laptop has at least 1280 pixels screen width, and on the desktop 24" tends to become the minimum (at least on a photography specialist site). And the matter can be at least alleviated by designing for two screen widths: the current and a larger one (say 900-1000 pixels minimum, 1200 better).
Example for a dynamic switchable interface: http://www.anandtech.com/
(text size, layout width)
Posted by: Barbu | Nov 27, 2008 11:15:46 PM
Very good site you got here guys. I liked it alot, lots of information. The last couple of months my interest goes mostly to the lens reviews. Althrough i liked it, i still be left with some questions, specially about the nyquist line.
As an example i choose the lens review Nikon 50mm 1.4. The lens is tested on the Nikon D300.
In the chart the nyquist line for the D300 is about 1400 LPH. Below the chart is the explanation wich tells that: if the chart is below this line, the lens is influencing the picture quality, above the line the camera is the bottleneck. If i read this, it looks to me like this is an important line. It tells me which lenses lowering the quality of my pictures. The first question i ask myself is, he i don't got a D300 what about my camera? Because my camera can be choosen from the list (only D300 and D3) i got searching for the resolving power of my camera. I struggle to the camera database and found in the test a description of resolving power. Curiously i looked at the review for the D300. And on page 31 it says resolving power about 2100 LPH!!
Got i missed something here? Can you explain what the correlation or difference is in the the LPH parameters on the different test? And if the nyquist is a single value for one camera, why are the other (same brand) camera's added to the lens reviews?
Thanks.
Posted by: Ed | Dec 3, 2008 11:26:00 AM
"The past year has seen a dramatic increase in staff at dpreview, but less new 'features' than many expected. Why? What have we been doing?"
And the Top 10 answers are!
10-playing a lot of foosball in "team building sessions"!
09- going to a LOT of "staff meetings!" to discuss what the staff will be doing over the next year!
08-walking around taking "sample shots" with a LOT of new cameras, just to get an idea of what the lab results will be like!
etc you get the drift ;)
Posted by: p | Dec 6, 2008 2:41:29 AM
I agree with Roger Urban - it would be great to see some medium-format camera reviews. This would be all the more interesting as the "format" lines are starting to blur with the advent of 4/3rds and Leica S2 formats.
Posted by: LP | Jan 2, 2009 9:29:35 PM
hi very good blog thank you
http://www.mariagephotographe.fr
Posted by: photographe mariage | Jan 26, 2009 5:55:44 PM
This slideshow seeks to explain what happened to Leica in the shift to digital imaging:
http://christiansandstrom.org/disruptivestories.php
Posted by: Chris | Jan 29, 2009 5:06:10 PM
I'm not knowledgeable enough to offer specific suggestions for improvement, but as someone who is researching options to migrate into the DSLR world, I find myself continually coming back to your site for objective analysis. Many other web resources seem to have a brand or technology bias driving them. And while many of the technical details of your reviews are somewhat over my head (at present) they provide me with valuable insights and force recognition of the evolutionary process I'll need to follow to get the most out of my photography over the long term. Thanks for both the specific and general education!
Posted by: MikeM | Feb 12, 2009 8:22:23 PM