Canon EOS Rebel T1i impressions, head-to-head with Nikon D5000

Gallery: Canon EOS Rebel T1i hands-on
Design
If you've held the XSi or XTi, you've held the T1i. It checks in a wee bit smaller and lighter than the D5000 (in case you weren't aware, we'll be doing that with some frequency throughout), though it doesn't feel "cheaper." In fact, we'd argue that the T1i feels a bit more "professional" (as in, sturdy, solid and less like a toy) than the D5000. More rubberized grips were in place, the whole body felt exceptionally rigid and one-handed operation is totally feasible thanks to the left-aligned rear LCD monitor.

As with the D5000, Canon has also opted to not include a top-mounted LCD. In other words, you'll be looking at that back panel alone if interested in checking out shutter speed, white balance, RSS feeds (kidding, but we wish we weren't), etc. As for the button layout, that's a mixed bag. In most aspects, we greatly prefer the button layout on the T1i over that on the D5000; the dedicated ISO button makes adjusting levels whilst shooting in low light a breeze, and both the Menu and Display buttons are conveniently placed just above the rear LCD -- right where you thumb naturally falls.

That said, we still found ourselves detesting the teeny, tiny Record button for firing up movies (we greatly prefer the Live View to Record button on the D90 / D5000, though that's totally subjective). We also found the click wheel (used to shuffling through shutter speeds and the like) placement on the D5000 to be far easier to reach than the top-mounted wheel on the T1i. Additionally, the actual button used to snap a picture just feels too shallow and small for our tastes. C'mon Canon -- get a man-sized depressor on this thing, won'tcha? Finally, we're no fans of the mode dial, or more specifically, its inability to shuffle around 360 degrees. On the D5000, users can spin it entirely around in both directions; on the T1i, users can only spin it one way for a limited distance, and afterwards you'll have to back your way into the preferred setting. Petty, but notable. All in all we've got about as many likes as dislikes when it comes to buttons, but we can't help but note that the pros outweigh the cons (read: nuisances).
Display
Make no mistake, the T1i's display is far less interesting than the Vari-angle monitor that's on the D5000. But in most every way, it's better. It's bigger (3.0-inches diagonally versus 2.7-inches on the D5000), it boasts a higher resolution (920,000 dots versus 230,000 dots on the D5000) and it's better positioned (left-aligned versus center-aligned on the D5000). 'Course, you can change that alignment quite easily on Nikon's offering, but if we're talking default positions, the T1i takes the gold here. The actual screen quality on the T1i is good, but it's certainly not as bright, sharp or crisp as the monitor on the D5000 (and D90, for that matter). Furthermore, the GUI on the T1i just isn't as visually stunning as the one on the D5000, though it does serve the purpose after you've digested a few chapters of the owner's manual.

So, we just know you're wondering which display we prefer. If we're being totally candid, we'd take the T1i's panel in 99 percent of scenarios. As many has recognized, the articulating display just isn't that useful in the vast majority of situations. It's cute, it's intriguing and it's different, but we just didn't find ourselves pulling it out all that often. Yeah, you can chalk that up to our distaste of Nikon's Live View implementation and the fact that we don't generally use our DSLR as a camcorder, but if you find yourself in that same camp, you too would probably find that Vari-angle monitor sat flush against the body most of the time.

What is useful, however, is the ability to really see the shot you just took on the rear of your camera, and nothing helps out more with giving you clear views than sheer resolution. Which, as we've pointed out already, is provided on the T1i's high-res screen. The bottom line? Articulating displays, at least on DSLRs, are overrated. Sorry, but it's true.
Image and video quality
With a sensor borrowed from the heralded 50D, it's easy to understand why the T1i takes gorgeous shots. Indeed, we were thoroughly impressed with the camera's shooting abilities in pretty much every respect. Inside, outside, you name it -- the T1i delivered shots that far exceeded our expectations for a camera at this price point. The ISO 12,800 option -- while largely unimportant due to the remarkable amount of grain it adds -- is still a feature we appreciated having. After all, a shot with loads of noise is better than no shot at all, right?
As you can see in the gallery below, the D5000 and T1i measured up pretty well against each other in terms of image quality. Indeed, we found it exceptionally tough to definitely say that we preferred the output of one over the other in every single shot and scenario. In certain lighting conditions, we found ourselves more partial to the T1i; in others, the D5000. At the end of the day, it's probably not the image quality that'll make this decision for you -- both cameras simply excel in producing beautiful shots.
Now, onto video. On paper, this one's easily an area where the T1i should dominate... right? Unfortunately, the T1i's 1080p movie mode carries along an unorthodox (ad unappreciated) 20fps setting, which is obviously nowhere close to the more widely accepted 24fps and 30fps standards. The 720p mode does do 30fps, but we couldn't but point out that the Full HD isn't quite as luxurious as advertised. Much like the D5000, the T1i also has a limit on capturing clips. With the D5000, there's a five minute per-clip maximum at 720p. On Canon's shooter, there's a 4GB per-clip ceiling, which roughly equates to 18 minutes of 720p footage or 12 minutes of 1080p. Either way, the time limit isn't nearly as strict on the T1i as it is on the D5000.

Oh, the quality? We know the Nikonians hate to hear it, but the Canon takes the cake here -- for two reasons, really. First off, at least the T1i has a 1080p mode, albeit a hamstrung one. When played back on a PC monitor, the output was definitely striking, as was the 720p footage. Secondly, the T1i doesn't exhibit the infamous "jelly effect" nearly as bad as does the D5000. Sure, there's a certain amount of wobble that's capture while walking as flat-footed as possible, but it's still far more tolerable than capturing that same walk with the D5000 (or D90, really). Also, we tended to lose focus a lot less with Canon's cam, and unlike either of Nikon's video-capable DSLRs, at least the T1i has a way (one that's admittedly clunky) to refocus automatically. Before starting a clip, the T1i instructs you to hold the "*" button to get the shot in focus; once you (or your subjects) begin to move, you can simply mash that button again to bring things back into focus without you having to touch the focus ring. We know, professional videographers will scoff at such a notion, but the novice born with only two hands and half a brain, it's a clever shortcut that gets the job done in most situations. Have a look at the clips below to see precisely what we mean.
Read - Unedited Nikon D5000 720p clip, leisurely walk
Read - Unedited Canon EOS Rebel T1i 1080p (20fps) clip, leisurely walk
Read - Unedited Canon EOS Rebel T1i 720p (30fps) clip, backyard / trees
As we close this section, we should point out that the 18-55mm IS lens bundled in the T1i kit is the Canon equivalent to the 18-55mm VR lens that Nikon tosses in the the D5000 kit. Take it from us -- buy the body only. The kit lens just doesn't have much usefulness in the grand scheme of things, and even an 18-105mm or similar would be entirely more flexible as an all-around option. Trust us, once you get this camera (or any DSLR, really), you'll quickly forget all about the kit lens once you splurge on a few nicer pieces of glass. That's not to say the kit lenses won't get the job done for novices, just that you should do a bit of lens research before selecting the kit over the body alone.
Wrap-up
Honestly, we could debate the merits of the D5000 and T1i for days based on specs alone; in some areas, the T1i appears superior, while the D5000 looks like the champ in others. But really, it's about more than numbers and marketing hoopla. It's about "the feel," it's about the features and it's about the value proposition. In case you haven't noticed, we actually compared the T1i to the higher-end D90 on a number of occasions throughout this piece, and for good reason. Somehow, Canon has managed to actually produce a camera that actually rivals a Nikon model that's supposedly one rung up on the ladder of DSLRs. We know, all the marketing suits are insisting that the T1i is really the D5000's main competitor, but frankly, even the D90 should be on red alert.

After using the T1i alongside the D5000, one thing became exceptionally clear to us: the T1i just feels and acts more like a professional camera than does the D5000. It's more rigid, the grips are better built, there's more flexibility due to a higher ISO ceiling and a few more megapixels (we know, we know...), and the video mode is marginally decent -- which is really saying something in the fledgling world of video-capable DSLRs. In terms of image quality, you're really splitting hairs. Both cameras deliver stunning shots for the money, and both are sure to impress their respective buyers. If you're already invested in one brand or the other with lenses and accessories, neither the D5000 nor the T1i offers anything mind-numbing enough to completely derail yourself and hop over to the ambiguous "dark side," but for those brand new to the arena with nothing to lose, it'll be mighty hard to turn down Canon's latest $800 body. In this price range, the only camera we like better than the T1i is Nikon's D90, which is currently streeting for around $90 more (body only) than the T1i's MSRP (body only, also).

We know, you probably zoomed down here hoping for infinite wisdom, an epiphany or a combination of the two, but the sad (happy?) truth is that the "entry-level" DSLR realm is cramped, and we haven't even begun to mix in options from Sony, Pentax and the rest of the gang. If you've somehow narrowed your options down to the D5000 or T1i, spend the extra bones and snag the T1i unless you've got some Nikon-branded accessories weighing you down. You'll appreciate the superior fit and finish, and the 1080p movie mode won't hurt. Oh, and believe us -- you won't miss that articulating display. If you don't mind spending a touch more, we still feel the far more rugged D90 is the way to go when you reach that $900 level. Or, you could just reignite your love affair with that dusty old Holga of yours and forget you were even caught up in this whole "digital" scandal to begin with.



















Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
theletterj @ Apr 30th 2009 11:13AM
This guy again...
giuliop @ Apr 30th 2009 11:34AM
Sheesh
Mitch @ Apr 30th 2009 11:16AM
Great review - thanks, we'll be including it on the T1i/500D wiki at http://wiki.planett1i.com
Quix @ Apr 30th 2009 11:31AM
OK, so T1i > D5000 overall. But for $90 more (if spending $90 more isn't an issue), is the D90 > T1i?
davidw @ Apr 30th 2009 11:47AM
Different levels...and it annoys me they kept comparing them.
The fact that the D90 has two scroll wheels and the screen on top put the D90 ahead...plus, if you DO get the D90 the kit lens is amazing, which saves you a good amount of money.
Tony C @ Apr 30th 2009 11:50AM
My money's on the D90, even with its jellyvision feature.
Joseph @ Apr 30th 2009 11:57AM
david - Kit lenses aren't amazing. Pro lenses are. Kit lenses can be "amazing for a kit lens."
Josh Warner @ Apr 30th 2009 12:23PM
Joseph -
Get off your high horse. Kit lenses can be amazing, and the Nikon 18-55mm DX is one that justly deserves this adjective. When you don't need to carry an extra pound and a half of extra weight and much larger filters for something like the 17-55 f/2.8 (like, for instance, 90%+ of all outdoor non-sports photography in this focal length range) the kit lens is not only more appropriate, it performs as well or better!
Some kit lenses are crap. That one, which is the most common one Nikon ships, is amazing. It's on the front of my D200 for significant amounts of the shooting I do. The lenses that cost at least an order of magnitude more are amazing FOR SPECIFIC USES, but these are not the norm.
Kenjis9965 @ Apr 30th 2009 2:46PM
If you're looking at the D90 its time to start taking lenses into consideration, and sadly, thats where Nikon loses
Dont get me wrong, Nikon has many great lenses....
But Nikon only makes lenses that are strictly Consumer or strictly Professional in price and spec
Canon has a lot more lenses that hit the middle ground, realizing that some people apreciate better build and optical quality without breaking the bank or your back, case in point are Canon's L-series f/4 trinity, the 17-40, 24-105 IS and the 70-200 f/4L IS.....the non-is 70-200 f/4 is actually a fairly affordable upgrade that most amateurs and casual shooters can easily afford to add to their system
And even though the D90 has the built-in focus motor, in-body AF is pretty poor...
Yes kit lenses can be nice, but i cant stand the build quality of the bloody things :/ or the size, some people want small and light and the 18-55 IS or 18-55 VR are both very very good, and Nikon has the best kit lens selection of anyone! [really, no joke, thats about all they bloody make]
But Nikon's AF-S autofocus on their lower end lenses is not as good as Canon's USM, Canon has been doing USM for a long time, and until you start touching their pro optics [Like the 70-200 VR] Canon is quicker here....Canon also has affordable lenses like their 85mm f/1.8 which works great for indoor sports and portraits...Nikon's works ok for portraits but forget sports with it [it lacks AF-S]
Also the D90's AF is not as good as my 30D, and this is speaking from shooting one, its slower and less accurate, the T1i has the same AF system as my 30D and the 40D/50D have an upgraded version of it thats far better...I've also handled a D300 and I used to have an EOS-3 which had Canon's top rung 45-point AF system, When you get there, Nikon and Canon are even, Until then, Canon is better than Nikon...
Nikon is starting to update their primes ever so slowly to incorporate AF-S...but right -now- Canon has the larger selection of lenses with USM and no compatability charts...
Also if you get serious and want to go full frame, the EOS-5D is much cheaper than the D700, it can be had for about $1200-1300 right now...
Nikon does have a far superior flash system if you want to do flash..
And oh yes, In my opinion, I dislike the D5000's rear OSD...I'm sorry, It looks like a joke to me and I cant see how its any "easier" to understand than the T1i....I look at the T1i's screen and I know what it all means instantly..the Nikon...less so...[I have a guess and after using it for a couple seconds id figure it out] The font looks screwy to me personally and I'd rather have the same OSD from the D90/D300..
YpoCaramel @ May 1st 2009 1:57AM
Overall I really wanted to prefer the D5000. Its articulating screen, battery life, build quality, subjectively cleaner output (see imaging resource) can do a lot for photography. But its menu layout is a bit too slow for someone coming from a full manual background (shouldn't have to go into menus to change WB, burst mode and ISO), and the D90 just a little too bulky and expensive.
The Nikon system lens I drool over is the AF-S 35mm - compact, light, well built and sharp (and even decent bokeh).
According to the SLRGear the Canon kit lens is sharper than the Nikon. But I also feel like lens sharpness isn't a huge deal, and I've learned to get by with a 50mm lens (for NYC city shooting) so I don't need 5x-10x zoom ranges. If I were to upgrade I'd get a faster lens - I love big apertures and low depth of field.
Kiran Nesarajah @ Apr 30th 2009 12:00PM
just buy an olympus and be done with...
Justin @ Apr 30th 2009 11:30AM
hello
irish.bug @ Apr 30th 2009 11:34AM
I have been saving for a 40D, but might after reading this, I might have to rethink. I confuzed.
neubdetat @ Apr 30th 2009 11:38AM
if better autofocus, better handling, better build and weather resistance don't mean much to you, then by all means got the 500D and put that spare cash into a 17-55 f.28. No regrets (unless you take it out into the rain).
Mike @ Apr 30th 2009 12:08PM
@IrishBug Nothing to think about. 40D would kick either one of this cameras a$$. You can get a point and shoot camera with more megapixels, but when you are talking about an slr there is a lot more to consider. Both of the cameras described above are entry level slr's. 40D is one level above it - it's semi professional. I'm not gonna get into an argument which camera 40D or 50D has more digital noise, but either one of them will be an improvement over those...
brian @ Apr 30th 2009 1:12PM
here is my opinion which I do realize is worth very little. if you are just looking to take pictures, and want the highest quality image in a semi-professional camera for the least money, then the 40D is the answer. Furthermore, if you plan on doing very large prints or huge crops, then the 50D may be your answer for a little extra cash (and you'll get a much better LCD too).
but if you want to add in video, and still have incredible quality images the T1i is the way to go. personally, i use a 40D and I am thrilled with it. i upgraded from the Rebel XT when the 40D first came out so i payed a premium price and i never regretted the purchase. the only thing i miss a bit is the smaller size of the XT line. the 40D sometimes feels kind of big on when i am out some places.
I do not have any interest in video, but I absolutely see the value in having it, and think all these cameras are amazing. nikons too.
its so hard to weigh out all the options and features these days with the competitive costs and awesome equipment. but moving up to the xxD level will be a move anyone would be happy with if they have the extra cash and only want to take pics.
Honza @ Apr 30th 2009 11:41AM
Great write up. BTW - the last photo on the page... did you mean for the Nikon to be so out of focus, or do you not understand depth of field? :P
Joe @ Apr 30th 2009 2:08PM
I noticed that, and I thought it was a clever and subtle touch.
I've still got my eyes on the D90 though.
Chris Hahn @ Apr 30th 2009 11:41AM
THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, for posting uncompressed video examples. So many camera reviews don't post actual video examples so that you can see if it's going to work well in your NLE.
RAEGLATEM @ Apr 30th 2009 11:47AM
even as a Nikon fanboy I believe the D5000 is a waste. I was greatly disappointed when Nikon released it.
That said I won't be purchasing the T1i either, I'd simply jump up a level.
Dummy00001 @ Apr 30th 2009 1:32PM
I'm no Nikon specialist (rather Oly owner), but IMHO at its price level, D5k sits very nicely below D90. If one is in market for new camera and prefer Nikon, then they not gonna get confused.
Chris Hahn @ Apr 30th 2009 11:47AM
Actually, I did have one question. Do either one of them have exposure lock in video mode?
UnixSystemsEngineer @ Apr 30th 2009 11:50AM
Leave your fanboy suit at the door?
Who is this, and what have you done with Engadget??
intercede007 @ Apr 30th 2009 12:00PM
So now that the world has an articulated screen DSLR after much bellyaching by the reviewing community (DPReview, etc.) over it's omission in previous models with regards to LiveView and video, it's not worth the trouble?
Can't we just admit cameras take still pictures and leave the video and other frivolities to the camcorder and Point'n'Shoot market? Why not put that research time into getting us cleaner images, better auto white balance, more advance AF systems and even more incredible high ISO performance?
Keep that bulls*** out of the D400 and just give me a better camera.
ungere @ Apr 30th 2009 12:55PM
I couldn't agree with you more. Sure, video might be a nice extra feature, and if you do both still and video, can help save a little money and only have to carry one camera, but like you said, I would much rather them spend their time and money working on better aspects for still pictures.
kadajawi @ Apr 30th 2009 12:27PM
Yet again: A video camera, no matter how professional it is (unless we are talking about 10k+ RED cameras or their 100k+ competitors) will not get a look similar to the one of a DSLR with video capabilities. I suppose those who want to make movies (as in for TV or cinema) will rather buy a 5D Mk II, which is still very cheap compared to the alternatives, but young filmmakers might prefer an entry level DSLR, due to it's low price. These cameras may revolutionize cinema, now finally it doesn't take big, expensive, complicated 35mm cameras where every minute you shoot costs a lot, no matter if it turns up on screen or not, to make a good looking film.
Then again, the majority will be happy with a DSLR that takes good photos, so... I do see your point. I wish my Pentax would have a video mode though...
Joe @ Apr 30th 2009 2:17PM
@kadajawi: I think you're entirely missing the "prosumer" level cameras, such as the Panasonic AG-HVX200. They run around $5K, use Leica lenses, shoot lots of HD modes (720p/24/30/60, 1080/60i or 1080/24p) use 3CCD sensors, record to P2 or external hard drives, dual XLR inputs, and plenty of other controls.
There's no way I would trade that for a dSLR, and I suspect you don't really have any professional video experience or you would have remembered that video needs to include audio.
dj radon @ Jun 8th 2009 7:57PM
In x years the digital SLR-form factor will replace the "video camera" for all practical applications. I'd say x is between 5 and 7 years.
As a long-time Canon owner, I hope they put a flexible screen on future models.
LloydChiro @ Apr 30th 2009 12:10PM
Can we redo the pictures again with less depth of field? With focus?
Josh @ May 7th 2009 9:52PM
If that was with regards to the last photo, i think it was to highlight the fact that the Canon "won" the review.
owdee @ Apr 30th 2009 12:11PM
im a firm believer that whether you go nikon or canon is a moot point because you cant go wrong with either. also, if you have invested in a lot of glass for either of them you probably want to just stick with that. regardless, to me the image quality from the nikon appears to be better in the example images here (although a couple of the shots from the canon appear to be slightly overexposed).
superhobo @ Apr 30th 2009 12:16PM
Those pictures are just...wrong.
intercede007 @ Apr 30th 2009 12:40PM
Someone needs to buy a tripod before they review another camera.
Alexandre @ Apr 30th 2009 12:39PM
I'm new to the whole DSLR market and will wait for more reviews before deciding. But if I do go with the Canon (body only), what lens would you recommend me to buy?
bagbklyn @ Apr 30th 2009 12:54PM
This is maybe a reason why to go with nikon, out of the box the lense that come with the kit will be what you would use most of the time.
Engadget reminds me of Car and driver. Canon is Honda and Nikon is toyota. Nothing can ever be wrong with canon.
TheMarioBrutha @ Apr 30th 2009 1:28PM
Actually, Canon's kit lens is considered to be pretty good, especially for the price. Take a look:
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon_18-55_3p5-5p6_is_c16/
If you're new to DSLRs, it might make sense to just start with the kit lens and then figure out what lenses you want to buy after you have a bit of experience. Even if you do end up buying expensive glass, the kit lens can always be a fallback - it's lightweight and should get the job done just fine.
pete @ Apr 30th 2009 12:38PM
whats with the weird order of your gallery?? just give us some side by sides!
Geir E @ Apr 30th 2009 12:46PM
Some of the samples are out of focus. hard to compare when they are. I would step up to the d90 for an overall better camera than both if I was on the lookout for a canon or nikon. 15 megapixles are also just too much on that small chip.
engadget @ Apr 30th 2009 2:16PM
Considering most of the ISO test shots are out of focus, the rest of this review should probably just be ignored. Unless of course you want impressions by somebody who clearly doesn't know anything about photography!
Vic @ Apr 30th 2009 12:59PM
"-- is still a feature we appreciated having. After all, a shot with loads of noise is better than no shot at all, right? " The "head-to-head" lost all credibility with me at this very moment. Not to mention just the sheer amount of "it feels better" type comments about T1i's body only makes me feel that this comparison was rushed and biased in the first place.
We get it, you've made love with your T1i while the D5000 recorded it.
Blake @ Apr 30th 2009 1:24PM
Good review. But I disagree that the kit lens has no value. This is the entry level dslr, and at this level most buyers aren't looking to spend more money on extra lenses. The canon kit lens has excellent reviews for quality, light weight and image stabilization and covers most shooting situations outside of telephoto. A good telephoto lenses is $200-250. An all in one 18-200 with stabilization is about $600. Remember, they're going to need to buy a $50-70 sdhc card to hold all those photos and videos.
brahmachari99 @ Apr 30th 2009 1:40PM
Wonder why so many of reviewers/professional are such dead set against an articulating display. Have you guys never worn glasses or have you never felt the need to shoot a photo over people's heads or get down to the ground level without getting your clothes dirty?
urdaddy @ Apr 30th 2009 3:02PM
because they're "traditionalist". the same ones who dragged their feet and complained the whole way about using a zoom vs a prime. they're not interest in having all available options to help get the best pictures. with every new feature that is added the arrogance of these know it all types starts to seep from every pore and can be detected from a mile away. oddly enough,10yrs from now when every camera has these sorts of features those same traditionalist type will be using them and complaining about the next user friendly feature added.
dagwud @ May 25th 2009 10:20AM
Agreed! I've a Canon Powershot G2 with an articulating display. While the optics are weak, the ability to shoot over the heads of the crowd at kids' events s fantastic, as is the ability to get "monster child" shots as the youngest learned to walk.
Some of my best photos happened because I could hold the camera at an unusal angle and still see how the image was framed.
matey87 @ Apr 30th 2009 1:41PM
top tip genius. if you're going to demo a camera that shoots progressive frame , don't whip pan it around because the picture will look like shit. the picture will look like shit on a Red One if you do that. Stick to reviewing usb rocket launchers or whatever it is you guys do all day!
iKurt4 @ Apr 30th 2009 2:08PM
If you want an easy to use pro camera, buy the Canon Rebel T1i. The Nikon is a consumer camera, because it has a swiveling screen and they don't have as many pro lenses as Canon's. Pros trust Canon and my uncle is a wedding photographer and he said Canon's are the best. Also, Nikon doesn't have experience in video, so it's best to skip Nikon's pathetic attempt to incorporate video into their DSLR line.
urdaddy @ Apr 30th 2009 2:50PM
and also skip this guys pathetic attempt at giving DSLR advice because he obviously sucks at it.
David W @ May 1st 2009 10:45PM
Why are you trying to make a point when it's OBVIOUS you have no clue what you're talking about? BOTH of these cameras are consumer cameras, and if you think the T1I is a pro-level camera you're a moron.
anghammarad @ May 18th 2009 1:52PM
urdaddy, David W, iKurt4 does "OBVIOUSly suck" at giving DSLR advice and that's because the points he's making are sarcastic! the question is, why are you so overwrought that you fail to see his and instead jump in to educate him?
drzeller @ Apr 30th 2009 2:19PM
About that gallery... what a wierd set of pictures! Unfortunately, the bluriness and poor depth of field in many of them make me wonder if the article was written by the right folks. You had to know someone would comment, right?!
D.