Photo and video competitions have had to deal with fakes and forgeries since their invention, a task that’s become increasingly difficult in the age of generative AI. Many competitions have had to deal with revelations that entries – sometimes even winning ones – were faked or enhanced by AI. Now, it’s happened with one sponsored by Nikon.

The company has disqualified the video that won first place in its Small World in Motion competition, stating it “did not comply with the competition rules regarding generative AI.” That rule is relatively simple: “AI generated videos are not permitted and Sponsor holds the right to request the original video for verification.”

The video in question supposedly showed “abnormal beating of airway cilia in a child with primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD), a rare genetic disorder affecting respiratory function,” and the original press release announcing it as the winner had several paragraphs describing the importance of the imagery and how it was captured.

Nikon’s statement says the decision came “after thoroughly re-evaluating the video and supporting materials and consulting with members of our judging panel.” It also clarifies that the decision “is based solely on the submitted video’s eligibility under the rules outlined for this competition” and “should not be interpreted as a judgment of the entrant’s professional reputation, scientific contributions, or intent.”

What the statement doesn’t say is what role generative AI played in the video’s creation; whether it was fully synthetic, or if it was used to edit something that was once a real image. You can still see it in news coverage of the competition and it looks otherworldly, but, to me, that’s the case for authentic microscopy videos, too. The BBC says the winner “acknowledged using AI,” and reports that other scientists raised the alarm about the video, with one expert in PCD saying that the cells in the video “look nothing like those from PCD patients.”

The company says the incident shows it needs to re-evaluate its rules and procedures moving forward, though as AI tools and people’s familiarity with them and willingness to use them advance, it seems likely that this will continue to happen, despite a growing market of tools designed to identify AI-generated or edited content. The reality is that many of the existing tools are, essentially, guessing, or rely on watermarks embedded by tools made by companies acting in good faith. Someone looking to enter a doctored or generated video into a competition would be able to bypass those relatively easily.

In light of the incident, Nikon has changed the rankings of the Small World In Motion competition, which awards a prize of $3000 for first place. That spot has been awarded to the former second place winner, Nguyen Nam Nhat, who submitted a video of “a tiny roundworm and a single-celled Dileptus” moving around. Second place now belongs to Benedikt Pleyer’s video of jellyfish larvae, and third place goes to Dr. Andrew Moore for their video of “synchronized cell division in neighboring cells.” You can view all the winners on the Nikon Small World website.

Google has made its free tool for identifying SynthID watermarks available to the general public, potentially making it easier to tell whether what you’re looking at was created by or edited with generative AI. While the tool is only looking for a watermark, rather than analyzing the image to see if it’s AI-generated, an increasing number of companies are starting to add SynthIDs to the images, video and audio generated by their AI tools.

The tool, called SynthID Detector, is relatively simple. You can upload an image, video file or audio clip to it, and it will scan for a SynthID. Google says that AI tools from itself, Nvidia, OpenAI and Kakao use the standard, so the tool should be able to tell whether AI was used to create the thing you’ve uploaded. Apple has also promised to start using SynthIDs to watermark its AI-powered photo manipulation tools later this year.

Mitchell Clark

Rather than try to add easily-removed metadata, SynthIDs are invisible watermarks added to AI-generated media, which should theoretically survive modification like cropping, adjusting colors or being compressed by a platform that isn’t even attempting to preserve the watermark. Also importantly, the watermark shouldn’t be detectable in the final output.

There is one somewhat annoying gotcha with the tool: it requires you to sign in with a Google, Apple or OpenAI account to actually check anything. This extra friction may be enough to dissuade someone from casually checking an image, and doesn’t really feel like it should be necessary.

It’s also worth noting that it is very limited. While many major players are represented in the list of companies on board with SynthID, there are plenty that aren’t. As the tool’s homepage warns, it doesn’t detect whether the image was made by AI, it can only tell you whether it was made with a specific subset of models. It’s also binary, only telling you if an image has a watermark or not. Unlike more robust (and, in some ways, more limited) tools like Apple’s Reference Image system or Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA) Content Credentials, there’s no way to see the original image, or tell whether the AI simply tweaked a real photo or created an image wholesale.

Mitchell Clark

Still, it’s an important piece of the puzzle as SynthID is gaining popularity. After all, a watermark isn’t particularly useful if it’s invisible and you have no way of checking it. You’ve been able to ask Google Gemini if an image has a SynthID watermark in it for a while now, and Google’s Chrome browser and Search engine will flag images with them in some cases, but the detector is a much lighter-weight solution, and provides an option for those who may be checking an image because they’re morally opposed to using AI, and who likely wouldn’t view being able to ask an AI chatbot about it as an acceptable option.

When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.

Yashica has announced a new compact camera called the Crew, which it says is “inspired by the collective energy of friend groups, production crew, and travel companions” and designed “to turn distance into connection.”

Unlike the undeniably retro Y16 the company announced last month, the Crew features a more classic compact form factor, looking much like many of the other cameras being sold under the Yashica brand name. However, while cameras like the City 100 feature a fully articulating screen, the Crew features a 3.0″ LCD (in a slightly unusual 16:9 aspect ratio) that flips up, making it ever so slightly quicker to grab a selfie of you and your friends.

That’s the idea, anyways. In practice, that may be a bit of a struggle, thanks to the camera’s retracting lens, which the company boasts features a “6x optical zoom.” According to the images on the company’s website, it has a focal range of 4.3-24.8mm, which works out to around 32-183mm equiv., given the camera’s sensor. While 32mm equiv. is still relatively wide, you may struggle to capture more than a person or two at that setting with sensible framing unless you have particularly long arms.

Yashica

That sensor seems to be the one found in many of Yashica’s other cameras: a 13MP model in the minuscule Type 1/3.06 (16.45mm²) format. For reference, that’s almost three times smaller than the Type 1/1.56 (48mm²) that the iPhone 17 uses for its main camera, and is still substantially smaller than what you’d find in the 2000’s-era compacts it’s aping. That, combined with the lens’ very slow apertures (F3.1-6.4, or F22.8-47.2 equiv.) mean the camera will struggle in all but the best light, though it does have a flash to help out a bit; it’s unclear whether it’s a xenon tube or an LED.

Some people may be able to overlook that because they’re going for a lo-fi aesthetic, or because this camera takes its compact moniker seriously. Yashica says it’s 26mm (1″) thick when powered off, and weighs just 126g (4.4oz), which means it may genuinely fit in a relatively small purse or bag, or even a pants pocket.

It can shoot 2.7K (2688×1512, a bit higher-res than FullHD) video at up to 60p, and can even upscale that to 4K, though we wouldn’t expect stellar results. Likewise, it has the option of producing up to 36MP images though, again, the sensor is only 13MP.

The Crew has a removable battery and USB-C charging. The company says it’s designed to be an “approachable introduction to photography for the next generation of image-makers” that offers “more creative flexibility than a smartphone while maintaining point-and shoot simplicity.”

While I’m not entirely sure the inclusion of seven color filters delivers on the promise of creative flexibility – the camera doesn’t seem to offer much manual control – it definitely delivers on the approachability. It costs just $168, or 1,320 Hong Kong dollars for a standalone model, though you can pay $10 more to get a version with a 32GB microSD card. It will be available in black or silver, starting later this month, around October 26.

Like many other compacts on the market, the Crew is being sold under a brand name that people may remember (or be familiar with from shopping for vintage cameras), but it’s not really the same company anymore. The Crew and Yashica’s other cameras are branded and distributed by the Hong Kong-based 100 Enterprises, though it’s not entirely clear who actually produces them.

Yashica

Yashica Crew

• Shop Now at Yashica

Sigma has announced the 50-120mm F2.8 OS DC | Contemporary, a fast telezoom for APS-C mirrorless cameras. The lens delivers a 75-180mm equivalent range for Fujifilm X or Sony E mount cameras and an 80-192mm equiv range for Canon RF users.

The lens is a spiritual successor to the excellent APO 50-150mm F2.8 EX DC HSM from 2006, but manages to add stabilization and downsize considerably.

At just 67mm wide and 99mm long (3.90 x 2.63″) for the E-mount version, the lens is smaller than a standard can of Coke (both the 330ml and 12oz versions). Its length extends by 25% when zoomed to its full extreme but is still only a fraction longer (5mm/0.2″) than Canon’s RF 70-200mm F4 in its retracted form. It weighs 390g (13.8oz), which again is remarkably similar to the weight of a full can of Coke.

Richard Butler

The 50-120mm completes a trio of F2.8 zooms for APS-C mirrorless, alongside the existing 10-18mm F2.8 and 18-50mm F2.8 lenses. Despite its longer range and similarly bright aperture, it shares a 55mm filter thread with the 18-50mm. It’s the only member of the F2.8 DC set to have a dedicated aperture ring and image stabilizaton.

That stabilization is rated at 6.5 stops of correction at 50mm and 4.5 stops at the 120mm long end, per tests conducted to CIPA’s standard methodology.

Richard Butler

The new lens uses a “high response linear actuator” for autofocus and has seemed swift and reliable from our usage so far, though we’ve not been trying sports shooting with it just yet.

The optical design utilizes 18 elements in 13 groups, including one fluorite-like FLD element, three super-low dispersion elements and four aspherics. The company says it’s been designed to exhibit minimal focus breathing, to extend its usefulness to video. It features 11 rounded aperture blades to keep bokeh circular.

Richard Butler

The lens barrel features a zoom ring, focus ring and a dedicated aperture ring (on the Sony and Fujifilm versions, at least) with an ‘A’ position. The Canon RF version will have a smooth-rotating control ring instead of an aperture ring.

As part of the Contemporary series it’s been designed to be dust and splash resistant. Its presence in Sigma’s more affordable line also means it’s priced at a remarkably reasonable $799.

Shooting experience

I’ve been shooting with a Fujifilm mount version of the lens for a week or so and I’m still caught off-guard occasionally that I’m using a 70-180mm equivalent, rather than a standard zoom.

Richard Butler

The aperture ring, the first on one of Sigma’s DC zooms for mirrorless, works nicely with the X-T4 and X-H2 bodies I used it on, though I did wish the lens could be locked in or out of the A position, rather than it simply being spaced a little further beyond F22.

For the size and the price, I was willing to forgive some pretty major image quality issues but didn’t encounter too many.

Close focus isn’t this lens’s strength, with the corners getting extremely soft and swirly if you shoot a flat subject a 50mm. Things are a lot more predictable near minimum focus distance at the long end of the zoom.

The swirliness makes a reappearance in the bokeh at times, but not in a way I found objectionable. In general, I found the bokeh to be soft and attractive, without any fussiness, which isn’t always a given for a fast tele zoom.

Richard Butler

In general, sharpness seems impressive, despite the use of X-Trans sensors, which our standard lens processing doesn’t always show to its best effect. There appears to be a small degree of pincussion distortion being corrected at both ends of the zoom, but nothing dramatic (it doesn’t appear to account for the close-focus strangeness at short focal lengths).

Richard Butler

It’s hard for me to be completely dispassionate about a lens that I’ve been hoping someone would make, for years, but I’m genuinely stunned by how small and easy-to-carry Sigma has managed to make the 50-120mm F2.8 OS. I look forward to shooting it for longer, once RF-mount versions are available, to see how it behaves on the EOS R7, since that’s currently the highest-res Bayer APS-C sensor.

As always, we’ve included Raws for download in our gallery, including some close-focus examples and a couple of aperture comparisons, so you can make your own assessment.

Sigma has announced that it’s bringing its 16-300mm F3.5-6.7 DC OS (24-450mm equiv.) APS-C lens to Z-mount. While it may not be the most exciting addition to the lineup – Nikon APS-C shooters have already had access to a very similar option from Tamron – it’s representative of what may be an important shift: it’s the first zoom lens the company has been allowed to release for the mount.

The 16-300mm F3.5-6.7 has been around for a bit over a year for Sony E, Canon RF, Fujifilm X and even L-mount cameras, and this new version uses the same optical formula. It comprises 20 elements in 14 groups, with one FLD element, four SLD elements, one piece of high refractive index glass and four aspherical lenses.

It can focus on objects as close as 17cm (6.7″) at 24mm equiv., and 105cm (41.4″) at 450mm equiv. At 70mm, it can achieve 0.5x (1:2) magnification.

It uses linear motors for focusing, and Sigma says the optical stabilization is good for up to 6EV of correction at the wide end and 4.5EV at the long end. For Z-mount users, that’s definitely a nice-to-have, given that Nikon hasn’t made any APS-C cameras with in-body stabilization.

As you’d hope given that it’s made for a smaller sensor, the lens is relatively compact and lightweight, at around 125mm (4.9″) long and 630g (22oz). It can accept 67mm filters.

All of these specs make the lens an extremely close competitor to the Tamron 18-300mm F3.5-6.3 Di III-A VC VXD, which, beyond not being able to go quite as wide as the Sigma, offers essentially the same set of features in a body that’s within a few millimeters and grams. (The Tamron happens to be the first third-party autofocus zoom lens released for Nikon’s APS-C system.)

While there will certainly be those excited to have another all-in-one zoom option, perhaps more exciting is what this announcement may potentially mean. Sigma has offered Z-mount versions of a few of its APS-C prime lenses for a while now, though, notably, not the one that directly competes with one of Nikon’s offerings. However, none of its quite good zoom lenses were available for the mount. While the 16-300mm arriving for Nikon systems doesn’t come close to guaranteeing that we’ll get more exciting options like the 17-40mm F1.8 DC Art, the just-announced 50-120mm F2.8 DC Contemporary or the 10-18mm F2.8 DC DN, it does seem like a bit more of a possibility today than it did yesterday.

Like the other versions of the lens, the 16-300mm F3.5-6.7 DC OS for Z-mount will cost $769.