text:
I am a Canon user. But I can't help but feeling that Dpreview just lost all the credibility with this silly review.
|Previous news story Next news story
Just Posted: Canon EOS 5D Mark III review
Just Posted: Our Canon EOS 5D Mark III review. The 22.3MP 5D Mark III appears to offer similar specifications to 2008's 5D Mark II. However, sensor and processing developments, along with a host of user-interface revisions mean the Mark III is a much more capable camera. It also gains a greatly-improved autofocus system. So do these changes justify the considerably higher price tag? Read our full review to find out.
have you actually used or owned the 5dMk3? talk about credibility!
On the Nikon forums there have been almost no 5D3 posts, while on the Canon forum at one point there were so D800 questions, DPR had to step in to disallow D800 posts.
Nikon has likely gained many more switchers, and have clearly won this round. That DPR seems to have ignored sensor and image quality and scored these two cameras as equivalent is frankly an epic fail.
Offer less features + charge more than the competition = Canon's recipe for success.
At least Canon added something to the MkIII that we haven't seen on a DSLR for some time.......mushy jpegs.
BTW: more MP itn't a feature...
And the MkIII has the best AF on the market today.
You should shoot RAW anyway for best quality.
Jpeg's only get Mushy from ISO 12800 upwards...
More MP is a feature that sold a lot of otherwise poorly speced Canon cameras, so how can you say that.
Exactly the MP and to a lesser extent video are what sold all those 5DIIs. The D700 was a better camera than the 5DII in almost every other way. All canon did with the 5DIII was bring the other features of the camera up to the level of the D700. Unfortunately it was too little to late.
The 5DIII doesn't have the best AF on the market. It is too early to tell how the top end canon/Nikon AFs will compare but if they end up being basically same for accuracy,speed and tracking which is likely, then the Nikon will have the edge because it has the ability to focus at -2ev and with F8 lenses.
Of course this only applies to the Canon 1DX as it is the only Canon camera with their top of the line AF. The 5DIII only has a neutered version of it. The 5DIII doesn't even have the best AF in Canons line up let alone the market.
It is worth noting that Nikon chose to put the full D4 level AF in the D800.
It is the same AF system, the only difference with 1DX is the metering system, where the 5dlll has the older 63 zone metering used in 7d instead of the newest one used in 1dX.
Look at the specs on canons site. It is not the same AF.
Who cares about scores when it comes to IQ. Use your own eyes. The reviewers comments are only useful for AF, handling, HDR, functions, etc. To my own eyes, the Canon's IQ is preferable to Nikon's. Others may prefer otherwise. Buy what you prefer.
Perhaps you have special glasses.
canon's IQ looks ok as long as you don't look closely. so you're right, if you don't care about IQ, it doesn't matter. heck shoot an iphone then. :)
You're not even entitled to your own opinion here. If you prefer one camera to another, you're just plain wrong. It's no longer childish; it's infantile.
will dpreview take a shot at comparing the 5DmkIII by removing the OLP filter to address sharpness vs a D800 with the mosaic engineering filter that completly fixes moire?
whichever camera has the better output after that will be the ideal rig for video shooters south of 3.5K.
It seems the issue with the canon is the filter which is a hardware issue meaning it will never be fixed by firmware. one advantage of the D800 AA filter from mosaic is that it is reversible in 1 minute whereas the OLP delete on the 5DIII is not and voids your warranty.
LSE: "whichever camera has the better output after that will be the ideal rig for video shooters south of 3.5K."
Why? The Canon XF100, HXR-NX70U, JVC GY-HM150U sell for under $3k. The Canon XA10 is listed at just under $2k. The HFG10 is now priced under $1.4k, and it is great in low light and has little moiré. Other DSLRs and m4/3 are also cheaper. Narrow DOF, which (especially without AF) is a PITA in all but highly controled scenes, is more easily substituted by light control and muted, dim, or bland backgrounds.
@Cy Cheze
neither are full frame bud. now revise your comment.
You need a controlled scene to use narrow DOF, but a good substitute is light control and muted, dim, or bland backgrounds? I think your logic is backwards, and, speaking as a commercial photographer, DOF is my best friend.
The Canon Mk3 and Nikon D800 are clearly both excellent cameras both capable of taking excellent images. The choice between them, in my opinion, does not come down to moronic, pointless techie-babble about shadow noise at ISO 25,000; the choice comes down to the current lenses you have and ergonomics.
I was going to buy a Nikon D700 and even put in an order on Amazon (which fell through), but I was never comfortable with the ergonomics - the camera felt like a brick and the bottom right corner rubbed my palm in use. I have large hands and it just was not right for me - even the finger notch felt uncomfortable. I was in a store and asked to try the Canon Mk2 - I had a Mk1 which I really disliked for its crappy LCD and front-heavy weighting with a decent lens and poor ergonomics. Well, compared to the D700, the Mk2 felt like a dream. It felt so much lighter, was smoother and more comfortable to hold and less brick-like. Both are great; I chose the most comfortable.
I come to this forum to read some useful opinions, and what do I find? Childish discussions about whose gear is better, mine of yours (which obviously most even don't really own). In the past, when negatives and positives were used, camera's were also being rated, disregarding the films being used, and they were given scores. Now, sensors have replaced the film, being still only part of the whole rating. Canon already made some of the highest mp sensors, read:
but a camera's quality is not measured 'only' by its sensor.
The German 'Foto Magazin' which I read for years, has rated Mkiii 87% and D800 86%. Nobody can accuse them of being biased, as the past 60 years have shown they are not. The Dutch 'Digifoto Pro' has given both its platinum award.
Both cameras seem to be excellent and when used, creating beautiful photos. So, Please stop the childish game of whose is better and leave space for photographic related discussions.
Amen. DPR has decent reviews, but the people who come on here and post carping, childish posts are complete muppets. I have never known so many idiots criticising about each others' equipment. Do you think true pro photographers post these sorts of comments? I remember seeing a documentary which featured a NY photographer (I forget who, he was in his 60s and was v well respected) and he was taking shots in the street using a Canon ixus snap camera with probably 8 MP. He wasn't on here comparing shadow details at ISO 25,000....
Seriously, it seems 99% of the people on here are techie morons whose opinions are completely worthless in the real world. People have taken award winning shots with cameras half the quality of the Canon Mk3 or Nikon D800. Both are clearly excellent cameras.
Anyone who says one camera "blows the other away" should be banned. Such utter hype and nonsense. They blow away cameras from 10 years ago for sure. That is all.
well, except that if you add up the bars the D800 actually was given a higher score. all you have to do is use the conparison tool at the bottom of the conclusion page ;)
Wisdom if I ever read it, Razaghi.
Well said!
I am a Canon shooter but I have no hesitation in recommending Nikon ( superb build quality ), Sony & Pentax ( great value ), or whatever to anyone who asks me. Horses-for-courses, as the saying goes! I would never tell anyone to buy a Canon 5DMk2 despite me owning one for nearly a year and loving it, I'd tell them to scoot down the local camera shop and try out some "lightboxes" from different makers within the price range they have set themselves. How the heck do I know what people will like and want to use, we're all different with different goals and ideas what we like.
The same is true when people chatter about cars, sports teams, homes, kids, pets, wine, or vacation destinations: 50% bragging for one's own and 50% discrediting the others.
To be fair, though, a $3k toy is, almost by definition, debatable. So let people bicker. So strange, though, how much controversy burns over whether a toy gets a score of 84, 82, or 80, which is barely the breadth of a pinhead. Where are all the 90 or 60-rated cameras?
Prompted me to join this forum. Two thumbs up Blockmania !
Wtf? 5D3 blows away D800 at high ISOs for both Raw and Jpegs. I expected 5D3 to be much worse based on DxO's noise score.
I was just about to make a post with exactly the same sentiments. Is there something wrong with my eyes?? The MkIII's JPEGs are razor sharp, and they blow the D800 right out of the water!
my guess is you are looking at the images at 100 percent pixels rather than at the same reolution. if you look at them the same size the d800 is marginally better
you obviously haven't used a D800. at the per pixel level the 5DIII is slightly better. but when sampled to equivalent resolution, the D800 matches it if not wins. resolution when you need it, ISO performance when you don't. best of both worlds.
5D Mk III
2239 ISO (Low-Light) score
11.7 EVs DR score
24 bits color depth score
2835 ISO (Low-Light) score
14.4 EVs DR score
25.3 bits Color Depth score
"5D Mk III
2239 ISO (Low-Light) score
11.7 EVs DR score
24 bits color depth score
2835 ISO (Low-Light) score
14.4 EVs DR score
25.3 bits Color Depth score"
nuff said
The be fair
Somewhere at 2000-2200 ISO DR, SNR and Tonal Range of both cameras are the same and higher are ISOs better Canon gets for DR (compared to D800), so 5D would reach higher ISO score if the color sensitivity was better because it's only variable which holds it down compared to Nikon at theses ISO
It's like the 5DIII's performance score was deliberately boosted so that it would be the same overall score as the D800. That's one way of limiting the emails I suppose.
That said, they are both great cameras, I just think that the Nikon edged out the Canon this time. When the 5DII came out I think it edged out the D700.
If I had either of these bodies I wouldn't be complaining at all, as long as someone supplied nice glass. :)
DPR definitely trying not to upset Canon community. If DXO mark results show D800=95 and MKIII=81 and they give equal scores to both, there's got to be biasing going on....I wont even go into the the slew of features D800 has over MKIII not to mention the $500 price advantage !
dxo only evaluate the sensor, they don't put value in the extra FPS speed or the 41 cross type autofocus point. However D800 is a real value at its current price (no matter the price of 5D III)
If you rate IQ (newer, better sensor technology) over 2 fps then the D800 would be the clear choice. If you don't, it's not.
Having used both cameras and worked with both files in LR, I can only assume DPR didn't want to upset an extremely large group of users.
That reminds how Pop Photo's first announcement danced around the fact that Canon had severely jacked the price. Well maybe not as much as a D3X ...
D800 is a more purpose-specific camera, 5D MK III is a more all rounded. I shoot with a 1Ds MK III and a 5D MK II and I find the difference between 4 and 5 fps substantial, 6 to 4 would be even more drastic. I will be happy to give out a slight edge on low ISO resolution for the extra speed. If I had to choose, I pick Canon unless I have a specific demand of the higher resolution. So I agree with the DPReview overall score. D800 higher DR? Yes, somewhat in the shadows. Big deal. Noisy as hell anyways if you try to extract the details anyway. Give me one stop more in the highlights, then you got me thinking.... maybe. I might still like the extra 2 fps for a all purpose camera after all.
Studio work? Landscape? Get a D800
More flexible photography required? Get a 5D
Which is better? None, just get the right one for you, and have fun with it
In full frame arena there is still a little products variation.
D800 and 5DMk III is too much for me.
For me, best buy full frame DSLR is canon 5D MK II. around1700$ that's a bargain. compared to D700 still 2200$ and the price never drop.
I even considering buy a mint 5d MKI it's just 800$ (if it still there) for street hunt compared to a epic overkill 9000$ leica.
many good photographer even used worst camera to take fenomenal photos.
I've never shot a JPEG with my 5D Mark II.
As far as I'm concerned the Mark II would be interesting even if it couldn't record in JPEG format at all.
It may be true that the target market will predominantly resolve to using RAW. However at this price point having a camera producing sub-par jpegs is frankly inexcusable.
Its like buying a new Ferrari that has a below average airconditioner. You don't buy a Ferrari for its airconditioning but rather for its performance. However an airconditioner is still an important component of the overall package and a technology that should have been well and truly mastered years ago.
If you think the 5dIII is comparable to a Ferrari, then you have a very strange perspective.
You may want to look up analogy and metaphor in the dictionary.
A hint for reading Shakespeare - Juliet isn't actually a giant ball of burning hydrogen.
You may wish to have a peek as well. His comparison is neither. You could possibly call it a simile, but hey, who am I to correct your literacy?
Ferraris are unreliable as hell. Overpriced. Get a Nissan GT-R, which will spank it.
I have been a Canon user for over 20 years, my first film SLR is Canon, my first DSLR is Canon, and my current gear is Canon, with over a dozen Canon glasses. I have followed DPR for many years, always believe DPR has the best unbiased reviews, until this 5D3.
DPR, your explanation of the scoring just not hold. I can understand the trade of FPS Speed vs MP, and I can overlook the $500 price difference. But you call 5D3 more featured than D800 just not hold. What about the build-in flash, which also commands slave? what about multi-format accepting DX lenses? The face-recognition AF, the superior metering from D4, and USB3? All these that 5D3 lacks, and with bad JPG.
I am not a C nor N fanboy, I am not worried about the scoring, which is just a number, and does not affect my purchase decision.
I am putting this because DPR lost my long time trust, and lost the high standard of unbiased journalism that I used to respect DPR with.
DPR, it's time to explain the scoring with evidence?
For not "being worried about the scoring" you sure seem worried about the scoring. The beauty of the DPR review of a camera is that it provides a TON of info for people to make their own decisions. Smart, honest people are going to disagree all of the time on the subjective evaluations. And imagine the headache DPR would be dealing with if they had scored one of the cameras higher than the other. Based on the comments I regularly see on here, it's no wonder they just gave them the same score.
Let's look at the score shall we...
The 5D3 just edges out the D800 in features and it also outperforms the D800 in the speed category (which by the way is given less weighting). The D800 on the other hand, edges out the 5D3 in RAW, JPEG, and to a lesser extent in the high ISO performance category. These categories alone carry the most weight.
The other categories such as handling, metering & focus accuracy, and the build quality scores are tied between the two. No surprises here.
Overall, it looks like the D800 is the clear winner based on the scoring. However, the 5D3 makes up for it with its speed and features to match. It's a toss up folks, do we call it a draw?
X-syns speed is slower with 5D3, so is the USB connection. So that leaves only the higher FPS rate for Canon ;)
@ OneThird
and you're not adding the uncompressed HDMI out and better image sharpness while recording video which is certainly a feature the 5DIII lacks in addition to the crop mode video which is excellent for telephoto work.
Plus the D800 does a lot of little things better like wb bracketing, exposure bracketing, spot metering, auto iso, shutter life ect.
Also the AF and metering are not equal. The D800 can focus at -2ev and with F8 lenses. The D800 uses the same metering and AF as the D4 and the 5DIII is using Canon's old metering from the 7D and a watered down version of the AF in the 1DX.
I really don't' see how anyone can say the 5DIII edges out the D800 on features with a straight face.
According to DPR, video is given less weighting which really doesn't affect the score as much. I think its time DPR should put more emphasis on video since both DSLRs are more than capable tools for videographers.
@ Josh152
Agreed, I didn't write the review ;) The 5D3 does offer features that a photographer might look for or want such as blending with up to 9 exposures, HTP that will help extend the dynamic range by reducing blown out highlights, and advanced HDR mode for many that are interested in this feature.
Gee "Mushy Jpegs" sounds familiar, wasn't Sony A77 creamed a while ago for "mushy" Jpegs yet over here on the Canon forum its ok? and not a big deal especially from a $$$$$$ Camera. Bias , Go figure. ?
But I do have a question concerning the review that faults the JPEG. Why should this be? My Oly C8080wz has such a great JPEG engine that RAW is almost pointless. Once your engineers have a great software written why would the implement something inferior? If the JPEG is really a lower caliber than this great piece of hardware deserves than shame on Canon! That is like strapping a coke bottle to the front of it. IMO. In ease of use, performance etc. my great JPEG on my c8080 is a huge factor for me. Nobody that I know looks at my pictures and says "oh that must be a jpeg". They could not have crippled this in such a fashion so they could reach a price point! You know what I mean?
Well, I'll add my 2 cents. The 800 and New Cannon are both fabulous camera's. I will probably never even hold one much less own one. But I have an opinion too. :) I spend a lot of time enjoying DPR's challenges. I almost always look at the camera make and model as well as the image. I would have to say that I almost always like the Cannon image better than the Nikon. For me it's never the IQ, (they are to me equally magnificent) but I just like the Cannon color better. Strictly a strong preference I have for great color. I like my Oly's color even better.
In the old days both 5D3 and D800 would get a "highly recommended" grade.
Arguing which of the two deserves most the 82% is <you name it>.
I've shot professionally for 14 years and have used just about all types of film, film formats and camera types and brands. I'ver reached a point of just wanting simplicity and rock solid performance. I've owned Nikon and shoot Canon for the last 8 years. The 5D was good, the 5DII was great, the 5DIII is certainly much better than the 5DII. Overpriced? Yes. But for me the 5DIII will be a money maker, I'll get many more nailed focus shots and get a few extra stops of high ISO.
None of my clients ask for larger files. I don't have to buy new computers or more hard drives. I spent the past year upgrading my glass to version II's.
All in all, the 5DIII will produce endless advertisements, editorials and video/films worldwide from many photographers. It will do all that with no fuss and superb reliability.
I do wish the camera were priced a little lower, but it is what it is, a money making tool, and it will do that incredibly well. And none of that relies on a review whatsoever.
While all of that is perfectly true, the D800 does the same but better for less money, without the Canon's glaring flaws.
And if the D800's IQ is not required but the extra 2fps is, hang on for the D600, which will be faster but lower res and cheaper again.
Watching DPR score the D600 should be hilarious. It's not as good as the D800 but matches the 5DIII exactly except with way better DR, all for way less money. Given the D800 and the 5DIII both got the same score, how do you score the D600 behind the D800 and ahead of the 5DIII? Expect a fanboy bloodbath :-)
The D600 is probably going to get D7000 like AF, Metering, and will likely have build quality similar to the D7000 as well so it wont really match the 5DIII. It will probably be scored at like 80.
Poor choice of sample images IMO -
In the review you suggest that the JPEG quality isn't great and that most people in the target market will shoot RAW; fair enough.
So why are only ~13% of the sample shots apparently taken in RAW?
Please can we have some nice high detail samples scenes taken in RAW at low ISO?
At the bottom of this page you can download raw files and process them yourself. There are also a number of processed raw samples throughout the review.
Until rumors of the D800 started to surface I was seriously considering making the switch from Nikon to Canon. Once the high MP rumors were confirmed, I was still awaiting Canon's response. We now know that Nikon offered up a revolutionary step forward, approaching medium format quality at a surprisingly low price point, whereas Canon answered with a modest lower MP evolution at a higher price. Comparing the detailed ratings raises a number of questions. How on earth DPR is able to conclude that D800 represent a value point of 9, 1 point below average, and only 1 point higher than Canon, stands out in remarkable fashion. Overall DPR has lost significant credibility with this review. What are they going to do when the D600 comes out? Even if it's a fantastic camera, they will have to continue the farce. I suggest that DPR immediately retract the ratings for both cameras and spend some time reviewing their rating criteria.
Suggestion for reviews -
Almost all cameras these days have a "super high ISO setting", where the image (and I hesitate to the use the word) quality is dismal. So, how about a fixed percentage penalty knocked off the final score for every ISO value offered where the resolved detail is below a threshold?
I'd say the ISO102400 should be beneath the threshold here, but there are far worse offenders out there. I'd knock out the Sony A77 at ISO16000. I guess my point is, if you can't work out the stamp is a stamp unless you're told beforehand...
Apparently, some people are ok with numbers, but don't know how to read. (Isn't there an entire 29 pages of review preceding the "score"?)
"By Jonathan F/2 (17 hours ago)
Dpreview scores are definitely tainted. The D800 and 5Dm3 get the same score? So despite having 36mp and being $500 USD cheaper, you guys feel..."
Canon is the photographers choice with extremely good glass from amazing primes to amazing zooms. Nikon has the reasonably good 14-24 although soft at 24, which in most pro cases is too wide & struggles with flare, Canon skin tone is better. The 1DsIII has been shooting beautiful skin tone for a very long time with very little post processing. The 5DIII is a 1DsIII with very good video functionality at a 5D price. Canon lenses are flatter as well which is much more flattering in people shots (you can always add contrast but you can't take it away). Nikon has tons of resolution but just jump in to the Nikon lens forum & see the complaining about the lack of variety in the lens department (soft 24-70) griping about the primes, contemplating Sigma? for macro its sad! Go in to the canon lens forum very different with endless choices from the top of the line to 2nd & third even 4th tier lenses to choose from joy! A new 24-70II which appears to be amazing a 70-200ISII which is outstanding.
The forums here (read: the whiny pants complaint department) is NOT a valid measure of the quality of a camera.
My experience is that the split seems pretty even for Pros these days. Canon's wide glass doesn't compare well. I think think I like the Canon 70-200mm a bit better than the Nikon. And that 17mm is cherry. The Nikon 14-24mm and 24-70 are not soft anywhere, except in your imagination. But if you don't know how to use them, they sure are horrible lenses.
Right now, both camps have all the gear anyone could need to do anything (with the exception of that 17mm lens in Nikonland and higher than 21mp for Canonites).
I've said before and I'll say it again: the gear is good. Better than you need to make amazing images. And it makes it easier than ever. There's really nothing lacking in either camp that anyone really needs to get it done.
Ergonomically, I think we could see some progress. (UI/UX is my main gripe with Canond) That's about it.
im a photographer but 5D3 or canons is definitely not my choice or the choice of millions of other photographers.
should i concluded that you are just drumming your own drivel?
Your comments about Nikon lenses are WAY OFF the mark.
Reasonably good 14-24? Perhaps you could suggest which of Canon's or any other manufacturer's offering are better. Nikon lacks some choices notably a consumer long zoom with AFS and VR, an ultra wide TS and some mid-range teles that should be updated. However you clearly have little knowledge of Nikon's system other than poking your head into the nikon forum and reporting on gripes. The Sigma 150 macro that you are turning up your nose at is a fantastic lens. I should know, I have one. And its widely reported vby criediable reviewers as having excellent optics and construction. The 24-70 is not 'soft'. I doubt most professionals could push it to its limits. Maybe you're trying to be provocative but you simply come off as childish and uninformed.
you must be refering to poor copies of those lenses. I own a D800 and the 14-24 is beyond sharp on the D800. it blows the the canon equivalent 16-35. The 24-70 is spectacular on the D800 offering edge to edge results that are unmached by any current 24-70. It should easily match the overpriced canon mkII. The 70-200 is by far my favorite on the D800 however because it easily matches the newest canon version and it is extremelly sharp at both the center and edges.
so your take on nikon lenses are clearly misguided. Let's look at the nikon primes that perform spectacular on the D800 (ommiting the cheaper 1.8 and 2.8 versions telephotos.
35 1.4, 28 1.4, , 24 1.4, 50 1.4, 60 2.8, 85 1.4, 105 f/2, 100 f/2.8 135 f/2, 180 f/2.8, 200 f/2. Plus all the TS lenses (24, 45, 85)
who's complaining about lack of variety? the single lense canon has that nikon shooters even want is the 17TS. That's it.
I think your knowledge of the nikon lineup needs some refreshing.
No point being hung up on the scores – they're just an overall guide. Look at the individual performance results and base your decisions on those. How do people become so misguided?
...meh, I kinda wonder if it's a bit intentional. It gets buzz/views/drives Amazon click through sales.
People want to worry and measurebate. The market and manufacturers encourage this.
But really, I'm impressed the DPreview manages to do a pretty decent job of quantifying a lot of unquantifiables.
I don't understand your scoring. They say the AF is great and then it is one of the lowest scores. It does not make sense. It is so amazing that the score for 5D3 and D800 are the same at 82%. Maybe you should run for office, wouuld make a great politician. What a coincidence! what are the chances of that happening?
5D3 image quality vs the 5D2 is pretty much null up to ISO 800. Which is good news for me, since that's where I do 98% of my shooting. The slightly better IQ at higher ISOs, along with better AF and dual card slots aren't enough to warrant replacing my 5D2 bodies at this time. Perhaps if the 5D3 were priced below $3K, I'd consider replacing one of my 5D2 bodies with one.
As for Nikon and their 36MP, I honestly could care less. I have far too many dollars invested in Canon glass to consider switching systems. The quality of the 5D2 is plenty good for me and my clients. At a time when the majority of photos are viewed on screen, 36MP is overkill for most (though cropability is good).
Now if Nikon were to create a 24MP body with D700 shadow noise performance, I just might consider adding it to my arsenal :-)
(though quite honestly, noise reduction technology has come a long way that it helps mitigate some of Canon's shortcomings in this area).
Its not "good news" since mkII was released already in 2008. After 3 1/2 years one would expect mkIII to have much better low ISO performance since resolution is basically same. It would be fine if DR was updated but not.
Other brands look too appealing now.
> Its not "good news" since mkII was released already in 2008.
It simply means sensor technology has matured a few years ago. The main advances are primarily in high ISO performance and slight increase in pixel density. But these advances may not be important to some people.
I don't think you should expect much practical difference in "image quality" below ISO 800 among most DSLRs over $1000. Differences on paper, yes. But by the time you do RAW processing, printing up to 20"x30" and viewing at a normal distance (say, 3 ft), I don't think sensor matters much at all.
Other aspect, however, can easily make a real difference. For example, 4 fps can absolutely miss a shot that 6 fps or 8 fps can otherwise capture. I do shoot sports (soccer), so large file size and slow fps is a very bad combination for me. On the other hand, it can be wonderful for a landscape photographer who primarily wants to show the fine texture of a lot of leaves and grass.
"Which is good news for me,..."
Once again: "good news for me"
not you. I really don't care about YOU.
Got it?
I keep hearing Canon Fanboys and Nikon Fanboys lumped into the same category here, but it seems to me the Nikon side has much more venom in them than the Canon guys do.
Go look at the 5D forum. It's full of D800 threads or threads that are quickly hijacked. The D800 forum is much less invaded if at all.
...Just saying...
Nikon is the smaller company, so I suppose there is more niche' hipster type mentality over there.
I'm convinced Nikon is more active in the forums than Canon. Just look at how quickly even a fun anti-Nikon comment gets removed from the Nikon forum. Nikon is evidently more cleverly into internet marketing and FUD spreading.
What a lot of tosh. The D800 threads have been started in their hundreds in the Canon forums by paranoid Canon 5D owners and pretenders... Truth is no one is really interested in the 5DMKIII in the Nikon forums - the threads speak for themselves. Look closer to home for your issues I would suggest before spreading BS like this.
So Nikon peeps, what score should the Canon have received? 81%? 80%? I mean even 78% means the camera is scored 95% as good as the Nikon D800. Is that what all this uproar is about? Whether the Canon is 0 or 1 or 2% different than the D800? Gimme a freaking break.
I am not a Nikon peep but,
The D800 should have gotten around 90 and the 5DIII should have had like 75-77 and a silver award. One set a new standard for IQ, Features, and value in a 35mm DSLR and the other was just a conservative update of an existing model.
There speaks someone with no significant hands-on experience of either camera.
To be honest, Nikon and Canon should have a point more or less for each defect and virtue. But I think that is precisely what is not happening. Nikon should have a percentage point for each function or quality over the Canon and vice versa. I still bet that Nikon would be an advantage in general terms. In any event, the quality of the cameras not seen by points, but the points, can they lead us to a conclusion. And here I have not seen anything that justifies the equal score of both cameras. The functions and quality of both cameras are excellent, but there is always a but, obviously to the advantage lies one of the models. And needless to say which ...
"needless to say which"
That's precisely what we're arguing about, so it's hardly "needless".
Canon should have lost 5 points to start with - one for every hundred dollars markup over the Nikon.
Markup over a different product? Prices are set at what the manufacturer thinks the market will pay, and it seems by sales numbers that Canon were right (Nikon famously had to revise their numbers up in some markets).
(I assume those that say the 5DIII is too expensive remain blissfully single: No woman probably likes to hear "do you have anything cheaper?" when looking for engagement rings at the jeweler's... :) )
If you marry a women like that you are in real trouble buddy. If her biggest concern about the engagement is how much the ring costs, run, don't walk away. She doesn't love you she loves the things you can provide for her.
The Canon is by any measure an amazing piece of equipment.
People can purchase one with confidence.
Medium term, Canon are probably going to have to replace it before Nikon have to replace the D800.
While both cameras are excellent, in a way comparing them is not right -although of course that is exactly what people will do.
But Canon have another high MP FF camera on the way and Nikon have a lower MP FF camera coming. Once all of these cameras are out, then we can see how the Canon and Nikon ranges overlap. Choices will be easier to make.
I dare say though, that somewhere in Japan a Canon senior director has been scratching his head, thinking about how their major rival managed to produce a sensor with a lot more resolution AND better DR and comparable high ISO performance.
Well done to Nikon - I am sure the Canon engineers are working hard and thats good for us all. Canon were maybe too conservative this time around.
By competitor, do you mean Sony? There is no Nikon sensor in the D800.
I wonder if painters go to websites like this and argue till their faces turn blue about "my brush is 5 points softer than yours" or "my canvas is 20% finer than yours'... hmmm
I can't believe pbreview gave that new synthetic brush the same score as my genuine Yak mane brush set. They must have been paid off.
Yes, but synthetics have come a long way. Take a look at these polyester pants. You can't tell from silk. And anyways you need the matching paint chemistry to go with these synth brushes. Yak manes are over-rated. My Yak died last week anyways.
Judging by the way this link was shared accross various other industry forums including construction ones, makes me think that yes indeed painters probably DO argue over such things.
Painting is only partly about the brushes, but mostly about the paint. Paint is chemistry, formulas, application techniques, priming, overcoating...infinite number of techniques...and brands of materials to buy, and to argue over endlessly. Of course they talk the same way photographers do.
Check it out
Is it technically possible for Canon to improve its JPEG engine via firmware?
seems like it would be
dont shoot jpegs though
You can tweak it yourself with user definable picture styles and the EOS utilities, so I'd have to assume they could.
Could be, though might not be too. Often many of the processing features are mated to the processing "engine" digic 5 and such. Camera makers use specific processors that have pretty much hard coded imaging pipelines that allow for very efficient file processing.
How long would it take your computer to export out full 22MP jpg files from raw files, could it do 6 per second? And could it do it all day long off a tiny battery?
So yeah, it's possible that some tweaking can be done, and I hope it is done, as it would likely improve the video sharpness as well. But it all well might be impossible.
Probably. But the thing is, this is a really bad problem with cameras.
My X100 puts out amazing jpegs. And if dSLRs could have better processing to give us what we want, we wouldn't need raw. If the white balance, colours, shadows and noise reduction in camera were all excellent, the vast majority of us would never need raw.
The only reason i shoot raw is because my camera frequently gets the white balance wrong, is inconsistent shot to shot, and often I want to fill in shadows or retain highlights. If it did it all for me in jpeg, I wouldn't shoot raw.
So we should definitely be asking for better jpeg engines. "Just shoot raw" isn't much of an answer. It's a compromise.
Have been reading DPR since early Phil Askey days and this review's conclusion of D800-5D3 parity clearly demonstrates that DPR has "jumped the shark". They have cynically played the more PC answer, instead of the correct one.
DPR found better high ISO, better performance, faster FPS, and better AF in the 5D3. They found more resolution and DR in the D800. Sounds like a tie to me. Don't whine because their conclusion disagrees with your priority on resolution and DR above all else. DPR reviews whole cameras.
And DxOMark test found better performance in all 3 IQ categories - DR, high ISO, Color Depth - for the D800 where it scored higher than any digital camera in their history.
And I'm not whining, just stating my opinion and the opinion of tons of other review sites. If you don't like it, oh well.
Dpreview doesn't use dxomark's data, though. (And really dxomark's data rarely translates into real world prints)
DxOMark test raw sensor performance. Prints are not the only delivery medium on 2012. Things like banding, and how a file holds up in post do matter to the majority of photographers.
"Jumped the Shark". I like that one. ;-))
I think you misunderstand the meaning of "jump the shark".
Didn't misunderstand it's meaning.
"Jump the Shark" is a term used to describe a television show when it begins to decline in quality. It was coined as a reference to the sitcom Happy Days when Fonzie literally jumps over a shark on a waterski.
From Wikipedia:
"The usage of "jump the shark" has subsequently broadened beyond television, indicating the moment in its evolution when a brand, design, or creative effort moves beyond the essential qualities that initially defined its success, beyond relevance or recovery." I didn't misunderstand anything, but was half-serious. But having used both cameras, I do wonder about the frankly shocking conclusion of DPR and about review sites staying relevant in the face of overwhelming pressure to work within a capitalist system.
With this review, I believe the term is applicable, no offense guys, it's all in good fun.
Nope. It doesn't refer to the decline in popularity or quality, it refers to the desperate measures taken to reverse that decline.
And massaging the wounded egos of Nikon fanboys would have been more of a desperate measure than an even-handed review. If you want to see "jumping the shark" read Rockwell. He does it about twice a week.
I think the reivew number are meaningless and almost have to be. I mean it depends what you are gonna do with it. I know for me d800 is a better bet, and its good cuz I dont have a choice since i have nikon glass. others will be in a different situation and will get a mk3. I do think the tie may be a bit political
DPReview writes: "'war-zone' ruggedness of a 1D Mark IV or 1Dx"
Really? Try to drop it on concrete, or accidentally hit a wall with it, especially with a zoom, or dunk it in some water...
Olympus Tough are rugged, 1Ds are just big and heavy chunks of delicate electronic and optic equipment.
rugged may not be the right word but they are tough
Kai hits 7D with truck, tosses it down stairs, submerges it, freezes it, thaws it, sets it on fire, and it still works...
Check out digitalrev's video where kai hits the 7D with a moving truck, sends it down a flight of stairs in a wheelchair and freezes it in a block of ice. Most of these cameras are very tough.
"ends it down a flight of stairs in a wheelchair "
How about without the soft wheelchair absorbing all hits? Sheesh, the screens will break, lenses will break, mirror will break, sensors will go out of alignment... Shesh, the real life is not about cheap effects.
When Andrew Reid of EOSHD opinion is given towards the 5DIII review it is hardly a surprise why the 5DIII video is given such a low score while every reviewers says the 5DIII has better video than D800. For the record Andrew Reid does not own a D800 and constantly badgers around drooling about some post processed D800 samples posted on Vimeo by others. He also thinks D800E has the greatest dSLR video when others warned about D800E removal of alaiasing filter would make it worse. To Andrew it appears resolution is the rave over aliaising for now. EOSHD's opinion should not be taken with reagrds to video reviews.
The EOS HD page should be taken as representing a 'module' within the review - there's a disclaimer towards the bottom of the page, in fact, making it clear that the opinions expressed do not represent the opinions of.... etc., etc.
We wanted to get an expert perspective though, and that's what Andrew can provide. The final score, and the susbtance of our conclusion, are 'in house' - ours and ours alone.
Out of curiosity, what makes Andrew an "expert?" besides having a blog and having the time to help you with such things?
While he does put a lot of effort into what he does, does he have industry experience, or an education that would make him an "expert". Just curious.
I've noticed dpreview posting more of his blog posts and having him featured in one of your reviews is quite unprecedented I think. I'm sure he's pleased as punch though.
From what I've read on andrews site he is often quite brash and jumps to conclusions on topics that he knows little about (he often comes to conclusions based off hearsay, such as with D800 video quality prior to any released footage).
Andrew Reid at EOS HD is in the video industry and tests many of the HDSLR and pro video cameras that come out. He has a very good understanding of all the different aspects of video production and editing. His analysis that the D800 produces a sharper, higher resolution video image supports what Dan Chung concluded when he tested both cameras. And having owned a 5D2 and now a D800, it's immediately obvious that the D800 video image is crisper while the 5D3 (not 5D2) is slightly less prone to moire.
marike, "in the video industry", is like saying everyone on these forums are "in the photography industry" because we take pictures. That doesn't make us experts.
To me watching Andrew over the last couple years, I see him as an enthusiast who indeed is trying his hardest to help the indy filmmaking scene by getting the most out of the affordable gear out there. I respect him for his effort and his insights, but I just want to know what makes him an "expert", and worthy of being put so prominently (with his branding and everything) within likely one of the most popular reviews on this site.
To many Andrew has proven to be unnecessarily controversial and in some cases temporarily banned from forums for stirring up the pot.
ever reviewer? not even canon shooters like phillip bloom agree with your statement. the 5DmkIII has really poor resolution and sharpening in post isn't the answer although it helps it slightly.
then there is the lack of uncompressed HDMI out which kills the canon when it comes to shooting high moticon scenes because the codec falls appart due to the low bitrate compared to the ~200mbps of prores you can get out of the D800.
the D800 is not as prone to moire as the 5DII was, yet if that is a problem for you, just the the mosaic engineering filter (also reviewed by phillip bloom)
looks like you got some research to do.
I believe being 'in the industry' is does not make you an expert. Being truthful and good at what you do makes you an expert. Many filmmakers, musicians and artists are outside of the established creative industries. I'd rather be outside the industry and my own boss with full artist control over what I create. I'm a working filmmaker, but I work for myself - not a studio. I'm not comparing myself to any of the following just to be clear but it is worth using these legends as an extreme example of this - Lucasfilm is outside the industry and George Lucas funds his own movies outside of Hollywood, as does Francis Ford Coppola with his own production company American Zoetrope. EOSHD is my publishing company and filmmaking blog. So does being self employed mean someone is not a professional, not an expert? Is an artist who is interested purely in the art of filmmaking not an expert because he isn't a hired hand by an industry? Strange point of view I think.
You're good at what you do EOSHD, and I respect you for what you do for the community (seriously). I just has questions why all of a sudden dpreview is giving you so much brand recognition. Dpreview has thirdparty's do reviews all the time for their cameras (compacts for example aren't don inhouse), however, they're never given the recognition that you've been given recently.
I just question why they chose you over other "experts".
In anycase, congratulations, I've never seen another blog/brand integrated into a review like you have been.
Yes - was somehow previously been clear:
The Pentax K-5 is still the number one
so, if I add up the bar's lenght on the final score, the nikon has more higher bars than the canon....yet the overall score is the same?
shouldn't the lower canon bars be offset by the higher canon bars for the score to be identical?
I wish dpreview would provide numeric values instead of bar charts so we could take the average ourselves and figure out how they arrived to the 5DmkIII score.
if the bar size is taken to be 100% and one averages the lenghts, it looks like the 5DmkIII really scored a high 70's and was padded to please advertisers/audience.
You may be over-thinking it. The fact that the two camera scored anywhere near each other demonstrates that something other than providing an fair, unbiased, non-market driven scoring of both cameras (what you alluded to in your last paragraph) is going on.
It's kind of sad really.
Personally, I would rate the Canon above the Nikon because of larger pixels and higher maximum frame rate. How DP Review may score the two cameras would not affect my own preference. If someone were to buy the Canon or the Nikon because DP Review rates one or the other a few points higher, then I feel sorry for those buyers, because they don't really know what their own needs are. Read the reviews, and find out whether the things that are important to you gets high marks, but don't base your buying decision on how many points are in the final score. Basketballl games are decided by final scores, but cameras are not basketball games.
why for larger pixels. canaon hasnt been able to produce any advantage from that. iq is worse on the mk 3 by every metric other than the resolution as well as the resolution what did that gain canon?
Larger pixels are not producing any advantage in this case since the D800 has superior low-light, high ISO performance (1/2 a stop) than the 5D3.
The D800 produces better files with nearly 3 EV more DR. That's more significant the an extra 2 fps.
It's kind of sad that so many people find it so hard to accept that not everyone else conform to their own opinion, especially in what is essentially a subjective matter. This is not hard science, it's a matter of opinion and of personal needs and desires. If camera A suits your needs and your shooting style better than camera B, then A is the better camera. If camera B suits your needs and your shooting style better than camera A, then B is the better camera. Simple as that. No camera is better than any other in and of itself, without reference to a specific (type of) user.
I tried this too. The bars don't add up at all. Unless some bars are weighted more than others, a joint score of 82 doesn't make sense.
Now all together ...
Oh ! Canon...I am but a fool...
Darling I love you though you treat me cruel...
You hurt me and you make me cry...
But if you leave me, Nikon I will buy...
Hmm, so lower pixel density really does equal lower noise, nice.
That is true except in those cases where it is false.
Agreed, like when you don't know how to expose properly, so you push 2 or 3 stops in post. Or when you are trying to make an HDR out of one exposure. Real photographers run into these problems ALL the time. :-/
well, if you compare 100% crops it does. But nobody sells 100% crops. if you print, the image will get normalized and will then make the megapixel = noise myth false if sufficient levels of resolution offset the noise by making it less evident.
Serenading hey? You are basically telling everyone you are a old f*rt :)
Pretty sure the d800 won the shadow pushing noise competition...
shadow pushing noise competition is for morons and nerds who don't know how to expose... or what a camera is for.
My favorite camera brand is better than your favorite camera brand.
It is because I am a superior person to you, which is why I am stating that fact on an internet forum.
I now feel good about myself, and will subsequently receive the attention of beautiful women, causing my offspring to have a successful career.
Ah, someone who understands the beauty of reality....
Yeah, this is a social psychology thing highlighting what must be an innate human desire to attach our self esteem to external things - a flag, a sports team, a music group, a brand of car (Ford vs. Chevy, BMW vs. Merc), etc.
Funny creatures we are.
p.s. CANON is way better than NIKON
I find it hard to believe some people are knocking such a capable camera, the 5DII was excellent and the III is even better, looks like its time to sell my Mk II and take some images with the Mk III.
Looking forward to this one !
While I'm at it, page 23 mentions the "28-70mm L-lens" - old lens knocking around the office from the original 1Ds review, or typo? Gonna dig out the 17-35mm f/2.8, hmm? The old 24-85mm from the Canon D30 review?
We shot some samples with that lens, which is actually very good. Most through were taken with the 24-120 which is available as a kit with the camera.
Cue floods of images on Flickr of cats shot with this body, the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS lens, and the HDR - Embossed 3 and Bold 3 modes left on *all the time*. Hundreds of images uploaded every day. "Youre photo is good example on the lfickr - DIMOND HEART AWARD POSt 5 award 15". If there aren't such images already. I haven't looked. Don't have the stomach for it.
I think I will now upgrade from the 5DI to the 5D3. The Canon 5D3 is a great photographic tool that will make me very happy, as the 5D has for years.
D800? Yes its great also. Probably would go with nikon if all my system was stolen, but not worth the hassle changing systems.
i wouldnt change systems for anything. lenses are more important than the camera. luckily i am nikon shooter already
"... mushy jpegs, even at base ISO." And it receives a score of 82%? Lucky it wasn't a Pentax, Samsung, or Panasonic camera.
You should try shooting RAW files. The quality is always better than jpgs and you'll probably never go back to shooting jpgs. RAW files give you a lot of flexibilty, too. From what I read, most people buying high end cameras use RAW files exclusively.
Canon should look at Olympus jpeg`s.
You have to see these things in context. This is only relevant when examining images at a very high magnification and raw detail is excellent. Plus, many more factors influence the rating than just JPEG image quality.
It is the year 2012 and the first line of a list of 'cons' for a top Canon DSLR reads :
''....mushy JPEGs, even at base ISO.''
If it wasn't so sad, it would be funny.
I think dpreview should review the iphone and give it a score of 100 just to freak all you guys out. You are WAY too hung of on that number. Read the review and decide what is important to you personally and make a decision. All the info is there in the first 20 pages and non of it is in the silly score number. It's like you guys want dpreview to tell you that one camera is 1.529% better than another one as if they can scientifically work that out.
Did they force you to scroll down this far and start reading?
Why wait for DPREVIEW ?
Take your own advice.
Ha, ha, comment section is a major attraction for this website, they will never pull it! And indeed, what do you care, if you don't like it leave it alone, for me it's entertaining and I stil learn someting now and then because of the comments made. No matter how you look at it, there're always new angles that you didn't think of before.
it's a shame really. the faux 1080p soft output of the 5DmkIII combined with the lack of a codec that doesn't fall appart in post or during motion make its advances in low light peformance and sensor sampling much less attractive. If they had a clean uncompressed 4:2:2 out and more detailed output it would have been nearly perfect. But in 2012, those levels of resolution combined with restrictive internal codec choices and the lack of higher fps for 1080 make the 5DIII a total non starter. I guess we'll see how the 1DX will do or the rumored D600. For now all these HDSLRs are seriously lagging behind.
Seriously lagging behind what? Digital TV and film production cameras? In case you forgot, HDSLRs are still priced and marketed toward amateur and professional 'photographers' and not professional 'videographers'.
Also, I believe what you are truly looking for is this: Canon has already announced a 4K DSLR with 8-bit 4:2:2 1080p HDMI output: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/04/12/Canon-EOS-1D-C-4K-capable-DSLR
But like with all technology, if you are demanding these specs in a $3500 camera, wait 5 years and you'll have your wish.
Sad considering the much cheaper Panasonic GH2 is still the leader for best video implementation in a stills camera. Canon deliberately crippled the 5D3 to protect the C300 etc. With the Panasonic GH3 just around the corner including 1080/60p the Canon 5D3 video implementation is going to fall significantly behind.
@Kane Joseph
It's a 3500 dollar camera. why does it not have features cheaper cameras have and why is it not able to resolve more detail than not just its competitors, but lesser cameras?
Your argument that if you really want resolution you need to shoot 4K is absolutely bogus. First of all, nearly nobody has a 4K TV and the majorit of people target 1080p. Second, the fact there is 4K equipment does in no way EXCUSE canon from delivering such poor 1080p performance. Third, the barrier to 4K is tens of thousands of dollars. By your logic, why bother with a silly canon toy. Go with Red and shoot 6K at crazy fps.
LSE, you are really arguing with yourself here. Why are you arguing FOR Canon to have comparable features of lesser cameras for a lower price when at the end you call it a silly Canon toy? If you actually read the article I mentioned, here's a direct quote from Canon about the future of 4K: "Canon says it doesn't expect 4K to be a practical concern for many individuals in the short term. However, the ability to archive original footage at high resolution, in preparation for the market catching up could be a draw for the cinema and broadcast industry."
So do you work in the cinema and broadcast industry? If not, then no need to argue for Canon about their poor 1080p performance because there are better options out there made by Canon, RED, Sony, et al. If you are in the cinema and broadcast industry, you shouldn't be arguing for a $3500 still photo camera to have broadcast quality video. Simple as that!
You are talking about what is primarily a stills camera, in form and function. How many equivelent video cameras shoot 22mp stills?
Kane, with regards your comments above I think you're rather dodging the facts of LSE's argument, which are absolutely sound and a real issue for all serious video shooters - creative artists and commercial pros alike.
The old and extremely cheap Sony NEX 3 with firmware update has peaking for manual focus. A better focus assist than the $3500 5D Mark III, on a $500 bottom of the range mirrorless camera.
Numerous other cameras have articulated screens, something the 5D Mark III lacks due to concerns over maintaining water proofing. In my view, at $3500 this should have been engineered around.
The other missing feature is resolution. The GH2 and a Canon prosumer camcorder, both well under $2000 provide more detail in every frame and an established high quality video recording codec.
I'm sorry but it was a lukewarm update in my view and well below what my expectations were, after a lengthy 3+ year wait. Can it still produce amazing footage? Of course. But so could the Mark II.
Think of all the people who wish they could own either of these excellent cameras. I've got both so I don't spend any time at all trying to convince myself I made the obvious choice. The only weakness I can find in either is the jpgs on the 5D3 and the noise levels on both. For "art" the D800 with 14-24 is awesome. For what I do when I'm not trying to make Yosemite look beautiful (quite a challenge), the 5D3 with 17TS & 24TS is a dream.
looking forward to nikon's 17TS. Their 24TS works ok except in one rotation axis case but you can always rotate it the other way for the same image. ditto about the 14-24
Connect with dpreview


text:
Updated: 12/03/2013 - 2009 Emma Nickole, also known as Nicki, was born at just over a pound when her mother was just 26 weeks pregnant. She was delivered by emergency C-section because her kidneys were dilated.
Updated: 12/03/2013 - Avery Hardy is a 7-year-old that has been through more than many of us will in a lifetime. When she was just a year old she had to spend weeks at Children's Hospital of Georgia because of a rare auto immune disease that blinded her in the right eye and gave her constant seizures.
Updated: 05/29/2013 - It's called acute disseminated encephalomyelitis. It's an extremely rare disease where your immune system begins to attack your central nervous system. It can be caused by many different things, but for 3-year-old Alexander Saunders, doctors say it was most likely the flu shot.
Updated: 02/27/2013 - Many families throughout the world are affected by cancer. But for Holly Pilcher, cancer is the last thing she ever thought her 5-month-old baby would be facing.
Updated: 02/27/2013 - Climbing, jumping and always smiling, Howell Beman sure doesn't act like a child who spends a lot of his time in the hospital. But it hasn't always been easy for this 5-year-old.
Updated: 02/27/2013 - When Bea Hall heart she was having a granddaughter, many beautiful thoughts popped into her mind: cheerleading, prom, weddings.
Updated: 02/27/2013 - A trip to the Children's Medical Center in 2010 turned into a real life nightmare for the Taylor family after Emma Rhae Taylor was diagnosed with mitochondrial disease.
Posted: 11/13/2012 - Nick started out with a general stomachache and a low-grade fever, but then it seemed to be more than an average virus. Sharon Melton, Nick's mother, wanted answers, so she kept bringing him to doctors.
Posted: 11/13/2012 - Hannah Smith was living out a typical junior year juggling school, work and dance, but in December 2011, tragedy struck when she realized she couldn't breathe.
Posted: 11/13/2012 - It was Mother's Day 2007 when 9-month-old Mallory had her first seizure. She would make countless trips to the Children's Medical Center, battling 14 different seizures in less than six years.
Updated: 02/27/2013 - For the Rogers family, their first daughter was perfectly healthy, but then an ultrasound for their second daughter showed something was very wrong.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Badgley Mischka
2007 October 22
Badgley Mischka - Bridal Spring 2008
View Gallery
(NEW YORK) Based on Grace Kelly in High Society, Badgley Mischka's collection--with gowns called Muffy, Lillian, and Tory, just to name a few--"were named after all our socialite friends." And the stunning dresses certainly did the former Princess--and reigning Park Avenue royalty--justice. Detailing was extensive: rhinestone appliqués and buttons, back sashes, beaded Alençon lace on bodices, and beaded net sleeves were just a few of the embellishments the designers used, and their bride was nothing less than regal, whether in a heavily beaded pearl silk chiffon gown with dropped waist, chiffon train, and double-beaded strap detail, or in a simpler silhouette, such as a white silk satin mini gown with detachable silk organza skirt and beaded veil. Gowns were accessorized with Badgley Mischka jewelry and models' hair was pulled back in elegant French chignons.


text:
|Feb 18, 2013, 04:04 AM
Ipod Classic - Music Deleted
I am hoping someone can help me. I am in the outback of Australia and the closest apple specialist is 9 hours away.. I just got a new computer up and running again after it being reformatted. My old computer the one that my iPod is connected to is in New Zealand. Anyways, I tried putting all my music from my iPod to my computer, but I apparently did it wrong and all of my music got deleted. I tried looking at other threads, but I can't seem to find someone with the newest version of iTunes either. I have 11.0. Can someone please help me!? I can't seem to figure it out myself! Thank you!
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
|Thread Tools
|Search this Thread
|Display Modes
Linear Mode
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:31 AM.


text:
Tag Archives: the new black
Black is the New Black Part II
Beautifully hand-faceted little black onyx hearts in a bracelet and earrings. Continue reading
Black is the new…black!
Black is the new…Black! It's the first day of Autumn and I celebrate it by showcasing the first in a new collection of black onyx gemstone jewellery. Continue reading


text:
Food allergy in children and young people (CG116)
food allergy in children and young people
Fast, easy summary view of NICE guidance on 'food allergy in children and young people'
Diagnosis and assessment of food allergy in children and young people in primary care and community settings
The advice in the NICE guideline covers:
- Children and young people up to their 19th birthday who have symptoms or signs that could suggest food allergy.
- Children and young people who are at greater risk of developing a food allergy. For example, they may already have another condition linked with allergies such as asthma, atopic eczema (an allergy-related type of eczema that tends to run in families) or allergic rhinitis (a type of allergy that includes hay fever). Alternatively, they may have a parent, brother or sister with a food allergy or allergy-related condition.
It does not specifically look at:
- Children and young people who have a reaction to a food that is not caused by the immune system (for example, an intolerance to lactose, the main sugar found in dairy products).
Other information
NICE Pathways
This guidance has been incorporated into the following NICE Pathways, along with other related guidance and products.
Visit the NICE Pathway: food allergy in children and young people
How this guidance was produced
Background information
This page was last updated: 17 February 2014
Guideline formats
- Web format
- Quick reference guide (PDF)
- NICE Guideline (PDF)
- Full Guideline
- CG116 Profi plant a phobl ifanc am alergedd bwyd: deall canllawiau NICE (fformat MS Word)
Food allergy in children and young people
Information for the public
Guideline review
Review decision date: TBC
Review decision:
Following consultation with stakeholders this guideline has now been placed on the static list.
Implementation tools and resources
- Audit support
- Baseline assessment tool
- Costing report
- Slide set
- CG116 Food allergy in children and young people: glossary of terms
- Podcast
See this guidance in practice
The summary of the key recommendations in the guidance written for patients, carers and those with little medical knowledge and may be used in local patient information leaflets.
Quick Reference Guide
The quick reference guide presents recommendations for health professionals
NICE Guideline
The published NICE clinical guideline, contains the recommendations for health professionals and NHS bodies.
Full Guideline
The published full clinical guideline for specialists with background, evidence, recommendations and methods used.


text:
Cheap ski holidays in hundreds of ski resorts worldwide.
Nb: infants must be under the age of 2 and
children must be under the age of 12 at the time of
Under new management, this small boutique hotel is a favourite of those looking for modern, luxurious accommodation in intimate surroundings, and good cuisine. The terrace and most rooms boast fabulous south-facing views of the Jungfrau and Lauterbrunnen Valley. Just 2 minutes' walk from the little mountain train (provides access to the 'Männlichen - Kleine Scheidegg' ski area) & 5 minutes' walk from the Männlichen cable-car (provides access to the 'Männlichen - Kleine Scheidegg' ski area).
20 Bedrooms.All rooms are newly-renovated and have bath, balcony, cable TV, DVD player, telephone, radio, minibar and hairdryer.Most are south-facing with wonderful views of the mountains and valley.A west-facing twin with restricted side view is also available.North-facing small double rooms for sole occupancy have shower instead of bath.South-facing 3-room suites (2 bedrooms, lounge and balcony) are ideal for families and are also available on request.
Iglu acts as a travel agent for disclosed principals/tour operators, further details
of which will be made available at the time of booking. Your holiday contract will
be bound by the tour operators terms and conditions.
Prices are shown for a basic room or unit, can be subject to change and are indicative
until time of booking. Please call on 0208 544 7114 for prices for other travel
and room options for this property.
The price shown includes 7 nights accommodation,
with flights from Heathrow.
Prices shown are per person per week based on maximum occupancy. Descriptions and
quality ratings are provided by the Tour Operator (or one of the Tour Operators
where similar holidays are offered by more than one supplier). We reserve the right
to make minor adjustments to the description or rating based on staff and customer
feedback. For payments by credit card, a 2.5% credit card charge (4% for AMEX) will
be added to your invoice. If you pay by a UK issued debit card, there is no charge.
All bookings are subject to a £5 per person Passenger Admin Fee charged by Iglu.com.


text:
A new Wisconsin Historical Society website is coming mid-May 2014! See a preview >>
In 1976, a group of scholars, local historians, collectors, and other people interested in the history of logging and lumbering in Wisconsin formed the Forest History Association of Wisconsin (FHAW). They have met every year since to read and discuss papers, which have been published in these Proceedings. Although these are not primary sources, we have included them at Turning Points in Wisconsin History because they bring together a wealth of useful scholarship not easily found elsewhere and because the earlier volumes are now extremely rare. Because they total more than 1,500 pages, we have broken the series into three separate sequences.
Some of the articles in volumes 21-31 document logging in the Flambeau and Wisconsin River watersheds, the communities of Minocqua, Tomahawk, Wausau, Mosinee, Stevens Point, Sheboygan, and Stanley, the development of the northwoods tourism industry, the counties of Iron and Rusk, log marks, the Oshkosh woodworkers strikes of 1898 and 1900, surveying, Eugene S. Shepard and his hodag hoax, archaeology of the Old Copper Culture, the Peshtigo Fire, logging on the Bad River Indian Reservation, logging railroads, and use of forest products in the aircraft industry. For more articles on Wisconsin logging and lumbering, see volumes 1-10 and 11-20.


text:
Updated for:
Thursday, April 24, 2014 7:54 PM
Photo by Alexis Goring. At the Prince George's County Community College's grand opening of its new Center for Health Studies on Wednesday, May 1, Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown said, "With the opening of this world-class training facility, we are developing a workforce pipeline for Prince George's County."
Published on: Friday, May 03, 2013
By Alexis A. Goring
The grand opening of the Center for Health Studies at Prince George's Community College drew a large crowd of students, staff and distinguished leaders in the community including Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown and PGCC President Charlene Dukes Wednesday.
"It was a little over two years ago when many of us assembled on this very spot to celebrate the groundbreaking of the Center for Health Studies at Prince George's Community College," Dukes said as she addressed the crowd. "At that time, we spoke of our vision for providing a facility that would not only serve our students but would also facilitate the collaborative nature of learning in a global, technologically-driven world. And today, you are standing in the realization of that vision.
"But let me be clear. A building alone does not determine the quality of a student's education. However, it can be a huge factor in making the educational process a more effective and pleasant experience for all."
The Center for Health Studies is an academic building encompassing more than 112,000 total square feet with 11 classrooms and 26 state-of-the-art simulation labs.
Photo courtesy of Prince George's Community College. A Center for Health Studies instructor shows off the center's ambulance, where students train to become emergency medical technicians, during a media tour of the facility earlier this year.
This new building will play a critical role in training and educating the next generation of nurses, emergency medical technicians, and medical assistants. It also will address increased demands in the health care workforce as research shows three of Maryland's five fastest growing job sectors are in the fields of health and health information technology.
"A center of this magnitude would not have been possible without the support of the state and (Prince George's) County," said Angela Anderson, dean of Health Sciences. "The center costs-to-date total approximately $36.4 million (including furnishings and equipment). Of that amount, the State of Maryland provided $22.7 million and Prince George's County government (provided) $13.7 million."
The Center for Health Studies has more than 2,400 faculty members and staff and 44,000 students.
"The opening of this magnificent facility is not solely for the benefit of our students," Dukes said, "but rather more about the future of the county."
The lieutenant governor agreed.
"Our administration is committed to investing in Maryland's infrastructure, creating jobs and preparing the workforce. Our community colleges are a critical part of these efforts," Brown said. "With the opening of this world-class training facility, we are developing a workforce pipeline for Prince George's County. It is our hope that PGCC graduates choose to take jobs in our county, whether it's through our new Health Enterprise Zone program, or in the new, state-of-the art Regional Medical Center that we remain committed to building right here in Prince George's County."
According to Dukes, PGCC has a 10-year capital improvement plan, and the next on-campus facility that will undergo renovation is Lanham Hall with plans to start in 2014 and move through 2016.


text:
2 people found this helpful
I worked at Clear Channel full-time for more than 8 years
Pros – You get to work for one of the largest companies in the world. The name "Clear Channel" looks good on paper.
Cons – This was once a great company to work for....8+ years ago! It has gradually gone down hill. I wish it could be blamed on the hard economic times, which, yes has contributed to how they treat their employees, but sadly I think it's more about how the company is managed. They once cared about their employees and treated you like family. The perks were once great. Now it's about how much more responsibility they can pile on you, how many more hour you can work and how much faster you can do it all. It's an extremely stressful environment. I always got overlooked for the work and hours I put in. If they dont like you, they will make your life miserable until you leave. They never fire anyone because they dont want to deal with unemployment. The turnover is really high because no one wants to work for a company that treats their employees so poorly.
Advice to Senior Management – Get back to what you once were or the company will go under. Start caring about your employees and treating them with dignity and respect. Or start handing out anxiety medication in your new hire packets, because they are going to need it! Otherwise, you might as well hire robots, because that is the only way the amount of work you demand of your employees will get done without stressing them out and making them constantly sick.
No, I would not recommend this company to a friend – I'm not optimistic about the outlook for this company
I have been working at Clear Channel full-time for more than 8 years
2 people found this helpful
I worked at Clear Channel full-time for more than 10 years
Would you like us to review something? Please describe the problem with this {0} and we will look into it.
Your feedback has been sent to the team, and we'll look into it.
Sorry, but your feedback didn't make it to the team. Your input is valuable to us – would you mind trying again?
Your response will be removed from the review – this cannot be undone.
Copyright © 2008–2014, Glassdoor. All Rights Reserved. Your use of this service is subject to our Terms of Use and Privacy & Cookies Policy. Glassdoor ® is a registered trademark of Glassdoor, Inc.
We do not post on Facebook
We do not post on Facebook


text:
Refresh, revive, and recharge hair and scalp without water. Pronto is perfect for use between washings, in a rush, or as a midday hair pick-me-up. This dry shampoo increases volume and removes dirt and build up in your root area in seconds.Natural rice, oat, and tapioca starches cleanse hair by absorbing excess oil, product, and grease and increase hair volume at the roots without weighing hair down. Tea tree oil helps treat the scalp and reduce the occurrence of dandruff, while the invigorating lemon verbena fragrance leaves hair smelling and feeling fresh. Key Ingredients:
Department: CosmeticsStyle: OB37


text:
Is it possible to change the content of a field in a InfoPath form from a workflow in SharePoint. I have tried working with the "Update List Item" action but have been unable to to find a direct way of doing this.
Take the 2-minute tour ×
SharePoint Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for SharePoint enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.
You can always download the xml of the InfoPath form using SPFile and have the workflow modify the contents of the xml file, thus modifying the item. To download the item try something like this
Then once it's download, grab the XElement of the field you want to modify, and change the value. Then convert the XDocument back to a Stream and save it back to the SPFile using SPFile.SaveBinary() method then use SPFile.Update() to save your changes to the SPFile object.


text:
Metadate CD
What is Metadate CD?
Methylphenidate is a central nervous system stimulant. It affects chemicals in the brain and nerves that contribute to hyperactivity and impulse control.
Methylphenidate is used to treat attention deficit disorder (ADD), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and narcolepsy.
Methylphenidate may also be used for purposes not listed in this medication guide.
In This Section:
What is the most important information I should know about Metadate CD (Methylphenidate)?
You should not use methylphenidate if you have glaucoma, tics or Tourette's syndrome, or severe anxiety, tension, or agitation.
Do not use methylphenidate if you have taken an MAO inhibitor in the past 14 days. A dangerous drug interaction could occur. MAO inhibitors include isocarboxazid, linezolid, phenelzine, rasagiline, selegiline, and tranylcypromine.
Methylphenidate may be habit forming. Never share methylphenidate with another person, especially someone with a history of drug abuse or addiction. Keep the medication in a place where others cannot get to it.
What should I discuss with my healthcare provider before taking Metadate CD (Methylphenidate)?
Do not use methylphenidate if you have taken an MAO inhibitor in the past 14 days. A dangerous drug interaction could occur. MAO inhibitors include isocarboxazid, linezolid, phenelzine, rasagiline, selegiline, and tranylcypromine.
You should not use this medication if you are allergic to methylphenidate or if you have:
- glaucoma
- a personal or family history of tics (muscle twitches) or Tourette's syndrome; or
- severe anxiety, tension, or agitation (methylphenidate can make these symptoms worse)
Tell your doctor if you have any heart problems. Some stimulants have caused sudden death in children and adolescents with serious heart problems or congenital heart defects.
To make sure methylphenidate is safe for you, tell your doctor if you have:
- high blood pressure
- angina (chest pain), heart failure, heart rhythm disorder, or recent heart attack
- a personal or family history of mental illness, psychotic disorder, bipolar illness, depression, or suicide attempt
- epilepsy or other seizure disorder
- a stomach disorder; or
- a history of drug or alcohol addiction
Methylphenidate may be habit forming. Never share this medicine with another person, especially someone with a history of drug abuse or addiction.
FDA pregnancy category C. It is not known whether methylphenidate will harm an unborn baby. Tell your doctor if you are pregnant or plan to become pregnant while using this medication.
Methylphenidate can pass into breast milk and may harm a nursing baby. You should not breast-feed while using this medicine.
Long-term use of methylphenidate can slow a child's growth. Tell your doctor if the child using this medication is not growing or gaining weight properly.
Do not give methylphenidate to a child younger than 6 years old without a doctor's advice.
How much does Metadate CD (Methylphenidate) cost?
What conditions might Metadate CD (Methylphenidate) treat?
|Ratings and Reviews
User ratings on perceived effectiveness
Average of visitor reported ratings on their perceived effectiveness of the drug in question.
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder/Attention Deficit Disorder combined
Attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)
Copyright 1996-2014 Cerner Multum, Inc. Version: 8.02. Revision date: 2013-05-15.
Metadate CD Side Effects
What are the possible side effects of Metadate CD (Methylphenidate)?
Get emergency medical help if you have any of these signs of an allergic reaction: hives; difficulty breathing; swelling of your face, lips, tongue, or throat.
Stop taking methylphenidate and call your doctor at once if you have:
- new or worsening symptoms such as mood swings, aggression, hostility, or changes in personality or behavior
- panic, delusion, extreme fear, hallucinations, unusual behavior, motor tics (muscle twitches)
- chest pain, fast or slow heart rate, pounding heartbeats or fluttering in your chest
- a light-headed feeling, like you might pass out
- sudden numbness or weakness (especially on one side of the body), sudden severe headache, slurred speech, problems with vision or balance
- easy bruising, purple spots on your skin
- fever, sore throat, and headache with a severe blistering, peeling, and red skin rash; or
- dangerously high blood pressure (severe headache, blurred vision, buzzing in your ears, anxiety, confusion, chest pain, shortness of breath, uneven heartbeats, seizure)
Common side effects may include:
- feeling nervous or irritable, sleep problems (insomnia)
- loss of appetite, weight loss
- headache, dizziness, drowsiness; or
- stomach pain, nausea, vomiting, upset stomach
This is not a complete list of side effects and others may occur. Call your doctor for medical advice about side effects. You may report side effects to FDA at 1-800-FDA-1088.Back to Top
Copyright 1996-2014 Cerner Multum, Inc. Version: 8.02. Revision date: 2013-05-15.
Metadate CD Interactions
In This Section:
What other drugs affect Metadate CD (Methylphenidate)?
Tell your doctor about all medicines you use, and those you start or stop using during your treatment with methylphenidate, especially:
- clonidine
- guanethidine
- a blood thinner such as warfarin, Coumadin
- an antidepressant--amitriptyline, citalopram, doxepin, fluoxetine, nortriptyline, paroxetine, sertraline, and others
- cold or allergy medicine that contains a decongestant
- medications to treat high or low blood pressure
- seizure medicine--phenobarbital, phenytoin, primidone; or
- stimulant medications or diet pills
This list is not complete. Other drugs may interact with methylphenidate, including prescription and over-the-counter medicines, vitamins, and herbal products. Not all possible interactions are listed in this medication guide.Back to Top
What should I avoid while taking Metadate CD (Methylphenidate)?
Avoid drinking alcohol, especially if you take extended-release methylphenidate. Alcohol may cause the medicine to be released into the bloodstream too fast.
Methylphenidate may impair your thinking or reactions. Be careful if you drive or do anything that requires you to be alert.Back to Top
Copyright 1996-2014 Cerner Multum, Inc. Version: 8.02. Revision date: 2013-05-15.
Metadate CD Dosage
In This Section:
How should I take Metadate CD (Methylphenidate)?
Follow all directions on your prescription label. Your doctor may occasionally change your dose to make sure you get the best results. Do not take this medicine in larger or smaller amounts or for longer than recommended.
Take this medication at least 30 minutes before a meal. Extended-release methylphenidate can be taken with or without food.
The chewable tablet must be chewed before you swallow it.
Measure liquid medicine with a special dose-measuring spoon or medicine cup. If you do not have a dose-measuring device, ask your pharmacist for one.
Shake the oral suspension (Quillivant) well just before you measure a dose.
Do not crush, chew, or break an extended-release tablet. Swallow it whole. Breaking the pill may cause too much of the drug to be released at one time.
You may open the extended-release capsule and sprinkle the medicine into a spoonful of pudding or applesauce to make swallowing easier. Swallow right away without chewing. Do not save the mixture for later use. Discard the empty capsule.
To prevent sleep problems, take this medication early in the day, no later than 6:00 pm.
If you need surgery, tell the surgeon ahead of time that you are using methylphenidate. You may need to stop using the medicine for a short time.
Store at room temperature away from moisture and heat.
Keep track of the amount of medicine used from each new bottle. Methylphenidate is a drug of abuse and you should be aware if anyone is using your medicine improperly or without a prescription.Back to Top
What happens if I overdose on Metadate CD (Methylphenidate)?
Seek emergency medical attention or call the Poison Help line at 1-800-222-1222. An overdose of methylphenidate can be fatal.Back to Top
What happens if I miss a dose of Metadate CD (Methylphenidate)?
Take the missed dose as soon as you remember. Skip the missed dose if it is later than 6:00 p.m. Do not take extra medicine to make up the missed dose.Back to Top
Copyright 1996-2014 Cerner Multum, Inc. Version: 8.02. Revision date: 2013-05-15.
Metadate CD Reviews
Copyright © 2014 Everyday Health Media, LLC
About Drugs A-ZDrugs A-Z provides drug information from trusted third-party Everyday Health partners and ratings from our members, all in one place. Cerner Multum™ provides the data within most of the Basics, Side Effects, Interactions and Dosage tabs. The information within the Reviews and FAQ tabs is proprietary to Everyday Health.
You can browse Drugs A-Z for a specific prescription or over-the-counter drug or look up drugs based on your specific condition. This information is for educational purposes only, and not meant to provide medical advice, treatment or diagnosis. Remember to always consult your physician or health care provider before starting, stopping or altering a treatment or health care regimen.
Recent Drug Ratings
- Rolaids Extra Strength for Pyrosis (heartburn)
- Binosto for Osteoporosis
- Exemestane for Breast Cancer
- Clozapine for Bipolar Disorder
- Osphena for Dyspareunia
- Tecfidera for Multiple Sclerosis
- Sanctura XR for Urinary Incontinence
- V-Gan-25 for Allergic Reaction
- Biotin for Nutritional Supplementation
- Kaopectate for Diarrhea


text:
Breast Cancer Surgery – Dr. Ed Sauter
Surgery is more often than not a front-line attack against a diagnosis of breast cancer. But what type of surgery performed by what type of surgeon? These are the questions addressed by the U.T. Health Science Center at Tyler's Dr. Ed Sauter in this post to HealthConnection.TV.
Why is surgery the first line of attack against breast cancer? (first question)
What are the surgical options for treating breast cancer? (skip to 0:31)
What is the difference between 'mastectomy' and 'radical mastectomy?' (skip to 1:07)
If breast cancer surgery becomes necessary, what are the advantages to having a surgeon who specializes in cancer? (skip to 1:55)
What factors influence a woman's decision regarding her options for breast cancer surgery? (skip to 2:49)
Do surgery and radiation automatically go together in treating breast cancer? (skip to 3:31)
A growing number of women, especially younger women, are choosing to have both breasts removed as a preventive measure, even if only one breast is affected by cancer. What is driving this trend and is it a good idea? (skip to 3:58)
Some women who have a strong family history of breast cancer but no symptoms and no diagnosis of breast cancer themselves elect to have both breasts removed as a precaution against the disease. What are your thoughts on this? (skip to 5:11)
Is it better to wait until after breast cancer surgery before considering or beginning reconstruction? (skip to 6:22)
Do breast reconstruction or augmentation negatively impact the chance of detecting a new or recurring breast cancer? (skip to 7:18)
Is there anything a woman can do to reduce the likelihood of getting breast cancer? (skip to 8:39)
Are there lifestyle choices that are important with respect to avoiding breast cancer? (skip to 10:35)


text:
Demi Lovato Admits: I Have Bipolar Disorderby Hilton Hater at .
Demi Lovato is continuing to open up about her recent stint in rehab and the basis for her stay there.
First, the singer/actress admitted she's battled an eating disorder for years, later adding that she's cut herself since the age of 11 and is leaving Sonny with a Chance to battle these demons.
Now, the 18-year is opening up again to the public, making an admission to People: "I never found out until I went into treatment that I was bipolar," she tells the magazine. "There were times when I was so manic, I was writing seven songs in one night and I'd be up until 5:30 in the morning."
Last week, Catherine Zeta-Jones sought professional help for the same disease, as Demi Tweeted her support of that star. She says she's taking positive steps in her life to turn things around.
"I feel like I am in control now where my whole life I wasn't in control... What's important for me now is to help others."
[Photo: WENN.com]
From Around the Web
More From The Hollywood Gossip
Demi Lovato Responds to Haters with Love on Twitter, Tells Fans to Rise Above BullyingDemi Lovato will not be torn down by her haters. She encouraged fans to choose kindness over cruelty and spread the love, not hate.
Wilmer Valderrama: Demi Lovato's "Rock" in Wake of Nude Photo ScandalWilmer Valderrama is showing his long and unwavering support for Demi Lovato in the wake of her shocking naked photo scandal.
Demi Lovato Covers Ed Sheeran: Watch, Listen Now!Demi Lovato does an impression here of Ed Sheeran. Do you like her latest cover?
Demi Lovato Blasts The Daily Beast as Ignorant F--ks: Find Out Why!Demi Lovato has gone OFF on The Daily Beast. For what reason? Find out now.
27 Comments New Comment Subscribe
@Diaper sweat surviving an abortion as u did when ur morbidly obese mother tried 2 rid herself of u has made u hate females in general.we've all seen sweats mama shes the big stanky cat piss smellin ho rollin thru walmart on a scooter cuz hEr fat ass is 2 lazy to walk! & she dont wear granny panties oh no sHe dont wear draws at all makes it to hard 4 sweat 2vwipe her flabby shit stained ass! he got 2 she cant reach it! & he always talkin bout hairy pussys well guess whos is hairiest? thats right momma's !remember sweat? all those nites momma made u lick her nasty stinky ol' snatch? u hated it said it tasted like DIAPER SWEAT!


text:
Supernatural fangirl and addict.
I love my show and the boys. I'm a Sam!gal who adores Dean.
I have a wee obsession with the motels in Supernatural. I am currently working on the motel entries in SuperWiki.
I believe in allowing everyone to enjoy whatever they love in fandom (ships 'n all...:D). I enjoy the variety of relationships on the show but the one that matters most to me is the one between Sam and Dean.
I love making stuff - vids, pic-spams, gifs and I love chatting about my show.
This is a 90% Supernatural blog. Other posts will appear as the fancy takes me (or be whatever show I am currently adoring).
I'm Ash48 on Live Journal and Ash4897 on You Tube.
Catching Elephant is a theme by Andy Taylor


text:
"It's like we're flying a plane at 40,000 feet and just now are opening up the book to see how we'll land," said Daniel Garen, senior vice president and chief compliance officer with Wright Medical Technology, who opened the 2013 Pharma Forum at the Marriott World Center in Orlando by detailing what today's life sciences meeting managers need to know about the Sunshine Act. The Forum is co-organized by Medical Meetings and The Center for Business Intelligence.
Final rules for the Physician Payment Sunshine Act, a provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, require that manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologicals, and medical supplies covered by Medicare, Medicaid, and the Children's Health Insurance Program report all transfers of value—including payments, gifts, research and consulting fees, speaking fees, meals, and travel—to physicians and teaching hospitals.
To continue Garen's analogy, the plane pushed back from the gate in 2004, when states first began passing their own transparency laws. Then it got off the ground when the Affordable Care Act got under way in 2009, and reached cruising altitude in 2010 when PPACA was passed into law. We've been in a holding pattern since 2011, however: While the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid promised to issue guidance on how to implement Sunshine, that didn't happen until February of this year.
The Costs of Errors
The ostensible goal of Sunshine, he said, is to enable patients to see their healthcare providers' financial relationships with industry. "But we're not there yet," he said. The government, however, is finding ways to use the data that's already out there. The feds are mining it to find outliers, such as disproportionate payments, to back up qui tam (whistleblower) lawsuits, and to uncover potential kickbacks and inducements to prescribers. One of the biggest miners of available data? The Internal Revenue Service.
The Sunshine Act also is intended to make the idea of receiving something of value on the physician side, or providing something of value on the manufacturer side, less attractive. "Both physicians and manufacturers are now thinking twice" about their financial relationships, Garen said, though the ultimate responsibility—and penalties—belong to the manufacturers.
If found out of compliance, medical device, biotech, and pharma manufacturers, along with group purchasing organizations, will have to pay $10,000 for each mistake they make in their data reporting, with a cap of $150,000. "If you knowingly make a mistake, it'll cost up to $100,000 for each incident, with a cap of $1 million. The higher fines only come into play if the error is intentional.
"Manufacturers are ultimately responsible for the accuracy of the data," Garen said. "We get information from a number of sources, but manufacturers are the ones on the hook. We are the ones who need to make sure we have the right procedures, policies, training, and education for physicians, and our executives have to certify that the information is accurate."
All this is costly to implement, monitor, and comply with, and it requires a number of departments to work together. And, while it may all start with compliance, implementation is really a financial and IT issue, he added.
Know What Transactions Are Reportable
Companies have to integrate their vendors' data, and identify multiple sources of HCP spend, he said. These include all direct or indirect transfers of value, from cash and marketing materials to non-patient educational materials, in addition to gifts, honoraria, and food and travel expenses.
And the details to be tracked are many, including HCP name/address/specialty, payment dates, the drug or device that the payment or transfer of value (POTV) relates to, and the form of payment rendered. One issue that will be thorny is vendor data integration, especially the form of what physician identification you use to track each healthcare provider. Most, but not all, HCPs have a national provider identification, or NPI, number. The government says you have to make a "good faith effort" to find that number, which means you "have to go through all the John Smiths to make sure you're reporting for the right person—and by the way, he doesn't have an NPI." While he didn't have a solution for this issue, he did warn that planners should know that it's in play.
Addressing a persistent rumor that companies are going to start holding their HCP meetings in Canada to get around Sunshine requirements, Garen said it would do no good "because it doesn't matter where the meeting is held—it's where [the HCPs] are licensed."
Incorporate Sunshine Requirements Into Your Event Management Process
To meet Sunshine's requirements, meetings managers must gather data across multiple areas of spend, and often from many third-party suppliers. "Pay attention to the details," he stressed. "What's Dr. Smith's NPI number, what product am I talking to him about?" Companies are counting on you to manage their events, collect and reconcile expenses, report spend into their aggregate spend system, and provide supporting documentation, he said.
For event management, you'll need to manage who is invited, both on the faculty and attendee side, and everything to do with the venue you select, including hotel, meal, and transportation spend. You'll also have to determine how to handle invitations, and manage proof of attendance. "What if we had to have everyone in this room sign in before they came in," he said, looking out over the crowd of some 600 people. "We would have had to start two hours early." He added that we'll likely see more use of badge-swiping technology to streamline the process.
And, while you don't have to report POTOVs of less than $10 per occurrence, you still need to track even lesser amounts to be able to monitor where individual HCPs are in terms of the $100 annual cap.
Determine How Information Will Flow
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid require companies to report data for August 1, 2013, through December 2013 by March 31, 2014. The data goes public by September 30, 2014. CMS will give HCPs 45 days to review their data, and dispute any discrepancies. "If you find a mistake, report it right away," said Garen. "If you make a mistake, it's $10,000. If you don't report it [and it's discovered], it's $100,000."
"Everyone needs to have someone who's responsible for the aggregate spend data," he said. And you need to be able to get your hands on the evidence that proves your data's validity quickly as well, since you'll only have 15 calendar days to find evidence to support your data if it's challenged. This means having a systematic way to store receipts, sign-in sheets, lists, and other tracking documentation.
It's vital to understand your company's or your clients' policies, said Garen, and to have communication channels set up to let everyone involved know when those policies change. Companies will be monitoring to ensure policies are being adhered to, and management will review the aggregate spend reports to certify that everything is correct.
Who Will Use the Data?
The short answer, Garen said, is that we all will. It's important to get all this tracking and reporting data right, and not just to avoid penalties and fines, he added. The data will be used internally by companies to ensure they're compliant with state laws and company policies. And the data can be used beyond even that, as Garen pointed out: "I'll be looking at it to see what our competitors are doing."
Then there are the external parties—the media, the HCPs, patients, medical associations, and academic researchers—all of whom will be scouring the data as well to highlight life sciences spend on HCPs on a local, regional, and national level, see where their own physicians rank, and examine how spend patterns do or do not affect HCP behavior.
Leveraging Big Data
But it's not all about a burden being imposed on manufacturers, Garen said. The up side of Sunshine is that "you now have a treasure trove of data." You will need to work closely with your compliance and legal departments to ensure your policies and procedures don't imply that you'll use the data to better influence docs, but rather to use it in aggregate to improve your programs. You also can use the data to glean good and ideas and best practices from what others are reporting.