DPReview Gear of the Year: Canon Rebel SL1 / EOS 100D

18MP sensor | Hybrid CMOS AF II system | 3.0-inch touchscreen

I'm afraid I didn't even hesitate. Though I've reviewed some fine cameras this year, when we started discussing our choices for Gear of the Year, I immediately chose the little camera then nestled in my bag: The Canon Rebel SL1, also known as the 100D and Kiss X7 elsewhere in the world. As a longtime reviewer, my choice is partly about the achievement the camera represents for end users, but also how I use the camera in my own life.

Canon SL1 - What I love:

  • Small body is easier than ever to bring along, so I do.
  • Snappy yet subtle shutter sound doesn't disturb subjects and sounds cool rather than cheap.
  • Touchscreen interface works better than most, making the quick menu truly quick.
  • Usable live view autofocus system offers more options for creative shots.
  • Low light performance is excellent for indoor and night shots, where family activities are common.
  • Focus tracking in video mode is effective, making movie mode that much more useful.

As I mentioned, other cameras I used this year also earned my admiration, including the Fujifilm X-E1, Olympus E-M1, Sony A7R, and Canon's own 70D, whose autofocus surpasses the performance of the little SL1. But it's getting SLR performance in a small package that's significant about the SL1. With the 40mm STM attached, that goes to extremes, at least for the SLR category, fitting into the same space I usually reserve for medium zoom lenses in my bag.

While I sometimes use longer zoom lenses for shooting outdoor events, I usually have either the 40mm STM mounted, which is not much thicker than a body cap, or the excellent 50mm F1.4. The 40mm is equivalent to a 64mm lens, and the 50mm is like an 80mm lens on this APS-C camera. Short telephotos are actually great for the type of shooting I like to do, which is portraits, but that's not all I like to do. 

What's missing to make the Canon SL1 the perfect 'street shooter' is a reasonably fast 22mm lens, which would equate to a 35mm lens. A 31mm lens would also come close to a 50mm lens on a full frame camera. These have too long been missing from Canon's lineup, so here's hoping they do something about this soon. 

For more general-purpose photography, the 18-55mm kit lens focuses fast, is reasonably small and image-stabilized, and I'd recommend it for most shooters. My wife picked up the camera for the first time and used the SL1 to grab this shot of my kid showing off her sandy hands over the summer. She liked its small size and how easy it was to quickly frame and fire through the viewfinder.

With the 40mm STM pancake lens, the Canon SL1 is a super small SLR with the equivalent of a 64mm lens. That may be a little long for some, but my affinity for portraits makes it just fine. The combo occupies the space normally reserved for medium zoom lenses. That's the SL1 in the lower left pocket, while the 70D is shown from the top with the 18-135mm lens mounted for comparison.

Controls on the Canon SL1 are small, but still usable, such that when the battery of my other camera died on a recent portrait shoot, it wasn't hard to quickly adapt to the SL1 and keep shooting: All the control I needed was there, and though I had to go into the menu to make a few changes, and of course change lenses, it went quickly and the camera worked like a charm.

I also use Micro Four Thirds cameras for my on-the-go family photography, but since I've had the SL1 around, my mirrorless camera has been sitting unused. I have more lenses that work with the SL1, which is the main reason, not any shortcoming of the MFT cameras. If I have a larger SLR along, the SL1 makes a great second camera, reducing lens swaps and taking up little space.

And because Canon hasn't changed the resolution of its APS-C lineup significantly (much to the chagrin of some fans), the little SL1 still performs as well as we'd expect in terms of image quality, delivering good detail in low light settings common to family events.

Where the SL1 excels, though, is in its live view and movie autofocus. The SL1 handled live view shooting better than other SLRs I'd used previous to the 70D, and as I demonstrated in my review, the SL1 can also track focus admirably thanks to its Hybrid AF II autofocus system. That alone makes having video on an SLR valuable: Working autofocus allows you to stop thinking about focus and instead focus on following your subject.

I'm not one who has trouble framing with cameras that only feature an LCD, but I have to admit it's nice to have an optical viewfinder in such a small camera, one that works with my modest set of SLR lenses, yet fits in a small space. As such, I have no problem recommending the Canon SL1/100D to family photographers. Its simplified feature set is nevertheless quite complete, having just what I need in a body I can keep handy without too much fuss. Good stuff.

This is part 5 in a series of articles where DPReview staff will be highlighting their personal standout products of the year.

Canon Rebel SL1/100D sample gallery

Sample photoSample photoSample photoSample photoSample photo
Sample photoSample photoSample photoSample photoSample photo
Sample photoSample photoSample photoSample photoSample photo

Recommended Links

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions held by dpreview.com or any affiliated companies.

235
I own it
86
I want it
35
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 269
12
MAF99
By MAF99 (4 months ago)

For somewhat similar personal reasons to Shawn, I love this camera. When I moved up from T3i to 6D, I wanted to backfill with smaller street and travel camera that I could carry all day. I narrowed the field to APC, because, for travel in particular, I want images to be wall-hangable at 16x24. I really wanted to like the mirrorless cameras, but I found the SL1 to tie on size, wt, and image quality with Fuji X-Pro1 and similar, and win for IS (with my lens choices), optical viewfinder (I hate EVFs), and familiarity (grew up on Canon SLRs). Comparable on cost, though much cheaper for me since I already had T3i lenses. So I “downgraded” from T3i to SL1 and declared victory. I carry 2 lenses: Canon 28/f2.8 IS USM (45mm eq), the perfect street shooter (see my review 8/28/12 on B&H), and Sigma 17-70 macro OS, a beautiful do-everything lens. So SL1 is better and (for me) cheaper than comparable high-end APC mirrorless--not comparable to MFTs (one level down) or FF SLRs (one level up).

1 upvote
108
By 108 (4 months ago)

I can understand Mr Barnett's choice. I have tried this little camera twice in store and if I ever had money for a new SLR I would strongly hesitate between this and a Pentax K30 or 5/5II. From the samples I took in store I can say very good iso 1600 and 3200 behaviour and above all an EXCELLENT viewfinder, almost as good as a Nikon 7100's or Pentax's, and certainly way better than the Nikon 3 and 5100 -5200 offerings, which proves that you can fit a good sized OVF in such a body if you want it.

0 upvotes
sh10453
By sh10453 (4 months ago)

Hey Shawn ... Was nice to see you and the team during the live event ...

Question for you?
What is the difference between the CMOS and the Hybrid CMOS technology?

Thanks.

0 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

If my memory serves me, Hybrid AF II uses a combination of dedicated phase-detect pixels and more traditional contrast-detect AF methods to achieve focus a little more quickly. First, the phase-detect system determines in which direction to move the lens, and by approximately how much. This works similarly to the phase-detect system in most SLRs, but the underlying technology is built into the imaging sensor itself. Contrast-detect AF then fine-tunes or verifies focus. I don't think Canon ever told us how they achieved the phase portion of Hybrid AF or Hybrid AF II, but we imagine its through use of pixel masking methods employed by other companies. With pure contrast-detect systems, the camera can more frequently guess wrong on which direction to move the lens, which causes more delays.

Interestingly, though, companies like Olympus and Panasonic have done remarkable work to make their pure contrast-detect systems compete directly with SLR phase systems, often surpassing them.

1 upvote
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

BTW, though you asked the difference between CMOS and Hybrid CMOS, I assumed you were asking a different question. The question I answered was what's the difference between contrast-detect and hybrid AF. It's even more complicated than that, because cameras like the SL1 have two AF systems: the traditional phase-detect system which relies on a system of mirrors and lenses and a dedicated AF sensor, and the phase-detect system embedded into the imaging sensor.

I also wanted to mention that the SL1's Hybrid CMOS AF II, while greatly improved, does not fare as well against Panasonic and Olympus's contrast-detect systems. Why Canon couldn't use their methods is unclear at this point, but surely someone knows.

To quickly answer the question literally posed: there is no difference between CMOS and Hybrid CMOS. CMOS stands for Complimentary Metal Oxide Semiconductor, which is the name for the sensor technology whether it has PDAF or not.

1 upvote
sh10453
By sh10453 (4 months ago)

Thanks for taking the time to reply, Shawn.
Yes my question was meant "as applied to cameras", not from a pure physics point of view.
That part (physics) I do understand, where the Hybrid CMOS is CMOS-SET (Single Electron Transistor), and we are not going there, of course!

Interesting observation of the Panasonic system. I do notice the fast autofocus on my Panasonic, but I have not thought or noticed that it is faster than my Canon 5D, for example.
Of course I am not talking about a scientific experiment that can measure micro and nano seconds. Just my normal use observation.

0 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

Sorry, that brings up more confusion. When I said Panny and Oly had faster AF systems, I meant compared to Canon's Hybrid CMOS AF II. Since your 5D only has traditional phase-detect, I wouldn't venture to guess which is faster between the two, as they're probably similar.

1 upvote
DCM1024
By DCM1024 (4 months ago)

I love this cam & took one of my favorite photos of the year with it. I have a 5D3 and 6D as well so this is intended as a comment giving high praise to this little gem of a camera.

5 upvotes
cam2013
By cam2013 (4 months ago)

Canon is making people fool for using same sensor year after year after year and then gives name from t2i to future t36i.the only change is name and the only unchanged part is sesnor.same is true for power shot s95 to powershot s120.no change in sensor.nice way to fool people by selling same crap over and over with high price.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
5 upvotes
armandino
By armandino (4 months ago)

They should hire you in R&D or marketing. Seems like you are the smartest ass around.

6 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (4 months ago)

I wouldn't call the 10 Mp CCD in S90/S95 the same sensor as the 12 Mp CMOS in S100/S110, which in turn is not the same as the 12 Mp BSI-CMOS in S120.

3 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

Actually, for a change, that's not true, cam2013. This camera has dramatically improved phase-detect autofocus on the sensor, and this time it actually makes a significant difference.

5 upvotes
sh10453
By sh10453 (4 months ago)

OK, we got the idea.
Which one do you work for? Nikon, Sony, Pentax, or Olympus?

0 upvotes
cam2013
By cam2013 (4 months ago)

to all who thinks i am commenting without any base ..i want to tell you that i own s100 and also have had t3i.From s100 to s120 it is all same sensor and how much change you can anticipate from the same sensoror and how much difference you can bring in IQ if you own old s100 or new s120 .My point is if sensor size remains the same then how far you can go in terms of IQ with same sensor.

Comment edited 49 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

cam2013 .. sensor size may remain same .. there is no limit on innovation and improvements .. and you are spot on .. Canon disappointed me too on sensor end. However, like all of the people on the planet for some very weird reasons I still like the company and hope they are making something awesome for us to compensate the delay!!

2 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

Oh, I thought you were talking about the subject of this thread, which is the Canon SL1, also known as the 100D. When you said the T2i was no different from the future T36i, that's what I meant to respond to: that the SL1's sensor is indeed different in at least one significant way. By the way, if you look back to today's 1/1.7" sensors compared to the same size sensors five years ago, well, there has been noticeable improvement.

0 upvotes
Resom
By Resom (4 months ago)

If a sensor brings good results, why should they change it? I bought a S110 for the half price of a S120 and I´m pleased. So, if they bring every year a slightly different cam, its not that bad (pricewise).

0 upvotes
KW Phua
By KW Phua (4 months ago)

There is not easy to find a perfect camera. When everything is perfect the cost most likely will be outstanding also. So each manufacturer select what they think is the most important criteria/spec for their camera. They may target their selected group. Same for the user. I also like to have a perfect camera, but if nan is perfect, I will select the one most suitable for my way for photography. Yes, GOOD IQ is very importance but for someone, he may prefer to get faster AF, and some prefer to use MF lens with top quality. Why need 1Dx or D4 if he only use MF lens.

1 upvote
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

its a very good point mate .. even though, competitors AF system is good enough for sitll photography, Canon hybrid/dual AF system is more usable for videos and tracking!! ditto for Omd-Em1!

2 upvotes
robbo d
By robbo d (4 months ago)

....and it's also no point having good IQ if your camera doesnt focus properly. Better having a sharp shot than no shot, which is where Canon derive their solid reputation.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

compared with m4/3" cameras,
it doesn't have 1080p60 as Pana G5 for example,
and won't take lenes with shorter flange-back
(though most of them are no good and I seldom use one).

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
ericsan
By ericsan (4 months ago)

At first i was reluctant to get this EOS 100D when i got rid off my "old EOS 550D" as i was tempted by MFT but mainly 2 things made the choice back to Canon : attractive price against MFT which is overpriced generally speaking (new bodies & good primes) & the possibility to keep my Canon & Sigma lenses lineup for a couple of years more !
I choose the basic kit (18-55 mm STM) which is truly sharp and i was happily surprised by the Hybrid AF II which works perfectly well.So if you can cope with the small body ergonomics, this is the ideal combo that delivers very good IQ (new sensor Hybrid AF II Generation despite remaining at 18mpix),access to the widest lenses choices (Canon + Sigma + Tamron) & Canon clear menu layout.So from now, what is missing ? : more primes than the 40mm STM to make this system fully enjoyable !!
No regret at all to remain within the APSC System so far ! MFT will start to attract me when brands will stop considering that it's a "niche market"...

4 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (4 months ago)

Replacing 550D with this is just GAS - it is the same camera basically, just weaker flash, just one mic and smaller battery and smaller body wrapped around this smaller battery - now to small to hold comfortable like a DSLR (gripping with your fingers around the grip - which is too small for normal fingers) but still too thick to hold comfortably like a compact (cradling in the base of your palm, like E-M5 etc).

8 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

You're incorrect, peevee1. You ignored the improved autofocus system in live view and movie modes. If that's important to a user, it's the difference between being able to use your camera how you like and not using it for video at all.

9 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (4 months ago)

It is barely working, and only with STM lenses. Who shoots SLRs in Live View anyway? And movies - without articulating screen and with black viewfinder - and with poor stabilization not stabilizing rotational movements... not the best choice.

3 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

... for you. Not the best choice for you. There are others in the world who have different needs and uses for a camera.

3 upvotes
BarnET
By BarnET (4 months ago)

While the AF in live view is a good improvement depends on the user. However it's hard to deny that Canon has not improved as much as the compitition has in the same time frame.

The Canon T2i was launched almost 4 years ago. No improvements have been made on image quality in 4 years.

Saying that this is the gear of the year 2013 with all kinds of great launched to chose from can only be described as a joke.

Are you guys on the Canon Payroll??

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

Canon is my first line gear but there is no Canon camera that I'd give a good rating. they are all so-so ones.

(the dual-pixel AF on 70D is an "invention of the decade" but the image quality and AF sensor are no good compared with rivals)

2 upvotes
robbo d
By robbo d (4 months ago)

interesting call??
I would love to get my hands on a 70D and take some shots to convince me how much difference there really is between the Canon sensor and one of the Sony/Toshiba ones.......
The 70D review here on DPR was not exactly glowing, yet it got a 83% score.
I still maintain that Canon is where it is by making all round solid performing cameras, pro support and heavy marketing. That's where almost everyone fell off the boat. Go into a shop and try not to find a Canon product and you'll be hard pressed.
It would seem to be the whole package which they do well, not necessarily individual parts of the camera standing out other than video and AF.
But then again how really bad is everyone else in terms of focus speed? and how really bad are Canon sensors in real life?
Perhaps large blow up quality from their APS-C? but the reality of how many doing that is minute in whole sales terms.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

there are several cameras that I liked, D300/D300s, D700, and 7D, but all of them are outdated now with no replacement. currently medium-high end Nikon bodies are the least worst but I'd prefer Canon lenses.

it's difficult to express in a single number but Canon sensors are about 0.5 stops worse than rivals. sensor SNR should be included in DxOMark lens tests but I don't know how they do the test and calculate the scores (doesn't look right to me).

1 upvote
grock
By grock (4 months ago)

Tell me about it!. All those photos I took and had published with my 7D look like GARBAGE now! It's funny, I thought they were good when I shot them, but boy was I an idiot. I look at them now and feel sick and just think IF ONLY THE SENSOR WERE .5 STOPS BETTER. The camera is SOOO outdated I might as well just take a piece of charcoal to paper, which wold produce a better image (provided I use the most current piece of paper that has been tested thoroughly).

I think for a minute that, instead of trying to express in a single number how much worse Canon sensors are, that I should just go out and, you know TAKE SOME PICTURES AND ENJOY PHOTOGRAPHY, but that's clearly absurd. I HAVE to let people know that the Canon sensors are GARBAGE and that image quality, as yabokkie says, is "no good."

7 upvotes
dual12
By dual12 (4 months ago)

grock, It's 2 stops plus noise.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

> I should just go out and, you know TAKE SOME PICTURES AND ENJOY PHOTOGRAPHY,

the whole DPReview might not be relevant for those who choose their tools without understanding them.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 14 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
macky patalinghug
By macky patalinghug (4 months ago)

If money comes my way next year this will the camera I will buy but the foremost reason for doing so is because I'm into the Canon system.

The article was honest and well thought of.

And yes, the title "gear of the year" must be replaced. For although it was well explained in the article it can still mislead to mean a universal objective assessment.

Somebody might say -"hey, man, my 100D was dpreview's Gear of The Year" when what the article claimed was merely that it was Shawn Barnett's fave camera for 2013.

And having a possessive pronoun or an attribution would have minimized this passionate confusion. If the title just said Shawn Barnett's top pick or Shawn Barnett's choice or Our Editors' picks for Gear of The Year.

"Editors' pick," an abused term, would still have been more apt.

Dpreview simply picked a bad title (one that needs explaining) and that is all. Bad, like a joke that nobody laughs at until it is explained.

3 upvotes
NetMage
By NetMage (4 months ago)

When is any "of the year" not an editor's pick?

1 upvote
Revenant
By Revenant (4 months ago)

You can't be misled into thinking that it's a universal, objective assessment, because there's no such thing. The idea that there is one camera that is the best for everyone, is preposterous. We all value features differently, we have different opinions about what constitutes great ergonomics, even about what constitutes great image quality.

1 upvote
tommy leong
By tommy leong (4 months ago)

this article would have SOOOOO much
more punch if you had paired it with Sigma 30mm f1.4.

BUT that wouldn't please Canon.

0 upvotes
grock
By grock (4 months ago)

Yeah, he was totally bowing down to Canon hear, especially that part about lenses that have "too long been missing from Canon's lineup."

0 upvotes
keeponkeepingon
By keeponkeepingon (4 months ago)

Canon makes a camera about the same size as an older rebel or nikon.

Gear of the year!

http://camerasize.com/compare/#189,448
http://camerasize.com/compare/#218,448

2 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (4 months ago)

Not really the same size at all. 1cm here, half cm there, and in the end you save quite a lot of volume.

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (4 months ago)

> and in the end you save quite a lot of volume.

The volume savings comes from the shallow grip of the SL1 / 100D, which only benefits portability while hurting ergonomics, especially with larger lenses and telephotos.

The small size difference between a small DSLR like the D5200 or K-30 and the SL1 basically means the Canon user can get away with one size smaller camera bag, nothing more. Since none of these cameras are pocketable, I can't imagine why some are quibbling over differences measured in millimeters.

Many including DPR staff often focus on portability issues which more often than not hurt ergonomics. For larger hands, or working outdoors in winter with gloves on with any of these miniature "walk around" cameras is truly an exercise in frustration.

The real "Gear of the Year" for an APS-C type DSLR is without a doubt the D7100 or K-3. Serious users and people not so focused on grab and go photography would be better served by one of these two cameras.

7 upvotes
keeponkeepingon
By keeponkeepingon (4 months ago)

" 1cm here, half cm there, and in the end you save quite a lot of volume." The D40 and XS are both thinner, and no dimension difference is as big as a centimeter, the D40 is (9.2 wider, 3.3 taller but 5.4mm thinner). I wager if the volume was actually calculated (say by water displacement) the difference would be less than 10%.

0 upvotes
CNY_AP
By CNY_AP (4 months ago)

Too funny, it's not meant for "working" with - it's not a pro camera. Wouldn't it be horrid if all cameras were designed to work with gloves on - they'd all be huge!

0 upvotes
Lord metroid
By Lord metroid (4 months ago)

You keep your camera in a bag? What does it do in a bag? I thought cameras was for taking photographies.

0 upvotes
FinDERP
By FinDERP (4 months ago)

If you want a GOOD and compact DSLR that doesn't skimp on features and has an excellent range of similarly compact lenses to go with it; buy a Pentax instead

3 upvotes
Treeshade
By Treeshade (4 months ago)

"Skimp on features", eh? Do you count "Live view and movie auto-focus" as features?

2 upvotes
keeponkeepingon
By keeponkeepingon (4 months ago)

Latest pentaxes have those features? Need to put the canon fanboi pipe down and smell the pancakes....

4 upvotes
StuartBell
By StuartBell (4 months ago)

Great camera, but Canon need to produce the equivalent of the 40mm pancake, at a focal length ideal for the APS sensor - say a 28mm pancake, for the times when you want the benefits of a DSLR (and one that at other times will take all your big lenses) in the smallest possible package.

2 upvotes
Astrotripper
By Astrotripper (4 months ago)

I actually think this is the only thing Canon showed this year that is remotely interesting. Seems like a nice, cheap, entry level DSLR and I can see its appeal. Good move on Canon's part.

Still, if I were in the market for a DSLR (which I'm not), I'd rather put up a little more money for one of Pentax offerings.

3 upvotes
Andreas Stuebs
By Andreas Stuebs (4 months ago)

I like reading subjective articles, because they sometimes mention points worth noting subjectively although the can not objectively graded: is the layout of the controls of Nikons better than that of Canons: you can discuss that till the cows come home at your camera club's annual dinner or until the last waiter stops serving you your beer or beverage of preference.
But being subjective you can disagree. And being subjective a piece like that sometimes says more about the writer than about the camera.
For me this Canon is not my choice of the year. For me it is too much of a me-too camera: there are other cameras which embrace the compact a lot better and without forcing you to look down a dimly lit 95% pentamirror viewfinder. A camera which to me has a tacky cheap feel. Had Canon really wanted to, they could have built a really good compact camera with a similar form factor. But obviously they did not want to and so they didn't. Not my camera of the year, not by a long shot.

2 upvotes
Panasonicus
By Panasonicus (4 months ago)

The Canon seems to me to be a "reaction to" sort of camera that Canon was forced to wheel out in response to the M4/3rds advances. The DSLMs are smaller, do movies much better and have a decent array of lenses to choose from which are also smaller. I downsized from a Canon 450d to a Panasonic G3 and have never regretted it as the weight and bulk saving has been huge. The results on a high end 42" Plasma are indistinguishable so there are no advantages to owning Canon if your objective is to make carrying gear a lot easier. DP's award might have been better suited to the GX-7 as that is innovation on steroids.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (4 months ago)

For my part, I would have thought the "gear of the year" could have been the Pentax K-3 that offers a lot to very-demanding-but-not-so-rich photographers. Even if I mainly use Canon and Fujifilm, I like a lot Pentax while I feel this brand is a little bit underrated on websites as well as in stores. Am I wrong ?

9 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

Gear of the year is a feature where we reviewers declare which cameras we liked the most. It's not a statistical tally and it's not a contest. It's about camera appeal. After all, the fastest car doesn't always win our hearts; sometimes it comes down to heart and soul.

9 upvotes
forpetessake
By forpetessake (4 months ago)

A lot of criticism comes from the fact that the article comes under "Gear of the Year" title. Had it been entitled "Our Staff's Personal Pick" people wouldn't be misled thinking that it was an objective evaluation and ranking of the 2013 gear.

Comment edited 14 seconds after posting
14 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

Perhaps. It's certainly not a bad thought. However, if more would read the text where we spell out our intent and think before commenting, as you have, more would understand and fewer would take offense.

5 upvotes
Resom
By Resom (4 months ago)

"if more would read the text"

Please Shawn, it can not be that hard to understand?!

The title is "DPReview Gear of the Year...", but you explaining x times, that this is your personal view, because the people criticize the TITLE!
So NAME it like that - "Editors Choice" or what ever. The TITLE is important, don´t you think?! Or is it okay that the TITLE misleading the readers? I´m puzzled, that you don´t get it?

12 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (4 months ago)

You cannot possibly be misled by the title, unless you stopped reading after having read it, and jumped directly to the comments thread. It's clearly explained in all the articles in this series, what their intent and purpose are. They aren't reviews or official awards, just the staff's personal favourite gear of the year. There's no ground for confusion, and no reason for anyone to take offence because their own favourite brand didn't get a mention.

4 upvotes
robbo d
By robbo d (4 months ago)

I think as many people just shoot jpeg around the world, the similar amount of people just quickly surf the headlines and would have mis read the intent.
I agree with forpetesake here. Never mind, job done, bur perhaps we will send John Carlson around for a shoulder rub and a few vouchers to a shrink for counselling.....Lol

1 upvote
Rowbear
By Rowbear (4 months ago)

Thanks for giving us your view on this very capable camera. I'd probably get it instead of a 4/3rd considering my current lens lineup, and save a bunch of $$$ in the process.

3 upvotes
HarryCambs
By HarryCambs (4 months ago)

Looks like Canon's take on the Olympus E-410

0 upvotes
TN Args
By TN Args (4 months ago)

This "Gear of the Year" rating comes from a man who says the Panasonic GX7 deserves a second-rate rating from dpreview.

Even more hilarious this rating, when you consider his only clear reason for picking this camera is that he already has multiple Canon lenses. That is such a personal factor that it is irrelevant to so many readers.

Let' compare the two cameras.

The "Not Worth a Gold Award" GX7 has:
- better sensor performance (check DXOMark or the dpreview widget)
- faster focusing
- more accurate and consistent focusing
- silent mode option
- bigger viewfinder
- better viewfinder information
- smaller body
- better looks
- many compact fast lenses
- better manual focusing, and focus peaking
- in-body image stabilization
- better videography 1080p x 60p, with videoactive viewfinder

Gee, that GX7 is obviously second-rate, Shawn.

Whereas the "Gear of the Year" 100D has:
- poor choice of compact lenses (lacks the very lens Shawn says he would most like)

WAY. TO. GO.

8 upvotes
armandino
By armandino (4 months ago)

@TN Args
I'd like to see your GX7 with an 85/1.2 in front of it or a sigma 35/1.4. Or a 200/2.
You can do some serious damage with this little boy, stuff that the Panasonic cannot even dream of.

3 upvotes
grock
By grock (4 months ago)

I actually never look at the test scene shots and only read the text. I find the text much more useful. I want a personal take on the camera. I can see sample photos anywhere. I want to know what some of the pros/cons are.
And yeah, maybe this reviewer picked this camera because he has a lot of Canon lenses, but don't act like that's such a unique, personal thing. I'd say at least 90% of people here own Nikon or Canon. I personally loved this review because I DO own a lot of canon lenses, including the 40mm 2.8, and would definitely consider this.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Nectar D Or
By Nectar D Or (4 months ago)

There are many capable cameras on the market, but this series of articles is obviously about which equipment the reviewers LIKED this year. The list of facts(?) you posted has nothing to do with liking a camera. So this reviewer liked the SL1 and didn't like the GX7. Get over it. Posting angry posts when a reviewer chooses a different camera than you'd choose is little bit childish. Don't you think?

The fact that one of the reasons for choosing this camera us that it gives a small body alternative for canon shooters is not hilarious at all. The canon system is extremely popular among DPR readers, and many of these readers, I believe, could enjoy a smaller yet very capable camera body for their lenses.

5 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

Oops, I had nothing to do with the GX7 review. I did write the First Impressions Review with Richard Butler, and our initial impressions were positive. You should really check your bylines. Sorry to derail your detailed argument.

I'm not sure how a detailed argument refutes the fact that I liked the SL1. Your results may vary, but I'm pretty sure about what I like.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (4 months ago)

TN Args, you just listed your own personal reasons for liking the GX7. You seem to think that it's an objective truth, that everyone must choose that camera over the SL1 because of those reasons. Everyone's subjective choice must conform to yours, it seems.

2 upvotes
MDGColorado
By MDGColorado (4 months ago)

By the way, DPR liked the GX7 too, giving it a silver award.

2 upvotes
CNY_AP
By CNY_AP (4 months ago)

How many Canon lenses does the GX7 work with? A huge percentage of us DO have Canon glass.

When I read reviews and view the test images, the Canon 18mp sensors actually fare very well at all ISOs. I'm not convinced the few sites which rate sensors do it correctly/fairly. Any sensor can have ZERO noise if they simply average all of the pixels together into one value, for example. And how many people make huge prints? A 8x10 print will look the same from any decent camera (in terms of noise). Canon has not improved their SNR much if at all in a few years however, and clearly the knowledgeable users know this.

0 upvotes
TN Args
By TN Args (4 months ago)

Shawn Barnett spent some time berating me on PM for my post, with a series of lonnnngg PMs, where I almost got tired of reading how ashamed and humiliated I must be, because (in his opinion) I posted something that was not true.

If he does this with every commenter who posts to his articles, acting like an iceberg nine tenths out of sight, he must be a very busy boy.

Anyway, it is possible, if you read my post above rather sloppily, that you may have gotten the wrong impression that I wrote that Shawn Barnett actually provided the published rating for the GX7 in the dpreview review. He did not - that was Jeff Keller, as anyone can tell by taking 2 seconds to check.

What I said, is that Shawn Barnett says the GX7 *deserves* the rating that dpreview gave it. He said so in the comments section of this article: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/12/02/best-camera-roundup-coming-soon-dpreview-live-stream-broadcast-cyber-monday, to quote:

(continued below)

0 upvotes
TN Args
By TN Args (4 months ago)

(continued from above)

"...we assign an award ...It's what we thought of the camera. ...we didn't score it highly as you like ...we just didn't like it as much as you'd like."

I'll leave it to the reader's own judgement as to whether that looks like Shawn Barnett thinks the GX7 deserves the rating it got, or not.

0 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (4 months ago)

My impression was that it was pretty neat, but the front-to-back distance, especially with the 3x zoom, was all out of proportion with the width and height.

The only way around that of course is to drop both the optical viewfinder and the old SLR mount.

Rock.. hard place.. I just can't help get the feeling that while Canon managed quite elegantly to pull its gonads out of the fire this round, its fighting a battle it can only hope to lose long term. Large sensor compact cameras are fundamentally better served by the mirrorless design paradigm.

1 upvote
CharlesTokyo
By CharlesTokyo (4 months ago)

I really enjoy these articles on the staff's personal choices. I'm sorry to see you have to take some heat for you choice, but I hope you continue these in the future.

13 upvotes
NCB
By NCB (4 months ago)

Was it just me who was singularly unimpressed with the sample gallery? Was the overall quality better than your average compact? It didn't strike me that it was. OK, most compacts don't do speed. But otherwise ...

2 upvotes
Yan Duval
By Yan Duval (4 months ago)

I second the need for a fast and basic 22 mm lens!

5 upvotes
armandino
By armandino (4 months ago)

It should be a pancake lens too!

0 upvotes
Iskender
By Iskender (4 months ago)

I've always really liked Pentax cameras, but after reading the frothing-at-the-mouth Pentax comments below I'm now considering hating the brand. Just to spite the fanboys, you know? :P

Some of you almost sound worse than the whiners in Olympus SLR Talk back in the day.

9 upvotes
GurcemZekai
By GurcemZekai (4 months ago)

Bro, i have been a Pentax fan and user for awhile.. I do love Pentax but not like a crazy man to overlook disadvantages.. But to be honest i never realized there was many Pentax fans before K3 release :D

Anyway we all know Pentax has more compact cameras and lenses so lets live with it and show mainstream dudes our hipster love <3 #PentaxianYOLO

4 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (4 months ago)

I didn't read the comments below but Pentax users have a right to feel slighted. Pentax builds high spec'd entry-level DSLRs that are small, weather sealed with 100% Pentaprism OVF (no cheap pentamirror), in-body stablization, 6 or more fps burst mode, etc.
But because DPR is now prioritizing small cameras for walking around grab shots, none of the Pentax cameras (or any other high performance cameras) get picked.

Personally if I never read the line "it's smaller so it doesn't get left at home" again, I'll be happy. Small size is perhaps the most overrated feature of the last 2-3 years. None of these really tiny mirrorless cameras are selling all that well, so perhaps DPR is miscalculating what photographers want most in a camera.

10 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

Sigh. This is about the camera I liked. It's not an insult to other brands. I also like Pentax cameras. Read my Pentax reviews, read our camera round ups. When asked personally to pick a favorite, I will pick honestly, not based on specs, nor on reader opinion. This is a personal opinion, not a DPReview policy statement.

Also, if you missed it, size is only part of the equation. The SL1 focuses faster in Live view and movie mode than other pure SLRs. That's more important to me than water resistance most of the time, as cool a feature as that is.

21 upvotes
SirSeth
By SirSeth (4 months ago)

Thanks Shawn and good for you for being authentic with your opinion. The SL1 wouldn't be my first choice, but hey, I value individuality. That this is your personal "stand out product" that you chose for personal subjective reasons rather than being a technical objective piece seems very clear. I enjoy reading these written by the staff because it makes you all seem more human (as does DPR Live). Thanks for that. Cheers and happy holidays.

1 upvote
armandino
By armandino (4 months ago)

Thanks Shawn, keep it up. There is always restless people out there, you can never win if you make your own opinion public. Honestly it did not matter to me which one is your favourite. I think if somebody makes a choice there is always a reason, which a smart person tries is to interpret. If the opinion is not honest and spontaneous, it defeats the whole purpose.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
grock
By grock (4 months ago)

" but Pentax users have a right to feel slighted."
Sigh... No, they don't. Nor do Canon users, Nikon users, Fuji users, etc. IT'S A CAMERA. He's not reviewing your mom's cooking or your art project or a poem you wrote. He's not writing about other people. He's WRITING ABOUT A CAMERA. Just because he happens to like a camera made by a company that's not the same company that makes YOUR favorite camera doesn't mean YOU should feel slighted by HIS choice. If you do, I feel sorry for you. You are a sensitive soul far too fragile for this world.
And how can you take his personal choice and say it's under some shadowy DPreview plot to prioritize smaller cameras. You know who's prioritizing smaller cameras? CAMERA MAKERS. Shocking then, that a lot of the reviews are for these smaller, walkaround camers, right? CRAZY.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

Wow, nice to see some sane comments. Sometimes I wonder why I bother responding. Your clear remarks show that I'm not alone in some strange alternative universe where everything I say is twisted into evidence against me, in a court where I'm presumed guilty because I dared express an opinion. Thank you.

1 upvote
mauritsvw
By mauritsvw (4 months ago)

But I'm still puzzled. The heading clearly states DPreviews gear of the Year, and then the reader finds out it's actually one Canon lover's favourite Canon of the year. Can you blame anyone for the negative comments? Most readers expected to find an honest opinion by DPreview as a whole, not some individual's personal preference.

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
grock
By grock (4 months ago)

Yeah, you found an honest opinion by a DPreview reviewer, instead of an amalgamation of a bunch of different people's opinions, and that's disappointing? I'd rather have one clear, personal take on a product than a review that's watered down by a chorus of opinions.
And if you'd read (or even glimpsed) the previous 4 Gear of the Year installments, you'd see that all of them are one single person's "gear of the year."
And yes, I blame every single person for making negative comments, because it's ridiculous to get emotional over a piece of technology, and even more to feel animosity toward someone over liking/disliking a camera.

1 upvote
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

Considering all what you have considered, it's really a very good camera!!

otherwise you have many better smaller cameras and many bigger, considering many other considerations!!!

I recon these small quick reviews sometimes gives a better picture into a user scenarios and help selecting a gear than the general full review, as more geared towards one's need and circumstances. Also few points in highlights bring your attention to points, you otherwise overlooked. for instance, somehow I didn't knew this little canon got good af performance in live view mode...

1 upvote
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

If you read my review, I go into detail on both the stills page and video page. Start here, then move to the vide page: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-100d-rebel-sl1/9

3 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

thanks Shawn for the reply!! I am feeling some respect for Canon again ... after half a decade roughly!

0 upvotes
pacnwhobbyist
By pacnwhobbyist (4 months ago)

My main problem with this camera is that I find it uncomfortable to shoot with due to the grip up front. I don't see how anyone with larger hands would find the grip on this camera comfortable. Canon's other entry-level model, the T3, may have a smooth plastic surface on the grip but it's much deeper and easier to hold onto.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (4 months ago)

it may not be firm enough for 70-200/2.8 but should not be a big issue for many other popular lenses EF-S18-135, 135/2, etc., and I find it more comfortable than Sony NEX (could be better with a hand-conforming grip).

0 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

That's something I put in the cons for this camera, because the grip is indeed small. I don't generally have trouble adapting no matter how small cameras get (so far), I just change how I hold it. But if that's an issue for you, steer clear.

3 upvotes
armandino
By armandino (4 months ago)

Ok we want a D4 grip in a mirrorless package and weight. We might need to wait that the Terminator T-1000 tech is around the corner for the next upgrade!

1 upvote
forpetessake
By forpetessake (4 months ago)

It stands out among entry level DSLRs, it's lighter, smaller -- some like it, some don't. But nobody really likes the outdated Canon sensor, which is a generation behind the Sony sensors used in many other cameras.

4 upvotes
pacnwhobbyist
By pacnwhobbyist (4 months ago)

But will the average consumer who buys this camera notice the difference between this and a camera outfitted with a Sony sensor? If you are into critical low light work and are blowing up your photos to huge sizes after shooting at ISO3200 and above, then a Sony-sensored camera might be a better choice. There are also other parameters to look at...like the camera's color response, which play into the equation as well.

9 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (4 months ago)

@forpetessake - the biggest difference in performance between the Canon sensor its rivals' is low-ISO DR (essentially latitude for Raw processing). Anyone shooting in JPEG won't experience that.

Most of the other difference come down to resolution (and the noise benefit gained from scaling down to a common size), but these aren't huge.

So it's fair to say the sensor in the SL1 isn't the best in class, but unless you're pushing low ISO Raws, you may find (and it appears Shawn did) that the size and usability aspects of the camera make a bigger difference.

12 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (4 months ago)

> Anyone shooting in JPEG won't experience that.

Of course buying a decent DSLR or MILC and shooting JPEG is kind of a waste as now all of your archives are 8-bit compressed files.

But at least DPR has one DSLR in what is IMHO, a poorly named the "Gear of the Year" series. The SL1 might not be the most thrilling or performant APS-C DSLR, but it's a very well done camera in spite of the shallow grip and fixed LCD.

> So it's fair to say the sensor in the SL1 isn't the best in class, but unless you're pushing low ISO Raws

It's not only DR where the SL1 is lacking compared to the other non "Gear of the Year" cameras. Color depth, high ISO and resolution are also behind most other APS-C cameras.

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D5300-versus-Canon-EOS-100D___919_871

This new trend of picking all small size, so-called "walk around cameras" to focus on is strange considering that this type of user is only a small percentage of the camera buying public.

4 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (4 months ago)

@marike6 - I didn't claim that the only difference was DR - I said the biggest difference was DR.

I also said: 'Most of the other difference come down to resolution (and the noise benefit gained from scaling down to a common size), but these aren't huge.'

And comparing the Print and Screen tabs on the link you provided very much supports that.

Most importantly, this article is about a very very tiny proportion of the camera buying public - specifically and explicitly Shawn. It's not a recommendation or an award - it's Shawn writing about the product he most enjoyed this year and why.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (4 months ago)

Yes the DR is the biggest difference followed by color depth. I was a bit surprised to see a full 20 points scoring between the two cameras.

> Most importantly, this article is about a very very tiny proportion of the camera buying public

Sorry, I was speaking more generally about the Gear of the Year series of articles in their totality where portability has been a focus.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
RedFox88
By RedFox88 (4 months ago)

marike6: LOL! You know there are 100,000,000s of people if not a billion people on this planet that know of digital photos in no format other than JPG!

The world is now viewing photos on phones where images will be small images or greatly reduced in size. JPG is a great storage format and differences between it and TIFF will need to be hunted out and viewed at 100% computer screen view or more magnified. Great if non compressed huge file size files excite you. Let me know when they come out with a 36 MP TV screen that is 120 inches diagonal. When they do it'll be half priced in 3 years with more features.

1 upvote
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (4 months ago)

@marike6 - the DxOmark score gives quite a lot of weight to DR at base ISO, so I'm not surprised at all by the big difference.

For example - which is the better high-ISO sensor?

Comment edited 17 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
armandino
By armandino (4 months ago)

"So it's fair to say the sensor in the SL1 isn't the best in class, but unless you're pushing low ISO Raws, you may find (and it appears Shawn did) that the size and usability aspects of the camera make a bigger difference"

I cannot believe so many people have such an hard time digesting that. Sometimes I feel that most of these persons spend more time reading and comparing specs than actually shooting.
Canon sensors might be lagging but are more than adequate. So at the end of the day probably something else makes the difference.

0 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

That's certainly what I would argue. When I look back at the photos from past digital cameras I've used and owned, it's clear we've come a long way. But I'm still quite happy with some of the shots I took with 2MP cameras that had far less DR, more noise, hyper-saturated color, and pixelation. It's relative. It's like arguing you'd only shoot ISO 25 film back in the film days because ISO 400 was too grainy. Or worse, that you prefer color negative film over slide film because of its greater dynamic range. You'd be right on the DR point, but you'd also miss out on the wonders of Kodakchrome.

Photography, distilled to its basic elements, is about a set of decisions you make when choosing to freeze a fraction of a second and save it. You decide the duration, the amount of light, the subject, framing and orientation, the optics you'll use, the film or picture style, and just how much data you want to save for manipulation after capture. This camera captured enough data for my needs.

1 upvote
007peter
By 007peter (4 months ago)

Great Review Shawn, I agree 100%. I have own numerous camera during last year (Canon T1i, then a Panasonic GF2, then a Sony NEX, and now an EOS-M), Canon SL1 is better than any of them by miles.
One of the least talk-about-feature is the amazing ** HYBRID AF II **. It focus significantly faster than * HYBRID AF 1 * in 650d (T4i) + 700D (T5i) and Eos-M1.

For those who haven't try ** HYBRID AF II **, give it a shot! You're be surprise @the improvement over Hybrid AF 1. So good that I don't need to buy a Canon 70D just for its ** DUAL PIXEL AF **. I find HF2 good enough for me.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
11 upvotes
onlooker
By onlooker (4 months ago)

And the rabid Pentax onslaught has started.

17 upvotes
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (4 months ago)

I thought it was only me that noticed lol.

1 upvote
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

I've noticed.

7 upvotes
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (4 months ago)

As a longtime Pentax user, I am embarrassed.

2 upvotes
alfaflash
By alfaflash (4 months ago)

I like the SL1 better than either the Fujfilm X-100 or the Sony NEX-7 that I had previously. It is much easier to use to photograph my fast moving grand children as it focuses much faster than either the X-100 or the NEX 7. I use the 40mm, f2.8 a lot of the time as it very sharp and always spot on with the focus. The one thing I wish it had is a swing-out rear screen.

5 upvotes
Peter Bendheim
By Peter Bendheim (4 months ago)

Yay - I so agree. just love using this camera, feels great in the hand, often leave the big cameras at home on purpose. Much better for my needs than mirrorless, like an optical finder. A very worthy choice no matter what the haters say. Decently made body, a tempered glass LCD, small with great IQ, just excellent in every way and I'm sure its a huge seller for Canon.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (4 months ago)

I tried the SL1 and it was like a Corolla. Small, light, affordable and perfectly fine image quality. Anyone except a "pro" should enjoy it and get good results.

6 upvotes
forpetessake
By forpetessake (4 months ago)

Being like a Corolla isn't a complement. It's like saying I'd rather had something better, but can't afford it :-)

3 upvotes
armandino
By armandino (4 months ago)

@forpetessake
an engineering success is always a balanced compromise. A corolla is such a success not because it is only affordable, but because it is the best balance in terms of performance/cost. You can buy cheaper or more expensive cars that are not nearly as good.
Getting a corolla is being smart, for most people buying more expensive cars is an ineffective choice mostly irrational, dictated by silly instincts (unless a specific need is required, i.e. off road or capacity).

1 upvote
KariIceland
By KariIceland (4 months ago)

Fyi the corolla is held in high regard in europe and the repair rate is the lowest of ANY car model.

1 upvote
quiquae
By quiquae (4 months ago)

@forpetessake
Did you know Corollas are traditionally designed by the best engineering team in Toyota, and is still considered the heart and soul of Toyota itself? You laugh at the Corolla because it doesn't have the glitz factor, when it is in fact one of the best engineered cars in Toyota's entire lineup.

The Corolla is a terrible ego extender, but a great (and very successful) tool for the task--which is exactly what Canon would want the SL1 to be perceived. I suspect that SL1's designers at Canon would be extremely flattered by a comparison to the Corolla.

1 upvote
justmeMN
By justmeMN (4 months ago)

The Canon SL1/100D is 10% narrower, 3% shorter, and weights 18% less than the Olympus E-M1.

4 upvotes
Treeshade
By Treeshade (4 months ago)

Body only. E-M1 would be similar when woth pancake, and smaller with zooms.

SL1 would be a better choice for beginner/family shooter because it is cheaper. It is also a good second body for Canon user.

Other than that, I can't find any major advantages of SL1 over E-M1. Small size, light weight, good video and liveview focus are just mirrorless "norm". That said, Canon has made a good "defensive" product against the mirrorless onslaught.

1 upvote
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (4 months ago)

How about an optical viewfinder? a deal-breaker for plenty of people.

5 upvotes
joelmusicman
By joelmusicman (4 months ago)

Start comparing the size and weight of a multiple lens kit and then we'll talk about who's smaller...

2 upvotes
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (4 months ago)

Start comparing the cost while you're at it then we'll see which is significantly better value.

6 upvotes
mferencz
By mferencz (4 months ago)

How about the huge electronic viewfinder with crisp clear images and great refresh rate vs the tiny finder in the mini Canon.

3 upvotes
EvokeEmotion
By EvokeEmotion (4 months ago)

"the mirrorless onslaught"

You sir, are funny.

0 upvotes
Alien from Mars
By Alien from Mars (4 months ago)

>The Canon SL1/100D is 10% narrower, 3% shorter, and weights 18% less than the Olympus E-M1.

So what? Now compare SL1 to GM1. ;)

1 upvote
67gtonr
By 67gtonr (4 months ago)

Major advantage of the SL1 over an E-M1 is the extensive world class Canon lens line up, as well as the cost differences!

0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

Pro Canon lenses are quite expensive and with cruel 1.6 multiplier .. its almost useless specially on wide angle / standard angle lenses. as a second camera body in your big gear bag, its a great deal specially wit little prime and tele lenses as unfortunately canon fullframe doesn't offer that handy Nikon crop mode. As an only one camera .. I won't compare it to EM-1 completely different market and class!!!
you guys on dpreview forums are the biggest fanboys on planet!! :)))

0 upvotes
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (4 months ago)

@mferencz - I think you'll find the refresh rate on the SL100 is a tiny bit better ;-) The ovf isn't tiny either, clearly you've never used one.

1 upvote
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (4 months ago)

@Naveed, you just wrecked your own argument with silly comments about wide and standard angle lenses. There are plenty of choices from Canon and third party suppliers such as Sigma and Tamron, far more than m4/3's (which I used to own). You have more choice and most are cheaper than their m4/3's equivalents, one of the reasons I changed.

2 upvotes
SirSeth
By SirSeth (4 months ago)

The size Canon managed for this DSLR is amazingly small without being really awkward. Good job there. However, compare lenses with the same field of view and see if the size argument holds. Micro lenses are tiny and the E-M1 is much less deep because of the lack of a mirror, so it also feels compact. Other features are personal preference. For me, the SL1 being less money doesn't matter if I simply don't want one. Now, the E-M1 I very much desire for my own reasons that I don't really feel like arguing about.

0 upvotes
NetMage
By NetMage (4 months ago)

OVF > EVF?

0 upvotes
67gtonr
By 67gtonr (4 months ago)

All m43 lenses are quite expensive regardless of the quality, for what you get. M43 is handicapped by that cruel 2x multiplier. The extensive Canon lens line up also has some of the best quality per dollar lenses available you can have your choice of silent focusing image stabilization at just about any level of image quality etc. the M43 camp will never have such a wide array of lens choices!
And if you want tiny high quality lenses buy a Canon EOS M.

0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

come on guys .. what are you talking bout huge canon lens catalog. All I can see is couple of lenses and that works fast and accurate with this camera. If you talking about slow af you better mount a manual focus lenses too .. if this is the criteria?? then m43, sony alpha supports virtually all the lenses on the planet via adapters!
few of the native m43 lenses are very cheap, extremely sharp and light like oly 45mm f1.8, pany 14mm, 20mm!! and they really dont need to rely on sigma and tamron etc. sigma and tamron already know they cant compete in native m43 with leica, vario and oly already producing brilliance!!

guys one more thing, call spade a spade, dont need to turn every argument into a religious debate ... pay attention to a point and stop acting 12 year old kid!! pure fanboyism!!!

0 upvotes
Bill Bentley
By Bill Bentley (4 months ago)

IMG_2635_2 in the sample gallery is not flattering to anyone in the frame, especially the little girl. It should be removed imo.

2 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

Hmm. I didn't see that. Thanks for mentioning it. It's deleted.

5 upvotes
Petrogel
By Petrogel (4 months ago)

Will this kind of consumer DSLRs be dead in 5 years?
These DSLRs are already dead, but they don't know it yet

5 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (4 months ago)

They're still selling well enough, not sure by what definition they're "already dead"?

5 upvotes
Juraj Lacko
By Juraj Lacko (4 months ago)

you dont know what you are talking about

6 upvotes
Spectro
By Spectro (4 months ago)

yeah...right. On amazon, the digital camera best sellers are mostly still P&S (I read those are dead too) and too be dead dslr. The first MILC comes in at #72, the Olympus pen. I am a photo enthusiasts like most here and just got an A7. I still think I can do more with my dslr. I think dslr P&S, milc can all coexist even with the cellphone.

5 upvotes
justmeMN
By justmeMN (4 months ago)

In 5 years, will Olympus and Panasonic still be making cameras? Probably not, because their camera divisions are money-losers.

4 upvotes
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (4 months ago)

I've been hearing that for the last 10 years, and guess what.....

6 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (4 months ago)

What now?

Camera Shipments Worldwide Jan-Sept 2013

Single Lens Reflex
404,927,271

Fixed Lens
358,972,351

Non-Reflex
72,266,826

Source:
http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-201309_e.pdf

Seems like you have it backwards. In spite of all the best efforts of websites like this one to promote mirrorless, it looks like the only interchangeable lens cameras making money are DSLRs.

2 upvotes
Petrogel
By Petrogel (4 months ago)

@Andy
Canon dslrs are selling well enough but when i wrote already dead meant by competition (and that is pentax nikon d3200, Sony Nex or Alpha series) only for EOS 100D which is the low (if not the lowest) end camera of the category.
And personally i don not believe EOS 100D is a good investment

0 upvotes
quiquae
By quiquae (4 months ago)

@Petrogel
In 2018, the 100D will be far less "dead" than any mirrorless camera being sold today, simply because it implements a mature technology, while mirrorless cameras are still in evolution.

Also, remember that "smallest" does not equal "lowest." If you compare specs, you'll discover that 100D is much better than the larger 1000D (the lowest grade Canon camera), and even exceeds 700D in some ways.

1 upvote
Petrogel
By Petrogel (4 months ago)

You're absolutely right, small doesn't necessarily mean low but in this case …. it does.
EOS 100D is the "absolute" low end DSLR and quite "smaller" (on specs) compared to competition (which is not the 1000D but Nikon D3200, Pentax K30 or even Sony A3000) -NOT TO MENTION- DXOmark's sensor rating which scores lower compared to Canon's 6year old EOS40D

0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

@marike ..

72,266,826 for non-reflex!!! that's big wow .. considering the whole system just emerged roughly five years ago.. and mirror box.. how long it is .. how many have already adopted it .. and how many are buying them blindly!!

I don't know why people keep on bragging about the sale and marketing figures here at the first place. I am a photographic enthusiast and all I am interested in good quality products on which I can count on. Sales figures are the least of my concern and good its not been taken in account by DPReview and other review websites. If one day I will be real rich and wanna save money on stocks, shares and stuff like that .. I will go and check that link you posted!!!

0 upvotes
webrunner5
By webrunner5 (4 months ago)

Is it just me but I don't see even one picture in the samples that are REALLY in focus and none that have what I call PoP.

2 upvotes
Andy Westlake
By Andy Westlake (4 months ago)

It's probably just you. What exactly do you mean by 'PoP'?

10 upvotes
forpetessake
By forpetessake (4 months ago)

I must agree, the images look kinda ... lackluster. If I were like many consumers choosing cameras, TVs, etc. by the look of the pictures I would have passed on Canon.

1 upvote
dual12
By dual12 (4 months ago)

More DPR awards for mediocre Canon cameras. What else is new?

19 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (4 months ago)

Please DPR, no cameras under $1000 and nothing that large numbers of people like and can afford. Cutting edge and trendy, please.

6 upvotes
dual12
By dual12 (4 months ago)

It's not mediocre because it costs less than $1000. It's mediocre because it's mediocre. Pentax and Fuji make significantly better looking images. They have significantly less noise and significantly more dynamic range than Canon, and not just this model either.

4 upvotes
FunckyPIX
By FunckyPIX (4 months ago)

direct jpg consummer, must learn to develop raw and to shoot.

2 upvotes
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (4 months ago)

Oh, you mean like I do on my 5D2? that sort of consumer?

0 upvotes
topstuff
By topstuff (4 months ago)

I don't get this camera. Tiny body but not enough tiny lenses. And a 40mm pancake is of no use to me.

Like I said, I don't get it.

8 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (4 months ago)

Given it's a normal EF-S mount the current Canon EF and EF-S lens lineup is pretty much as small as they'd ever be anyway.

2 upvotes
Sevventh
By Sevventh (4 months ago)

Pentax has figured out how to make smaller APS-C lenses but Canon for some reason doesn't want to do the same.

6 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (4 months ago)

I think all those small Pentax lenses rely on the body for the focus motor and to drive the aperture mechanically don't they? Canon have an all electric mount which requires additional motors in the lens, tho it makes the mount mechanically simpler and more versatile.

1 upvote
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

@topstuff: Then don't get it.

16 upvotes
Sevventh
By Sevventh (4 months ago)

@Andy Crowe: Yes, Canon decided in the 80's not to include a screw drive. The screw drive Pentax lenses can be smaller due to lack of focusing motor and IS. However, the Canon lenses are quieter for focusing.

1 upvote
Lab D
By Lab D (4 months ago)

I like the SL1, but is it much different than the old Olympus E-4xx series or the Sony A35, A55 and A37? The SLTs were actually better for tracking during video, but with some restrictions.

3 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

It is currently available, and it works with Canon lenses, unlike the ones you mention. That matters to those with Canon lenses. Yes, I agree the SLTs were theoretically better at tracking while shooting both video and stills. But one stat isn't how I pick a camera. I pick it based on the overall package, its performance over time, and its suitability to my needs.

5 upvotes
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (4 months ago)

@ Lab D - it's quite a bit different to the Oly 4-xxx series. It has a much better sensor for a start, not to mention ovf and a great touchscreen interface. The Oly's were very nice little cameras, the Canon is a modern version with lots of improvements to boot, plenty to like IMHO.

0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

@papillon_65 do you know/ remember what's Oly 4-xxx series was? and then what you saying about it's ovf?

0 upvotes
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (4 months ago)

All the Oly 4-xxx/5-xxx cameras had ovf's that were tiny, quite a bit smaller than the 100D, have you ever even used one because I get the impression that a lot of hot air being generated here is from people who haven't.

0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

"quite a bit smaller" .. quite or bit?

0 upvotes
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (4 months ago)

Quite a bit is grammatically correct, not sure what your point is?

0 upvotes
Garp2000
By Garp2000 (4 months ago)

I second that. Good review!

3 upvotes
Heie2
By Heie2 (4 months ago)

And still no sign of the only camera to ever offer a selectable AA filter...

11 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (4 months ago)

Just because a camera has a new, innovative feature, it doesn't necessarily becomes your personal favourite camera to actually use.

7 upvotes
Heie2
By Heie2 (4 months ago)

My apologies. The SL1 clearly trumps some trivial innovation.

6 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (4 months ago)

I didn't write that innovation is trivial, and I don't think it is.
But let me put it like this: if you were asked to choose the camera you enjoy using the most in your daily life, and the camera you consider to be the greatest technical achievement, or most innovative, would you necessarily choose the same camera in both cases?

Clearly, Shawn Barnett was thinking more about personal user experience and convenience (a small, fun to use camera that takes lenses that he already owns), than about innovative features, when he made his choice of gear of the year.

3 upvotes
dual12
By dual12 (4 months ago)

He should have chosen the best camera, not his favorite or because it was cheap. That Canon is mediocre.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

@dual12, the job was to pick our favorite camera, not the most interesting technical innovation. Sorry to disappoint you, but that would be a different article. Read further down to see what I think of Pentax, or visit my review of the K-5 II. This was about the camera I liked most, as Revenant quite correctly says.

10 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

@dual12 I would suggest you not to waste your time on this series mate, as you disagreeing to the main purpose of these articles!!

1 upvote
Revenant
By Revenant (4 months ago)

dual12, you clearly don't understand what "personal choice" means.
Are you saying that every member of the DPR staff should have chosen the one and only "best camera"? Best according to whom? According to you? There certainly isn't any objective way to determine which is the best camera for everyone, because no such thing exists. It all comes down to personal needs and preferences.

1 upvote
retro76
By retro76 (4 months ago)

I really wish Canon would have released more pancakes and/or small primes. Besides the 40, everything else seems big and disproportionate on this body.

Comment edited 13 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (4 months ago)

The long flange distances makes it physically impossible to create small pancake primes like mirrorless bodies have (lenses below around 40mm focal length have to be retrofocal, which makes them much bigger)

1 upvote
Sevventh
By Sevventh (4 months ago)

Pentax has figured it out, Canon just won't commit the R&D dollars.

3 upvotes
Rob Bernhard
By Rob Bernhard (4 months ago)

Have you tried the original 35mm f/2 on this camera? Or the original 24mm f/2.8? These are my two "go-to" lenses for traveling light using previous xxxD series cameras but I'm curious about how they feel on the SL1.

1 upvote
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (4 months ago)

All the smaller Pentax lenses, other than 40mm, are all relatively slow at darker than f3 and still a little bigger than you'd expect a pancake lens to be. If you look at the faster lenses like the 35mm f2.4 it's much larger than a pancake.

2 upvotes
Jared Huntr
By Jared Huntr (4 months ago)

Given there exists a 20mm pancake for the EF mount proves that there is no optical limitation. Note we are strictly talking about being able to design the optics.
http://www.voigtlaender.de/cms/voigtlaender/voigtlaender_cms.nsf/id/pa_fdih7pyj95.html

1 upvote
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

Wow @Jared
This looks amazing .. is it for Fullframe? 20mm is an excellent focal length for a FF and f3.5 is wide enough for its application!!

0 upvotes
quiquae
By quiquae (4 months ago)

@Jared
At f/3.5, the Voigtländer 20mm is a slow lens for a prime, and reviews suggest it is not that sharp or well controlled. In other words, it makes significant compromises on "optical limitations" in order to stay small.

0 upvotes
Jared Huntr
By Jared Huntr (4 months ago)

@ quiquae

Someone said it was physically impossible as though we were talking about unicorns. Well, I simply provided an example of why this was false. In a world of instagram and deliberately ruining one's images for the sake of 'art', surely there is a place for such a lens. Or if compact size was a must, would you rather get a wider field of view than not get the shot at all?

0 upvotes
quiquae
By quiquae (4 months ago)

@Jared

There is indeed a place for such a lens--on Voigtländer's catalogue, that is. Canon seems to be going for a more mainstream audience, who would go up in arms if their brand new EF lens turns out to be such a problematic piece of anachronism. (I have to admit, I'd be one of them.)

By the way, if the Voigtländer's image is to your liking, you can just buy one today instead of waiting for Canon's....

0 upvotes
Daniel Lauring
By Daniel Lauring (4 months ago)

Great for Canon shooters, but unfortunately, Canon's APS-C doesn't perform any better than the best m43 so that is a better choice for someone that wants to pack small...body and lenses. Now if this was a Nikon with a Sony sensor....

23 upvotes
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (4 months ago)

I'm not aware of any m4/3's camera that has an optical viewfinder, are you?

19 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (4 months ago)

Except this camera is also capable of shooting sports and mounting all Canon lenses natively, and it has a proper viewfinder. It takes great video with AF. It is remarkably small and light for what it is. With a pancake it could go in a large coat pocket. It's a great first camera for a young shooter, or anyone. Give a kid an m43 and they will just use the LCD like a dork. You need an OVF if you want to teach real photography.

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting
26 upvotes
Lab D
By Lab D (4 months ago)

papillon_65 know that the PEN cameras have an optical VF availaible, right?
OK, the VF-1 is only good for a very short range of focal lengths, but to claim there is no OVF is untrue. :)

1 upvote
daddyo
By daddyo (4 months ago)

JackM,
"You need an OVF if you want to teach real photography."
That is a pretty silly statement. I've never seen a photography course that stipulated, 'Optical viewfinder required!'

11 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (4 months ago)

@papillon_65 - which of course is either an advantage or a disadvantage, depending on your personal preference.

An OVF is useless for video recording, and doesn't support things like exposure / white balance preview, depth of field preview below f8, focus enlargement / peaking etc.

6 upvotes
Erik Magnuson
By Erik Magnuson (4 months ago)

@Andy Crowe - then it's a good thing that the SL1 has a display capable of all of those things in addition to an OVF - it's win-win.

4 upvotes
Sevventh
By Sevventh (4 months ago)

JackM,
"You need an OVF if you want to teach real photography."

I use plenty of cameras, some have an OVF and some have an EVF. Thank you for educating me that when I use an EVF I am not making real pictures! What would you consider range finder view finders by the way? Real or not?

2 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (4 months ago)

@Erik Magnuson Most people who claim an OVF is essential also make fun of people having to hold their camera out at arms length "like a zombie" to use the rear screen...

2 upvotes
Mark B.
By Mark B. (4 months ago)

@Lab D - there's a difference between a true through-the lens OVF and a VF that you add to the top of the camera.

2 upvotes
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (4 months ago)

@ Lab D - clutching at straws spring to mind, how much info can you see in that ovf?

1 upvote
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (4 months ago)

@ Andy Crowe, of course, but you can still do all those things with the SL1 using the LCD, which is very nice by the way. Personally I'd rather have an ovf than not, YMMV.

1 upvote
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

@Lab D: The Pen cameras have an EVF available, and you can attach a single-focal-length optical viewfinder, but no mirrorless camera offers a through-the-lens optical view of the scene, which we call OVF, because that would require a mirror; instead it's an electronic viewfinder, or EVF.

3 upvotes
Eric Hensel
By Eric Hensel (4 months ago)

When I studied Photography in High School (60's) We were only allowed to shoot 4x5 for the first year...Crown Graphics with no optical finder --just a wire frame, or the ground-glass if you had a tripod. We had to leave our 35mm's at home.
I can take a good photo with anything, now...though I prefer the EVF.

1 upvote
FunckyPIX
By FunckyPIX (4 months ago)

"An OVF is useless for video recording"
James Cameron doesn't seem to know
http://cdn-premiere.ladmedia.fr/var/premiere/storage/images/cinema/news-cinema/james-cameron-son-film-sur-hiroshima-remis-en-question/32792102-1-fre-FR/James-Cameron-son-film-sur-Hiroshima-remis-en-question_portrait_w532.jpg

1 upvote
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

what a hillarious debate .. ovf vs evf!! :)))

1 upvote
mferencz
By mferencz (4 months ago)

Can't help but think of a giant hat on a tiny man every time I put something other than a pancake on it. The mount is too big but the idea is great.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
Zbyszek_Z
By Zbyszek_Z (4 months ago)

The 31 mm lens idea is just nonsense when you realize that there is a new Canon EF 35mm F/2 IS USM lens which is a very good one, particularly for low light photography of non-moving objects. The only obstacle here is that it is pretty expensive, unfortunately. But it is that good , that it is worth that relatively high price (about USD 600).

1 upvote
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

Nonsense to want a true 35mm equivalent? I don't agree. I'd also like it to be a pancake, without IS. It's certainly possible.

4 upvotes
67gtonr
By 67gtonr (4 months ago)

Buy an EOS M with the 22mm f2 lens, its an excellent lens and as small as lenses come!

1 upvote
Ayoh
By Ayoh (4 months ago)

Hmm you like a 40mm pancake, wish there was a 21mm version and think a 31mm lens would also be useful...ah if only someone made such eccentric lenses

7 upvotes
Brett St Pierre
By Brett St Pierre (4 months ago)

Well I think you know that Pentax makes such lenses in their Limited series 15mm, 21mm, 40mm, 43mm, 70mm and then the non-pancake 31mm. And even their premium DSLRs are smallish

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
6 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (4 months ago)

A DSLR mount can't have pancake primes other than 40mm due to the long flange distance.

0 upvotes
Ayoh
By Ayoh (4 months ago)

I'll try and sound more sarcastic next time Brett

7 upvotes
Xentinus
By Xentinus (4 months ago)

I laughed so hard :D

0 upvotes
DPReview Staff
By DPReview Staff (4 months ago)

Yes, they do make those, but the bodies don't focus well in live view or movie modes, and no matter how I try, I can't get those excellent Limited lenses to mount and focus on my Canon bodies. I'm sure I said this a little further down and further up. I realize now I should have picked a Pentax. My mistake. Next time I review a camera, I'll make sure to measure it against Pentax in every paragraph. And I hope you can take sarcasm as well as dish it out.

11 upvotes
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (4 months ago)

Excellent choice and I fully endorse the rationale behind the SL1. It's a really nice little camera which doesn't have much missing in terms of it's bigger brothers. It's also a really fun camera to use, easy and intuitive IMHO. If you own a full frame or larger Canon it compliments them nicely. I'd also like to see the 22mm EF-M ported over to EF-S, it'a cracking little lens that would be great on this camera. I've owned the EOS-M and OMD EM-5 and I prefer the 100D over both of them, the ovf is very decent for such a small camera and very useful when you don't want to do the stinky diaper dance. Im very happy with mine, good choice Shawn.

6 upvotes
Andy Crowe
By Andy Crowe (4 months ago)

> I'd also like to see the 22mm EF-M ported over to EF-S

It's physically impossible, the longer flange distance of the EF mount means any lens under 40mm has to be retrofocal, which makes it a lot bigger (that's also why the 40mm pancake is only f2.8)

2 upvotes
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (4 months ago)

It's not going to be bigger than the EF 35mm F2 I use on it, that'll do for me.

0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

by the looks of it, you need an OVF for some very good reason!! so is an excellent choice for your needs!!

0 upvotes
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (4 months ago)

Care to elaborate on that Naveed?

0 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (4 months ago)

sure mate, you started comparing 3 cams, and then chose one and praised it got an OVF. clearly its OVF in a small camera, that you are after. So all am saying, if this is what you wanted or need, then well done!!

0 upvotes
papillon_65
By papillon_65 (4 months ago)

Yep, that's about the strength of it, a mini dlsr that takes all of my lenses and has an ovf, nothing not to like for me.

0 upvotes
Olymore
By Olymore (4 months ago)

As an m43 user this is the only Canon camera I would be interested in. I thought there were many unfair comments when it was first announced.
Particularly considering the viewfinder is not compromised compared to larger entry level cameras and most of the functionality of larger cameras is present.
If Canon were to bring out an XXD equivalent in a similar / slightly larger size I think it would be a big success.
We're slowing getting back to the film days when outwith professional SLRs, quality cameras were much more compact.

4 upvotes
Total comments: 269
12