Let's cut to the chase, here, and avoid some of the personal insults.
DPReview has been angry with Canon since the flap a few years ago in which other online sites released info before Canon wanted them to, while DPR didn't, and Canon didn't 'punish' the early-releasers.
DPR unfairly/incompetantly compares all cameras at 100% zoom, handicapping higher-resolution cameras.
DPR rates noise strangely, judging cameras which blur the hell out of detail as better cameras.
DPR rates 'resolution' in a way which doesn't match the res chart images they actually show in the review.
DPR seldom notes which lenses are used in reviews. You and I know what this results in...
Seriously, if you want to read lots of forum posts, DPR is the place.
If you want competant reviews, Imaging Resources, hell, even Steve's Digicams, are far better. See also Camera Labs and DC Resource.
These are the kind of political behind-the-scenes shenanigans that this entire review smacked of to me. It just seemed that the entire review was a deliberate lie and slanting of the truth, by purposely judging the camera with inappropriate lenses to its sensor ... and then they covered their aperture by putting a small caveat at the end saying, "High-end lenses required to get the most out of the camera."
This is deliberate lying to me, lying through omission. As the fellow Jay Brookstone noted in his post: they need to pick the right lenses.
In fact, prior to any of the new Canons coming out, it has been speculated to no end here that many of these older lenses are going to fall by the wayside as being antiquated, precisely when
newer and higher-powered sensors emerge. The flaws in these older lenses themselves, it has been repeatedly argued, will become obvious when put on newer and newer cameras. And that is what it seems like is happening to me.
To this, Phil Askey said, "but just how much trouble do you think the average 50D buyer should have to go to to get their 15 megapixels?,"
which to me reeks of intentional fraud and dishonesty. I would think an outfit whose sole purpose was to put-out worldwide reviews of products ought to get off its lazy ass and go though "whatever trouble" is necessary in order to provide the best and most accurate account of the truth. Like I said, I found Mr. Brookstone's simple post to be pretty much the bottom line here: and that is the 15.1 mpx 50D is going to reveal which Canon lenses need to be put to pasture
and which lenses are good enough to spend your money on for the future.
I am sure many of you remember the debates of last year that the older lenses weren't going to be able to keep up with these newer sensors, and that an entire facelift in lenses is going to have to be forthcoming in order to make these higher-end cameras capable of being useful. And to me, that is pretty much what is going on here. Newer lenses like the 100mm f2.8 macro, 10-22mm, and the 70-200 f2.8 ISL were all very sharp on the 50D, according to Mr. Brookstone.
Anyway, thanks for your post and the links to those other sites. I also noticed that the Photozone testing on some of the older lenses revealed lousy results, but I will be interested to see their results on some of Canon's very best lenses, particularly their macros and fixed telephotos.