The updated site may still be in beta, but we’re pleased to be able to announce the return of one of its most requested features: full-spec camera comparisons.

As well as big changes like this, we’ve been making continued improvements and fixes behind the scenes, but we’re now in a position to address one of the most common requests: a camera comparison feature that makes proper use of our specs database.

We appreciate how important it is to the community that the tool works well, and recognize that it wasn’t up to your expectations at the site’s launch. Having worked hard to build and maintain our database for more than 26 years, this was always something we planned to do, so we’re pleased to be able to add it back to the site.

The camera comparison feature works slightly differently than before but should also present the data in a way that’s both easier to read and to compare, especially on mobile. We’ll be making some adjustments in the coming days and weeks, and as always, we welcome your feedback about how it can be further improved.

This isn’t the end, by any means, though. A light theme version of the site is already being tested, to make sure it works reliably across the site, so please bear with us as we continue to improve the website.

Apple recently released the iPhone 18 Pro, which became fully available for purchase last week. As a result, reviews and hands-on tests are trickling in, so we’re learning more about the phone. If you’re curious what people are finding, here are some videos that showcase different features or aspects, all with a main focus on the camera system.

JerryRigEverything’s teardown

If you like seeing the electronic guts inside phones and cameras, you’ll like JerryRigEverything’s teardown of the iPhone 18 Pro. His video reveals the hardware behind its variable aperture main camera, camera stabilization system and internal cooling. For those who only care about the camera components, you’ll need to skip to roughly 7:02, or 9:25 to see the variable aperture camera.

A photographer’s perspective

Tyler Stalman walks through the new phone from a photographer’s perspective. He explains the aperture controls in plain language, then digs into Apple’s Image Effects, Reference Image mode and AI-based editing tools. He also shoots film alongside the iPhone to see how convincingly its new film-inspired looks reproduce the real thing.

A field test in Colorado

Austin Mann takes the iPhone 18 Pro to Colorado for both a written and video review. Along with testing the new variable aperture for night scenes and shutter-dragged motion blur, he demonstrates Focus Tracking in video and shows why it could be useful for moving subjects and close-up work. He also covers 4K time-lapse, Reference Image and Apple’s latest Photographic Styles. You can read his written review on his website as well.

A cinematographer’s perspective

Matt WhoisMatt Johnson looks at the iPhone 18 Pro as a filmmaking tool. His review focuses on the updated subject tracking, exposure control without always needing ND filters, heat management and the optical side effects of stopping down, including pronounced sunstars and changes to ghosting.

Jimmy Chin’s campaign images

Jimmy Chin shared behind-the-scenes material and finished images from his Apple collaboration involving the iPhone 18 Pro and two other photographers. It’s more of an ad than a review, but it shows an example of the polished, exhibition-oriented imagery Apple is using to promote the phone (and Jimmy Chin’s work is always cool to see).

Want to go deeper?

Dale Baskin

Our own Dale Baskin has the iPhone 18 Pro in hand, courtesy of Apple, and is working on some testing to share how the cameras stack up. He’ll soon have a sample gallery to share, and we have more planned, too. Be sure to stay tuned, but in the meantime, let us know if you have any specific questions about the latest iPhone.

We’ve been running this Question of the week series for over a year now, and yet have not covered the most fundamental, and perhaps most important, question yet… what sparked your interest in getting involved in photography?

Compared to many of our veteran community members, I’m still deep into grasping the finer points of taking great shots with a standalone camera, and I’m still intimidated by what I see as more advanced cameras like the Sony a1 II or Canon’s EOS R1.

For today’s question and related to my journey, I feel that joining the DPReview community was the true spark that led me to take my photography seriously. I couldn’t have gotten this far this fast without your insight. Because of our community’s support for each other, I hope new photographers find their spark here, too.

So, with that said…

What sparked your interest in getting involved in photography?

Drop a reply in the comments section below, and if you’ve got a photo to include from your mentioned forum sections, it may be selected for next week’s showcase article on this topic!

Adobe has announced that its acquisition of AI company Topaz Labs has been completed, with it and its products have joined Adobe’s ranks.

Topaz Labs is best known for tools like Topaz Photo, Topaz Video and Topaz Gigapixel, which use a variety of proprietary AI models to do various tasks, like denoising or upscaling photos and video, sharpening pictures or applying a slow-motion effect to standard footage. Adobe announced its intentions to acquire the company earlier this summer, but said it was contingent on regulatory approval, which it has clearly received.

As part of the announcement, Adobe has clearly reiterated its intentions for Topaz’s existing products, at least in the near term: Adobe says the branding, apps and models will continue to be available as standalone products, suggesting you won’t need to also be a Creative Cloud subscriber to access them.

If you do have a Creative Cloud subscription, Adobe says it plans on “integrating Topaz Labs’s tools and models into everyday Creative Cloud workflows,” as well as optimizing the performance of its AI models. Some Topaz Labs models have already been available in tools like Photoshop, but it sounds like that could expand into the company’s video tools as well.

The Canon EOS R8 II adds two of the features that many people felt the original model could have benefited from: an autofocus joystick and in-body image stabilization.

However, as well as making it a better camera, these additions, along with inflation, have made it a more expensive camera, putting it in direct competition with Nikon’s Z5II, which is our current pick of sub-$2000 full-frame cameras.

The Nikon has been on the market longer, so its price has softened a bit, but its list price is within $50 of that of the Canon, so it’s likely they’ll end up costing a similar amount. While the original R8 and, in some places, the original Z5 persist at reduced prices, these are some of the least expensive current models for anyone looking to join a full-frame system and are designed to act as the entry point to this part of the market.

Having used both cameras extensively, we thought we’d look at how they compare and which we think is better.

Headline specs

On paper the core specs of the two cameras are very similar: they have the same-sized sensors with comparable pixel counts, both have image stabilization and both include an AF joystick.

Beyond the core specs, it all becomes a little less clear-cut, with the Canon offering some benefits over the Nikon with regards weight, maximum burst speed and the ability to capture Raw at its fastest burst speeds and in its pre-capture mode. But there are probably more ways in which the Z5II is a stronger camera.

By taking a look at the main differences and when they play a role, it might help you decide which would be the better camera for you.

EVF/LCD

Mitchell Clark

The Nikon has a larger, higher resolution viewfinder than the Canon. The EOS R8 II is built around a smaller viewfinder panel, which is why its resolution is limited to 2.36M dots, which is 1024 x 768px. The Nikon has a larger panel, meaning it can offer higher magnification (a larger view) and 3.69M dot resolution, which equates to 1280 x 960px. This is a 25% increase in linear resolution, which is enough to make the view seem less pixelated, even with the greater magnification. The Nikon’s finder also goes brighter, giving a more realistic preview of highlights.

The Nikon’s rear screen is also a touch larger 3.2″ display with 1024 x 680px resolution, vs the Canon’s 3.0″, 900 x 600px display. The size is likely to make more difference than the roughly 14% difference in linear resolution. Both cameras have fully-articulated displays that hinge to the side.

Mechanical shutters

Another difference is that the Nikon has a full mechanical shutter, whereas the Canon has an electronic first curtain (/mechanical second curtain) shutter. This doesn’t make a huge difference for most real-world shooting, but one difference is that the Nikon can shoot at up to 1/8000 sec shutter speeds, whereas the Canon tops-out a stop earlier than that.

The Canon’s fully electronic shutter mode can go higher than this, but with a readout speed of around 1/70 sec, this can’t be used with flash and risks showing rolling shutter distortion with fast movement and banding with flickering lights.

Twin card slots

Richard Butler

The Nikon has twin SD card slots, while the Canon has just one. This isn’t likely to make a huge difference to any but the most risk-averse photographers. Dual card slots can offer a level of dependability that is essential for professional work, but is more a question of your risk comfort level ranged against your willingness to pay for multiple cards, for most day-to-day photography.

Video

Mitchell Clark

Things are less clear-cut when it comes to video. The Z5II can capture Raw video which might, if you’re from a photo background, sound like an immediate win for the Nikon. But, in practice, this generates a lot of data, requires a rather more involved workflow and doesn’t offer the same magnitude of benefit over 10-bit log footage as Raw does over JPEG, in stills.

By contrast, the Canon can record 4K/60, derived from 6K, full-width capture, whereas the Nikon has to crop in to an APS-C region, if you want to shoot footage for slow-mo moments. This makes it harder to maintain a wide angle-of-view and lowers quality on the Nikon. Both cameras shoot 10-bit log, with Canon’s C-Log3 being preferred by many editors.

Battery life

However, battery life is a much more decisive difference between the cameras. The Z5II uses the same 16Wh battery as the Z6 series modes, powering it to a rating of 350 shots per charge if you shoot using the rear screen or 330 if you use the viewfinder. The Canon uses a much smaller 7.5Wh battery, from which it delivers a rated lifespan of 270 and 150 shots per charge, for using the rear screen and viewfinder, respectively.

And, while the numbers that the standard testing offers up aren’t necessarily exactly those you’ll see in the real world, we’d generally expect a camera that measures as 330 shots per charge to last around twice as long as one rated at 150. The video ratings are also a little over twice as high for the Nikon. For anyone looking to use the camera for more than occasional snaps, this difference is likely to be very noticeable.

It’s one of the factors that makes the Nikon appreciably heavier, though, weighing in at 700g (24.7oz), making it 154g (5.4oz) heavier than the Canon.

Lens choice

Mitchell Clark

The final consideration is lens choice. Given all modern ILCs sit somewhere between ‘really quite good’ and ‘excellent,’ the availability of appropriate lenses is just as important as your choice of camera brand.

Both Canon and Nikon have built out fairly extensive lens lineups with a selection of low, mid and high-level lenses, in a good array of sizes and focal lengths. However, both have also tried to restrict access to their mounts to their own lenses plus a handful of lenses they’ve licensed third-parties to make: the majority of which are for APS-C models, but with some of Tamron’s full-frame options available for Nikon. The biggest difference, in this regard, is that unlicensed third party makers are offering increasing numbers of lenses for the Nikon Z-mount, whereas Canon has more effectively controlled the RF ecosystem.

In both instances, we’d recommend checking whether the lenses you think you might want exist at a price you’re willing to pay. And to check reports and reviews, if those lenses are made by third parties, as the autofocus performance in particular can vary significantly even within the same brand.

Summary

There are the hints the Canon has tried to make the EOS R8 II easier to use, with its Advanced Assist mode that is willing to automatically use multi-shot modes, where necessary, and the option of a simplified, results-focused Raw processing interface. However, the Z5II does have a button for directly accessing its Picture Control color modes, whereas the Canon has two distinct color systems, one of which can’t be accessed when shooting Raws, so in some ways the Nikon can be easier to use. The Canon’s menu is perhaps a tiny bit more logically grouped, but both are a little overwhelmed with options and will take a little time to learn.

Overall, the EOS R8 II and Z5II both offer a level of image quality and performance that you couldn’t previously get at this price and will be more than enough camera for a lot of photographers, even if inflation means they’re not quite the obvious bargains that their predecessors were.