Mirrorless Roundup 2011

Mirrorless cameras may not have taken-off in all global markets yet, but they're making progress, both in terms of technology and sales. The marketing efforts have reached almost hysterical levels, helping to raise awareness that mirrorless interchangeable lens camera is here. We've had a chance to use all of these cameras extensively (and have reviewed most of them), so now seems like the ideal time to look at all the cameras and help you decide whether a Mirrorless camera is for you and, if so, which models you should consider.

Getting to grips with sensor sizes

It's difficult to engage with customers about the merits of sensor sizes so, to a great extent, the manufacturers sell these cameras on the strength of them offering interchangeable lenses. The association of interchangeable lenses with 'DSLR quality,' combined with the promise of flexibility that changeable lenses bring help to differentiate Mirrorless cameras from compacts. But it's primarily the increased sensor size that brings the image quality improvement, both in terms of low-light performance and control over depth-of-field.

The other key thing to consider is lens availability. The Micro Four Thirds lens mount, used by Panasonic and Olympus has by far the widest range of lenses, followed by Samsung's NX range, Sony's E-mount, Pentax Q and Nikon's 1 system. However, when considering the lens availability, it's worth being honest with yourself about how many lenses you're planning to buy - if you're only going to buy one additional lens, then it doesn't really matter how extensive a 'system' is, so long as it includes the lenses you might want.

What's out there?

Being a fairly new market, it's taken a little while for a consensus to develop amongst manufacturers about who might want a Mirrorless camera and what they might want it for. The result is a diverse ecosystem yet to be exposed to the evolutionary pressures that tend to result in homogeneity. In general, we feel it's possible to break down most of the Mirrorless class into three main groups, much as can be done with DSLRs: beginners, intermediate users and enthusiasts. But, beyond this classifications, there are some interesting niche cameras and alternative takes on the concept.

As you'd expect, the more sophisticated the audience, the more external control you get, the more features you can expect a camera to have and the more you can expect it to cost. In some cases this means more external control, or the option to add an external viewfinder, but it also tends to mean higher-resolution sensors and higher-resolution rear screens. The classes aren't precise - you could argue, for instance, that the Panasonic G3 offers more features and functionality than the GX1. But here we're trying to consider the overall intent - a balance of features and price, to split the cameras by the shooting style we believe they're intended for.

In this overview we're restricting our coverage to relatively recently-released cameras that we consider to be 'current generation'. Of course some older models are also still for sale new, often at a bargain prices. You can find more information about these cameras in our database or previous reviews.


Beginners' cameras

This is the area in which all the manufacturers think Mirrorless systems offer the most advantages: as small cameras that are as simple to use as point-and-shoot compacts, but with substantially better image quality. Between these and entry-level DSLRs there's been plenty of price competition, and even though we're only really on the second or third generation of these cameras, you can get a pretty mature product for a bargain price.

 Sensor SizePixel CountMovie capabilityScreen SizeTouch Screen?Viewfinder?
Sony NEX-C3 APS-C
(23.4 x 15.6 mm)
16.2MP 720p30
MPEG4
9Mbps
3"
920k
No No
Olympus PEN E-PM1 Four Thirds
(17.3 x 13 mm)
12.3MP 1080i60
AVCHD
17Mbps
3"
460k
No Optional 1.4m or 920k EVF
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF3 Four Thirds
(17.3 x 13 mm)
12.3MP 1080i60
AVCHD
17Mbps
3"
460k
Yes No

Intermediate cameras

The intermediate class is directly comparable to the popular 'Rebel' level of DSLRs. These are aimed at people who have perhaps already owned a enthusiast compact or an older DSLR and want a newer, more capable camera, or who are upgrading from a point-and-shoot compact but want to develop as photographers and take more control over their cameras.

The result is more external buttons, improved features and, in many cases, more accessory options.

 Sensor SizePixel CountMovie capabilityScreen SizeTouch Screen?Viewfinder?
Sony NEX-5N APS-C
(23.4 x 15.6 mm)
16.1MP 1080p60
AVCHD
28Mbps
3"
920k
Yes Optional 2.4m EVF OLED
Olympus PEN E-PL3 Four Thirds
(17.3 x 13 mm)
12.3MP 1080i60
AVCHD
17Mbps
3"
460k
No Optional 1.4m or 920k EVF
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Four Thirds
(17.3 x 13 mm)
15.8MP 1080i60
AVCHD
17Mbps
3"
460k
Yes 1.4m equiv. EVF
Samsung NX200 APS-C
(23.4 x 15.6 mm)
20.3MP 1080p30
MPEG4
u/n
3"
610k
No No

Enthusiast cameras

These are the cameras aimed at people with extensive shooting experience. Perhaps intended as a second camera, or as a replacement for a similarly high-end camera. These tend to be the models that offer the highest levels of external controls, the strongest specifications and product design that says 'I'm serious about my photography.'

 Sensor SizePixel CountMovie capabilityScreen SizeTouch Screen?Viewfinder?
Sony NEX-7 APS-C
(23.4 x 15.6 mm)
24.3MP 1080p60
AVCHD
28Mbps
3"
920k
No 2.4m EVF OLED
Olympus PEN E-P3 Four Thirds
(17.3 x 13 mm)
12.3MP 1080i60
AVCHD
17Mbps
3"
610k
OLED
Yes Optional 1.4m or 920k EVF
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Four Thirds
(17.3 x 13 mm)
15.8MP 1080i60
AVCHD
17Mbps
3"
460k
Yes Optional 1.4m equiv. EVF

Specialist cameras

A couple of niches have sprung up in the Mirrorless camera sector, from the video-focused Panasonic GH2, through to the fun, rather irreverent Pentax Q. We've currently put the point-and-shoot targeted Nikon 1 cameras in this group too, given their conceptual differences from all the other 'Beginner' level cameras (smaller sensors, more flexible autofocus), but you may wish to consider these too.

 Sensor SizePixel CountMovie capabilityScreen SizeTouch Screen?Viewfinder?
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Four Thirds
(˜19 x 13.5 mm)
16.1MP 1080p30
AVCHD
24Mbps
3"
460k
Yes 1.5m equiv. EVF
Ricoh GXR Mount A12 APS-C
(23.6 x 15.7 mm)
12.1MP 720p24
Motion JPEG
3"
920k
No Optional 1.4m EVF
Nikon 1 J1 CX format
(13.2 x 8.8 mm)
10.1MP 1080i60
MPEG4
3"
460k
No No
Nikon 1 V1 CX format
(13.2 x 8.8 mm)
10.1MP 1080i60
MPEG4
3"
920k
No 1.4m EVF
Pentax Q

1/2.3" Type
(mm)

12.4MP 1080p24
MPEG4
3"
460k
No No

Click here for page 2 - Beginners' cameras

223
I own it
99
I want it
62
I had it
Discuss in the forums
311
I own it
35
I want it
36
I had it
Discuss in the forums
109
I own it
11
I want it
24
I had it
Discuss in the forums
441
I own it
57
I want it
110
I had it
Discuss in the forums
467
I own it
206
I want it
91
I had it
Discuss in the forums
145
I own it
23
I want it
58
I had it
Discuss in the forums
73
I own it
8
I want it
29
I had it
Discuss in the forums
111
I own it
6
I want it
46
I had it
Discuss in the forums
89
I own it
4
I want it
9
I had it
Discuss in the forums
67
I own it
8
I want it
34
I had it
Discuss in the forums
46
I own it
4
I want it
21
I had it
Discuss in the forums
166
I own it
16
I want it
56
I had it
Discuss in the forums
189
I own it
20
I want it
77
I had it
Discuss in the forums
Our favorite products. Free 2 day shipping.
Support this site, buy from dpreview GearShop.
Sony Alpha NEX-7

Comments

Total comments: 429
123
Mannypr
By Mannypr (Dec 20, 2011)

I must admit mirrorless cameras are starting to produce photos of pretty good quality but after having seen samples carefully from all of these camera they still have a long way to go to compete with DSLR cameras . The problems that mirrorless camera confront is that when the mirrorless camera technology takes a step forward , DSLR do the same and get better , always keeping in front of the image quality produce by the latest mirrorless camera has to offer.

0 upvotes
sesopenko
By sesopenko (Dec 20, 2011)

The difference is that through the omission of a mirror box and optical viewfinder the mirrorless camera costs considerably less.

1 upvote
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Dec 20, 2011)

Many of these models are built around APS-C sensors that are the same as the ones being used in DSLR. For these, there is no difference in IQ at all. There's nothing inherent to the Mirrorless design that would make that the case.

4 upvotes
allencraig
By allencraig (Dec 20, 2011)

Not sure if the sensors are the same. But they ARE the same size.

1 upvote
bcalkins
By bcalkins (Dec 21, 2011)

Interestingly, the Sony NEX actually has a LARGER sensor than the Canon APS-C cameras :)

3 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (Dec 21, 2011)

well sensors if not same, they are better, as for instance sony latest NEX-7 got better sensor (resolution and DR) than any APSC.

The reason you seeing better photos on Flickr etc from DSLRs is due to the fact that advanced old pro photographers are still using bigger bodies. Its the eye, brain and techniques behind these cameras that makes the photos unique.

Mirrorless or other, its only for the experience that counts and what you enjoys more.

1 upvote
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (Dec 21, 2011)

also another reason is mirrorless (except m4/3) lacks good range of lenses, other than the experienced photographers.

0 upvotes
HIScamera
By HIScamera (Dec 21, 2011)

I completely agree with Naveed. Seasoned photographers all over the world are using DSLR because that's all they had up until now. What if you gave all of them, say NEX-7, and tell them that's all they can use for next one year? You will see that 'quality' with mirrorless will be on par with DSLR. Guaranteed.

0 upvotes
Chillbert
By Chillbert (Dec 21, 2011)

Another reason you might be seeing better images from DSLRs is the higher-end lenses being used with those cameras. Over time that gap will close. If you don't mind manual focus, you can already use almost any lens on micro 4/3 and Sony E-mount.

0 upvotes
migus
By migus (Dec 21, 2011)

sensors are NOT the same; the LiveView feature requires different circuitry to compensate for the thermal stress (noise). Same basic sensor will show less noise in dSLR vs. CSC. However, size matters and dSLRs won't win the long run because of slightly lower noise (already excellent, see Sony) and better handling.

0 upvotes
toxinoz
By toxinoz (Dec 20, 2011)

bgbs (and others here) suggest mirrorless cameras cannot be considered seriously by photographers because they are not part of a system. In my experience, this is a complete misconception. In the m4/3 area alone (Panasonic & Olympus bodies, so far; lenses from Panasonic, Olympus, Leica, Sigma etc) there is now a diverse, comprehensive and growing range of lenses, from ultra wide-angle, to powerful telephoto, from zooms to primes, from very fast (f0.95) to not so fast, plus a range of flashes, cordless off-camera multi-flash, and even the ability to use lenses from almost every other camera/lens maker, albeit in manual mode. You can even use bellows and specialist macros from the old Olympus film system, macro lenses which no other system ever had (as far as I know), plus ring flashes, twin flashes etc from the Olympus 4/3 range. It is entirely practical for a serious photographer to travel with a range of these lenses + bodies to shoot a wide array of subjects; I regularly do so.

5 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (Dec 21, 2011)

Yes Sir, but Sony with excellent sensor and good enough bodies, doesnt got any native wide angle lens, their prime lenses are also lacking. Same is the case with new releases from Pentax and Nikon.

The complain is valid. m43 is an exceptional case.

0 upvotes
Atlasman
By Atlasman (Dec 21, 2011)

Well said.

Mirrorless capturing systems are way more adaptable than its DSLR counter-part. There is only a small area where the DSLR is still better—and eventually even this will fall.

1 upvote
ThePhilips
By ThePhilips (Dec 20, 2011)

Nice move DPR: putting the two top competing mirrorless cameras, matching in many aspects including the price - the NEX-7 and the GH2 - in different categories.

On second thought it is at the very least a dumb move.

2 upvotes
Naveed Akhtar
By Naveed Akhtar (Dec 21, 2011)

I think that is the way it should be. Sony can't compete with m4/3 on lenses and m4/3 cant on sensor tech (well more or less yes, but not 100%) at this moment.

These are two completely different fronts, making a good sensor, anyone can do .. as all manufacturers in APSC market are already producing good quality sensor, just launch them in a new body, but building new lens system involves loads of time and research as most of these lenses are completely new design and redesign. Competing with an already matured m4/3 system is not possible for another year or so.

0 upvotes
jadawgis732
By jadawgis732 (Dec 20, 2011)

When you say that the GXR is a little hard to categories, I think you mean categorize. Or categorise for all you limeys out there. Good article though.

0 upvotes
OneGuy
By OneGuy (Dec 20, 2011)

Just got up on the mirror-less camera learning curve and found the roundup easy to follow. Comments:
1. I like the option of pancake lenses because they are usually high quality and at a decent price. Now both the body and the lens are compact while keeping up with DSLR's IQ.
2. The roundup should indicate the IS as being body or lens based. This issue comes up early in the camera-lens selections. I do not consider using lens adapters because AF and IS functions are likely to be lost.
3. Don't like the 'mirror-less' designation. (The reason is that 'a mirror' is feminine and while it's okay to disagree, it gets into the acceptance thing.) Prefer 'sensor-direct' or 'trim body' with 'custom lenses.' Even WYSIWYG is good for differentiation.
4. Consider putting a Bluetooth phone into a camera. Make WiFi std.
5. The human eye is much better than generally believed. Image processing artifacts will be seen even if sub-consciously. I don't consider cameras producing spotted or pukey jpegs.

0 upvotes
bgbs
By bgbs (Dec 20, 2011)

I still view Mirrorless as more of a walk about camera. I can see NEX7 being used as a landscape camera as well, but that is about it. For every other kind of shooting you need a DSLR because with DSLR you invest into a whole system. You cannot use Mirrorless for serious flash photography for example. Limited lens selections are also a problem. Not much third-party accessories are available to improve photography.

I'm looking to buy V1 for casual walk about shooting when the price gets down, just because its fast and accurate AF makes it a worthy contender. The IQ out of that thing is more than enough for me. For serious work, I will still be using my DSLR.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
VladimirV
By VladimirV (Dec 20, 2011)

If you really think you can only do serious photography when you invest in a system (whatever that means) or that third part accessories improve photography then you need to go out more and take pictures.

The person behind the camera and books or a class will improve photography and there is no need for a system, one camera with one prime lens is all you really need for serious photography.

3 upvotes
Chillbert
By Chillbert (Dec 21, 2011)

Not everyone is willing to lug DSLRs about everywhere. Mirrorless cameras make serious photography more accessible and convenient, and for me that's the right balance. If you're happy with your DSLR and don't mind the size and weight of your system, you probably don't need a mirrorless camera. (By the way, how are they *not* system cameras? Micro 4/3 and Sony E-Mount are both public specs with third parties participating.)

1 upvote
tomboyter
By tomboyter (Dec 20, 2011)

I would simply like to say that DPReview has become my definitive authority on things photographic, and I am reluctant to purchase anything until I have read your evaluation. Thank you for being so thorough and unbiased, it is so rare to find journalistic excellence and I appreciate it all the more when I see it. Eagerly awaiting your findings on the Canon S100 and completely agree with your strategy of delaying conclusions until all the facts are in. Wishing you the Happiest of the Holiday Season and continued success in the coming year !
Tom Boyter, Columbus, Georgia USA

0 upvotes
Desert Cruiser
By Desert Cruiser (Dec 20, 2011)

Great cameras for most people. Size and weight being a real plus.

Now, thanks for another great article! We keep recommending you because of this. Merry Christmas to the staff at DPReview !!!!! Keep up the great work!
Don....

0 upvotes
peterpainter
By peterpainter (Dec 20, 2011)

When do the DSLR and cheapy P&S round-ups appear?

0 upvotes
Aleo Veuliah
By Aleo Veuliah (Dec 20, 2011)

I have used a lot of SLR cameras, and from 2008 to now I don't feel the need to use any SLR system

I have two Panasonic Lumix G cameras and four lenses, and quality is great, and very easy to use and to carry

0 upvotes
sesopenko
By sesopenko (Dec 20, 2011)

I got a Nex-5N a few weeks ago and was so impressed I sold my 5D classic, full frame DSLR.

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Esa Tuunanen
By Esa Tuunanen (Dec 20, 2011)

Current mirrorless system cameras can't really be categorized well in any way.
Instead of established groups like inside compacts and DLSRs they're more like compacts and DSLRs smashed together with feature sets and everything all over the place.
Even prices don't follow feature sets and controls/ergonomy so well.

Also advertised features shouldn't be taken as equal: Settings in menus are far less usefull than direct controls.
In the end none of the mirrorless cameras has controls equal to higher end DSLRs and either lack enough dials or bullet-point engineer settings in a way which isn't consistent and clear unlike direct button+turn of dial combination.

And despite of human hand setting limit for ergonomic size of body, grip and controls there's this manic obsessive size shrinking.
While mirrorless concept enables small bodies it shouldn't mean small only-policy but diverse choises from compacts to real DSLR challenging high end bodies inside the system.

1 upvote
unknown member
By (unknown member) (Dec 20, 2011)

I agree. We only just got the first mirrorless camera that can actually auto-focus accurately for any situation, and that camera comes with limitations as well. As soon as the technology can be copied by every maker we should start seeing compact cameras that can actually replace a DSLR. EVF is here to stay and will get better. And some creativity with controls will improve things in that area.

0 upvotes
nico-foto
By nico-foto (Dec 20, 2011)

I wonder what you mean regarding accurate auto focus. My GF1 and my GH2 both have much more consistent focusing than my Canon 7D. They can't focus on moving targets, but thats a problem of all contrast detection cameras. In fact, if there's ONE reason I love using my mirrorles cameras so much is becasue pics are always tack sharp, perfectly in focus for static subjects. If you need action or sports AF performance, well, then we're not there yet for mirrorless (except the Nikon 1 maybe).

1 upvote
unknown member
By (unknown member) (Dec 20, 2011)

"They can't focus on moving targets, but thats a problem of all contrast detection cameras."

I think you already had the answer. So how can all your photos be tack sharp?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
JackRoch
By JackRoch (Dec 21, 2011)

Because all his/her subjects are static?

1 upvote
Chillbert
By Chillbert (Dec 21, 2011)

Failure to focus on moving targets is clearly a limitation of current mirrorless cameras because of contrast-detect AF. I have also read the phase-detect AF on DLSRs works better in lower light, and I sometimes find with my NEX-5N (which I use heavily in low light) I have to switch to manual focus with focus peaking to get those shots. Which works fine, when I have the time to get it done, but perhaps a DSLR would get more of those shots, too.

0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Dec 21, 2011)

"Failure to focus on moving targets is clearly a limitation of current mirrorless cameras because of contrast-detect AF."

Hope more and more of them introduce on-sensor PDAF - after all, Nikon has managed to do it in an absolutely stellar way.

1 upvote
HIScamera
By HIScamera (Dec 20, 2011)

I find it amazing how so many photographer dismisses Mirrorless as trivial invention, that aren't deemed up to their standards, when only 10 years ago, they were saying the same thing about digital cameras. I remember reading bunch of photography magazines all crying foul with these so called 'digital' cameras and how they do not have the 'soul' and 'characters' of the film which they will never replace. Were they right?
Mirrorless might be new and unfamiliar, but they are already on par with many DSLRs in terms of IQ, and usability-wise, they will only improve as time passes. Progress Mirrorless made in last 3 years surpasses anything by either DSLR or any rangefinder cameras. Who know what we will have in another year?

7 upvotes
HIScamera
By HIScamera (Dec 20, 2011)

And regarding OVF, stop being stubborn and open your mind to the possibility. It’s absolutely ridiculous how every new technology is immediately targeted as being ‘heretic’ and should be burned at the altar of the god of ‘what-I-am-familiar-is-best-and-shall-not-ever-be-replaced.’ EVF might not be to your standard now, but to discounted as something that can never replace your OVF is just plain idiotic. Give it another year or two, and I bet they will either match or surpass current OVF.

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
1 upvote
HIScamera
By HIScamera (Dec 20, 2011)

It’s so surprising how photographers, who are supposed to be artists with open mind, to see things in new light, and to accept and utilize what’s available to them in the most creative ways possible, are so dead set in their minds to shun new things and cling to old standards. I really hope their photos do not reflect this.
The most amazing photo I saw this year was shot by a photographer, using his iPhone. Clearly he understood that the concept that it is a photographer who takes the photo, not his tool or the limitation of it.

1 upvote
Esa Tuunanen
By Esa Tuunanen (Dec 20, 2011)

Fully agree that mirrorless should be seen as full concept capable to also challenging hundred year old analog mechanical era SLR-concept which has grown to religion... just like rangefinder concept.
I would see lack of PDAF's focus capabilities as only bigger pebble in the shoe but even that wouldn't be problem in most photography.

Hand size of me, or anyone else, just hasn't become any smaller so makers should get over their obsessive shrinking of all models and expand selection of mirrorless bodies to also those which have full DSLR like ergonomy and direct controls...
Except for the part of having viewfinder so far from the camera's edge as all DSLRs (except Olympus E-1) still cling to past and don't end body immediately from the left side of lens mount causing nose hitting to LCD/body.

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Dec 20, 2011)

There's a place for all this stuff and to each his own. But it's no coincidence the very first thing this article mentions is sensor size. I wish it didn't make any difference but it does. Following your logic--and you're probably right--in another 10 years they're won't be any need for small cameras because cell phones will be just as good.

0 upvotes
HIScamera
By HIScamera (Dec 20, 2011)

I suspect in 10 years, we won't have cellphones. It will be something entirely new, entirely organic. There won't be line dividing 'digital' and 'analogue' in future.

0 upvotes
sesopenko
By sesopenko (Dec 20, 2011)

I'm itching for the day I can get a full-frame M mount camera with an available EVF module for 1/2 the price of a 5D Mk II.

I believe it extrapolates well: Nex-5n is half the price of the A77. A full-frame, mirrorless should theoretically be half the price of a full-frame DSLR.

I wonder if Ricoh will step up to the plate in 2012?

0 upvotes
PicOne
By PicOne (Dec 21, 2011)

Anyone remember the old discussions on "Arizona Highways" photo submissions' policy? :-)

0 upvotes
hammerheadfistpunch
By hammerheadfistpunch (Dec 20, 2011)

A request for this article; a scatter plot showing DPreview scores on the y and price on the x. A little over simplified, but i would venture a guess that bang for the buck is most people biggest (or second biggest) consideration with this category. I would say brand loyalty is #1 maybe.

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
1 upvote
increments
By increments (Dec 20, 2011)

The scores given to the cameras include value, so that wouldn't work. Also scores are relevant to the segments, which may well end up as different to those chosen in this article.

For example you can't compare the scores for the NEX C3 and NEX-7.

Even relative scores for rivals such as E-PM1 vs. C3 aren't directly comparable because the benchmarks shift over time.

IMO the scores and awards are at best a very rough indication, and at worst can be misleading if people don't read the explanation of the scoring system.

If you're thinking of buying a mirrorless camera, work out what you can afford then read the reviews. (Content not score.)

1 upvote
hammerheadfistpunch
By hammerheadfistpunch (Dec 20, 2011)

yeah, as i started looking into that it dawned on me that was the case. Im still for a scatter plot of some kind though, something digestible.

0 upvotes
increments
By increments (Dec 20, 2011)

If you can't be bothered reading reviews, are the differences really that important to you?

Edit: Sorry, that probably sounded harsh.

I just mean that there's very few bad cameras about. If you just stick to getting a recommended camera that you can afford, it'll be fine for you unless you have some specific requirement.

There's no best camera (or even best value camera) but there might be a best camera for YOU if you have some specific need.

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
1 upvote
hammerheadfistpunch
By hammerheadfistpunch (Dec 20, 2011)

Well, i already bought the one I wanted (GH2) but I am a fan of organized information.

0 upvotes
sesopenko
By sesopenko (Dec 20, 2011)

Exactly. I believe that the Nex-5N is the best bang for the buck camera on the market for those getting into photography. Good kit zoom, superb image quality. Well featured. All for around $650.

0 upvotes
increments
By increments (Dec 20, 2011)

A scatter graph is not necessarily organized information. Any set of data is only as good as its integrity. Then you need to use the data appropriately. Then you need to display it coherently.

Sometimes you need to accept there isn't a clear ranking, but rather nuanced differences that should be acknowledged. Although any weighting given to them will be subjective.

0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Dec 21, 2011)

"Also scores are relevant to the segments, which may well end up as different to those chosen in this article."

And not only that... for example, the GH2 as a whole (not taking the vastly superior lens availability) is definitely worse than the 5N for stills shooting. For video shooting, however, it's vastly superior (far better actual resolution etc.) - unless you really need 1080 60p. This should also be taken account as this isn't (can't be) reflected in the (relative) scores of the two cameras.

0 upvotes
Low Budget Dave
By Low Budget Dave (Dec 20, 2011)

This is a good review, and it puts the cameras together pretty well. I would have preferred a few more columns, though, so we can draw our own conclusions. You included a column for "touchscreen" for example, but not "rotating screen". I would have also liked a column for "autofocus speed" or some similar measurement of speed that is not already obvious.

The V1, for example, has little other claim to fame, and the EPL3 has little else to justify it over the EPL2. For the NEX 5n, it is one of the few limitations.

If you had added enough columns, you could have dispensed with "grouping" them, and let people make up their own minds as to where the logical groupings fall. It is your article, of course, but several people have already commented about how your groups seem subjective. Just a few more columns, and you could simply group them by price.

0 upvotes
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Dec 21, 2011)

"The V1, for example, has little other claim to fame"

Excuse me? Fully electronic shutter? Full-res stills while taking videos, without any interruption in the video stream? Show me another (more serious, non-P&S) camera capable of doing these...

1 upvote
oselimg
By oselimg (Dec 20, 2011)

Since Dpreview relocated it's become more marketing website than a source of information. Yet another marketing orientated article. Does anyone remember the last lens test? As a result in the last few months I've been looking for alternative sites for information. If things keep going the way they are now I am afraid Dpreview will lose it's status as the prime source of information and join with the run-of-the-mill web sites which do nothing but marketing. I wonder this has anything to do with the Amazon connection.

4 upvotes
Simon Joinson
By Simon Joinson (Dec 20, 2011)

from what i can tell you seem to consider anything that (i) appeals to a more general audience or (ii) isn't an in-depth lens review is, by definition, nothing but marketing. Most of the cameras in this roundup have had full in-depth reviews (or are mid-review). The commentary is based on 1000's of hours of use and testing. What you don't seem to get is that it's possible to provide 'information' on products for the lay user without it being 'marketing' (which, being produced by the manufacturer, is uncritical, one-sided and, in the context of a site like DPReview, subject to strict rules regarding disclosures and payment).

Comment edited 28 seconds after posting
8 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Dec 20, 2011)

Amazon fares well as a marketing website and as a source of information. It would a good thing, not bad, if others emulate, complement, or surpass it in specialty areas. Lens reviews are scarce, it's true. But how many people buy a $1,500 lens over a $500 one based on a review? It takes a lot of buck for a bit of bang, lens-wise. A pro might benefit from the 10% advantage of the better lens, but few other folks could leverage the difference or afford it. Then there are those magnificent $3 and $4k lenses. Prestigious, yes. But do a few hundred "hits" from connoiseurs translate to ad earnings?

Meanwhile, there are a few sites devoted to lenses, lighting equipment, or whatnot.

0 upvotes
oselimg
By oselimg (Dec 20, 2011)

No need to get defensive for being marketing orientated.if that's the way the website wants to go fine. I don't have a problem with marketing. But from the replies I understand that's the way it will go. I just compare the site with what it was a few years ago. There were no "market forces" then???

1 upvote
Simon Joinson
By Simon Joinson (Dec 20, 2011)

No, my point is that you're completely wrong and that the site isn't becoming more marketing orientated, and yes, i take offense at the suggestion. A few years ago we only had camera reviews. Now we have more camera reviews than ever, and a lot of other stuff. If by marketing you mean we're trying to add features that broaden our appeal and result in more visitors, then, yes, we'd like a long term future for the site, if that's ok.

7 upvotes
oselimg
By oselimg (Dec 21, 2011)

Thanks for the confirmation.

0 upvotes
oselimg
By oselimg (Dec 21, 2011)

I would also like to add that majority of visitors to sites like this are gear worshipers(just read the forums). Avery, very small percentage of buyers are actually aware of such websites and the buyers chose their camera on the basis of their budget limitations rather than detailed reviews on the web. Even a lot of enthusiasts are not aware of most of these sites. Hobbyists are not bothered with technical details. How long is the zoom, how many pixels, video facility, flash are what they want to know and understand. And that sort of information is readily available in the shop. So my argument is that by trying to broaden your appeal you will not make much difference to the numbers which will probably be evened out by the people who will no longer click on the site as much as they used to.

0 upvotes
Carol Stee
By Carol Stee (Dec 20, 2011)

Why all these groups? Instead, put all the cameras in a chart, from the least expensive to the most expensive, to get an accurate comparison. The groupings are misleading because some Intermediates outclass some of the Enthusiasts, with newer sensors, better IQ, better ergonomics, etc.

Olympus PEN E-PM1 14-42mm $499
Panasonic GF3 14-42mm $599
Sony Alpha NEX C-3 18-55mm $649
Nikon 1 J1 10-30mm $649
Sony Alpha NEX-5N 18-55mm $699
Panasonic DMC-G3 14-42mm $699
Olympus PEN E-PL3 14-42mm $699
Ricoh GXR Mount A12 body only $649
Olympus PEN E-P3 14-42mm $799
Panasonic GX1 14-42mm $799
Pentax Q 49mm equiv. $799
Samsung NX200 18-55mm $899
Nikon 1 V1 10-30mm $899
Panasonic GH2 14-42mm $999
Sony NEX-7 18-55mm $1,349

Comment edited 26 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Dec 20, 2011)

In which case the NEX-7 wins and everyone can go home.

Except those people who want an easy-to-use, $500 camera, who are left a bit lost.

3 upvotes
George E620
By George E620 (Dec 20, 2011)

I think the suggestion could have some merit as an appendix page with some of your key opinions/findings as extra columns in a table. By way of example some columns might be: low light performance, AF quality, ease of use/handling, .. Very much like the Camera compare feature in concept. Sort of like a "jumping directly to the conclusion" page. ( I quite like what has been done in the roundup. )

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Dec 21, 2011)

Just to compare: the NX200 is in Europe for 515 EUR, that is cca. 650 USD. 899 USD is pretty much. Plus the NX11 (still being sold) is some 400 EUR, that is cca. 520 USD.

0 upvotes
JWest
By JWest (Dec 21, 2011)

Not to mention that you can easily pick up an NX100 for £200.

0 upvotes
Dan Ortego
By Dan Ortego (Dec 20, 2011)

Funny, I never really looked of those cams as a category with pics' and all. They look kinda silly with their owners in tow. Then again I suppose it fills the gap between a cell cam (barely) and the DSLR. Ok, I want one too!~

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Dec 20, 2011)

No, its the medium-frame and full-frame folks who become servants to their gear. I'm no cell-phone nut, but smart camera phones may have hit the swee-spot, so far as functionality go. Next to them, single-function boxes of any sort may be looked back upon as "kinda silly."

0 upvotes
oselimg
By oselimg (Dec 21, 2011)

I guess it's very smart to reduce photography to sensor size without even being aware of the impact it has on the final picture. Angle of view is not the only issue when comparing formats. Same angle of view doesn't mean the same thing for different formats

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
ivey3721
By ivey3721 (Dec 20, 2011)

Did Panasonic claim that GX1 compete against NEX5N, not NEX7?
If GX1 is posintioned this way, would NEX-5n/GX1/E-P3 group makes more sense than a NEX-7/EP3/GX1?

1 upvote
ivey3721
By ivey3721 (Dec 20, 2011)

I beleive GH2 and NEX7 should be in one group - they are different cameras, but both camera are the top of the line.

2 upvotes
Seashore
By Seashore (Dec 20, 2011)

I agree completely. Panasonic has a wider lineup than the other manufacturers. I would have put G3 and GX1 in intermediate or GX1 and GH2 in enthusiast. But I suppose they didn't want two Panny cams in the same category as it could be seen as unfair to the other manufacturers (I may be wrong here, obviously). Nice overview otherwise.

0 upvotes
Seashore
By Seashore (Dec 20, 2011)

How about four groups (not that anyone is going to care about this, or that it will make sense to anyone but me)?

Small, for P&S upgrader: EPM1, J1, GF3, NEXC3
Hobbyist photog: G3, PL3, NX200, V1
Small enthusiast/pro backup cam: NEX5N, GX1, EP3
Enthusiast: GH2, NEX7, Fuji X100

I have no idea where to put the Ricoh cams.

1 upvote
ivey3721
By ivey3721 (Dec 20, 2011)

I second. It makes more sense to me.

0 upvotes
Chillbert
By Chillbert (Dec 21, 2011)

I like those four groups - closer to my thought process, anyway. I put myself in group 3 (small enthusiast) - the camera, not me, that is.

0 upvotes
keepreal
By keepreal (Dec 20, 2011)

One or two comments suggest this article is useful as a guide to buyers for Christmas. I presume they mean Christmas 2012 because nobody in their right mind would rush into a purchase and hand over a sizeable amount of money in such a rush for this year. Would they?

So, everyone, have a very good festive season and don't act in haste and regret at leisure. Better still if you take your photography seriously, abandon the idea of a mirrorless camera altogether until there is one that is serious and sensibly priced.

I should like so long, already!

Comment edited 32 seconds after posting
1 upvote
lowpine
By lowpine (Dec 20, 2011)

don't be a <passive aggressive> hater.... btw Happy Holidays!!

3 upvotes
JWest
By JWest (Dec 21, 2011)

Or alternatively... go out and treat yourself, you deserve it! Merry Christmas!

0 upvotes
keepreal
By keepreal (Dec 20, 2011)

I do not believe any mirrorless camera is ideal for serious photography not even as a second camera. My ideal would at worst be no bigger than or heavier than a Leica M3 with a good range of compact, light weight lenses including a 12-24mm equivalent that is not severely distorted when you use RAW. Electronic viewfinders appear to suffer from problems in certain conditions, so I insist upon an optical one approaching Leica quality. In spite of my reservations about EVF the NEX-7 might have been of some interest but for the hugely inflated price.

The idea of holding a camera away from your body to peer at a LCD screen on the back obliterated by bright sunlight, compose the image properly, hold the camera steady with your arm or arms away from your body is a joke.

Micro-miniaturisation of electronic circuits has not led to compact DSLRs like it could, just large heavy models with many useless features unnecessary complexity and bloated prices. The only winners are the manufacturers.

3 upvotes
chrohrs
By chrohrs (Dec 20, 2011)

I agree! Any camera that doesn't require you to look through a tiny hole is a joke! That Ansel Adams guy should have got a real camera with a viewfinder!

Sarcasm aside, it's clear that optical viewfinders are going the way of buttons on cell phones. Yes, they have some advantages, but the advantages of electronic display are myriad: DoF preview, live histograms, more accurate focusing, etc.

12 upvotes
increments
By increments (Dec 20, 2011)

Optical Viewfinders may still have a big role to play, if you consider Hybrid VFs as optical.

1 upvote
Photomonkey
By Photomonkey (Dec 20, 2011)

The real issue is eye level finders. Electronic or optical they trump the LCD-at-arm's-length method almost all the time.

I still remember Rollei TLR users bravely proclaiming the advantage of the waist level finder in shooting over the heads of a crowd. While true,it scarcely represents the typical shooting scenario for anyone.

2 upvotes
boardsy
By boardsy (Dec 20, 2011)

Yes, you're right, which is why the NEX 3/5/3C/5N have a tilting LCD that allows you to hold it against your torso, elbows pressed in, for a very stable hold, even with manual lenses! And a $10 clip-on pop-up sun-shade works perfectly for very bright sun.

Add to that fantastic low-light high ISO performance, almost non-existent anti-aliasing filter for fine detail, customisable buttons to avoid annoying menu, TTL metering, focus magnification & peaking aids, ability to adapt all glass ever, excellent Hand-Held Twilight low-noise stacking mode, panorama etc - NEX for the win! :-)

2 upvotes
Esa Tuunanen
By Esa Tuunanen (Dec 20, 2011)

keepreal, almost any camera can make contest winning photo if it's just good enough for that particular situation and photographer knows what he/she is doing.
Problems are elsewhere.

Like that trendy obsession to very hand shaking shooting style with LCD. But while EVF isn't perfect also OVF causes one real problem in every situation: It doesn't show in any way how exposure looks leading to need for "post-preview".

And about that obsession to downsizing every single camera: Human hand size sets minimum size for camera with good ergonomy and direct external controls. That's why high end mirrorless segment needs also DSLR size cameras. (just without the bulk of mirror chamber and viewfinder prism)

0 upvotes
bebopberg
By bebopberg (Dec 20, 2011)

+1 to that. Sometimes I think Japanese manufacturers design their ergonomics around teenage girls hands. Hopefully we will see some serious attempts at full-size mirrorless, a bit bigger than the NEX-7 even.

1 upvote
Carol Stee
By Carol Stee (Dec 20, 2011)

@keepreal

The Panasonic G3 and the GH2 have built-in EVFs so you can hold the body pressed against your cheek and not at arm's length. They also have a good range of compact, light weight lenses, some designed by Leica, with more to come.

And the Sony NEX-7 has a built-in EVF to one side, rangefinder style. The lenses are bigger and heavier than Panasonic's, and there isn't a wide range yet, but more are in the works. The IQ is the finest of any APS-C camera, including the Leica M9.

And all mirrorless bodies can be fitted with adapters to use almost any lens, including Leica M mounts. Mirrorless cameras are for serious photography.

0 upvotes
hammerheadfistpunch
By hammerheadfistpunch (Dec 20, 2011)

I admit to hating the EVF on my GH2, but you would be amazed how well the image compares to APS-C and FF sensors in their IQ. of course your going to buy a more suitable camera for "serious photography" but these camera's certainly have their place because if you think about it from a marketing perspective most people who have been buying d90's 7d's and even 5d's are just amateurs or enthusiasts anyway. "serious" (professional) photographers are a small fraction of the market and these cameras serve up 80-90% of the quality at a low price and more familiar user experience. That having been said, a professional could pick up a GH2 and get stunning images out of it I have no doubt, its a remarkable camera all things considered. I guess it boils down to what you consider "serious" photography, i would say it means people making a living off their work, not people who spend a "serious" amount of money on their gear.

0 upvotes
keepreal
By keepreal (Dec 20, 2011)

Esa – Yes, skilled photographers can get good results even when the equipment they use is less than ideal. A camera is only as good as its user.

I agree that smaller cameras can be awkward for large hands especially when the weight is 1 kg or more with the lens attached. However, had a top quality DSLR been available about the size and considerably smaller weight of the prewar Leicas, and I see no good reason why not, that would be ideal. There are smaller and lighter DSLRs not far off that but nothing even vaguely on a par with the best prosumer or professional models.

If part of the reason is the myriad features then, as I said before, few are really necessary or useful. If for example, one values face recognition, then I maintain that the owner is not a photographer but a snapshotter who owns a camera.

I regret that DP Review aims to include such people in its audience. It started off on a different footing but now anything goes.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
keepreal
By keepreal (Dec 20, 2011)

chrohrs - I like your humour and managed to resist taking the bait but only for a few hours...

Like Ansel Adams I had a plate camera a long time ago. You -knew exactly what the result was going to be like even before you tripped the shutter because you put such care into everything. I still try to do that today with digital and take very few shots for that reason. Of course, that is fine for landscape photography but ludicrous for action.

If and when EVF drawbacks are completely solved, like a noisy image in certain conditions, when the Sony NEX-7 price or equivalent comes down by at least 30% and when there is a high quality range of lightweight optics including a 12-24mm on APS-C or equivalent with no distinct distortion shooting RAW then I will be happy to abandon direct optical viewfinders and possibly even DSLRs. Mind you, if a replacement for the Samsung NX200 appears with a top notch EVF up to keepreal standards, I think I might like that better than the Sony.

Comment edited 15 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
keepreal
By keepreal (Dec 20, 2011)

PS. The Samsung does have some interesting lenses and I would have considered the NX200 with reservations because of the lack of viewfinder with the 16mm lens even though a fixed focal length. On my Nikon D300 I use my Sigma 12-24 99% of the time and I could have lived with that lens for landscape photography very happily. The saving in bulk would have been a benefit but the severe distortion and lack of edge sharpness killed that idea. Other lenses in their range are better but still not up to scratch. The reviews at http://www.photozone.de are revealing and very disappointing.

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Chillbert
By Chillbert (Dec 21, 2011)

keepreal - with good practice (elbows tucked in) and the benefits of image stabilization etc., it's really not the problem you think it is.

0 upvotes
migus
By migus (Dec 30, 2011)

OVF might be dissapearing, yet it has an intrinsic feature that no EVF can match, irrespective of its 2.4 or 24Mpix: natural accomodation. Ask an optometrist about the difference between OVF and EVF, from an anatomical perspective.
OVF=Negative accommodation, adjustment of the eye for long distances by relaxation of the ciliary muscles. That's it, your eyes remain focused as for the natural subject, be it landscape, portrait or macro.
EVF=Positive accommodation adjustment of the eye for short distances by contraction of the ciliary muscles. Eye must re-focus between the subject and its EVF image, possibly many times each minute - a problem increasing above age 35 (rigidity).

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
nik77
By nik77 (Dec 20, 2011)

Strangely, the Samsung NX11 is not included. Please correct me if I’m wrong but it’s a current mirrorless model still in production, isn't it?

Might be just my wrong impression, but it feels like DPreview has something against the Samsung cameras. For example the excuse given below, for not having one on the group photo above doesn't sound credible.

2 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Dec 20, 2011)

That´s what I thought as well; the NX11 is still being sold and also considering the age it´s still not an old camera (introduced 2010). It´s predecessor NX10 still can be found in shops. There is no doubt Samsung will offer NX11 untill they introduce the NX20, a vievfinder-sibling of the NX200 (just as were NX10/11 and NX100). It should have definitely been included in the comparison.

1 upvote
olroux
By olroux (Dec 20, 2011)

I have the same impression: DPreview seems to snob Samsung camera... By the way, this review is quite disapointing in many way :-(

1 upvote
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Dec 20, 2011)

Samsung is a global "winner" in terms of cell phones or even tablet computers. But the camera crowd won't treat it as a contender. If the firm buys the Olympus trademarks, will the reviewers treat its cameras any differently?

1 upvote
Menneisyys
By Menneisyys (Dec 21, 2011)

"Samsung is a global "winner" in terms of cell phones or even tablet computers. But the camera crowd won't treat it as a contender."

But they do! In this very section (reader comments), there have been several mentions of the NX200.

0 upvotes
migus
By migus (Dec 21, 2011)

True, Samsung commands little respect in the photo circles, despite its EX and NX series. Also its phone cams are reputed to be quite good, w/ little recognition. Its AMOLED phones and tablets are 2nd to none (hear Apple), but how are its cameras when it comes to IQ? Most think Samsung as a cheap 'me-too' from Koreea (but then Apple hasn't invented anything either)...

I also thought the same, till i tried an NX100 this year. I bought one for a friend, shot w/ it for a few days... then it grew on me till i decided to keep it. Now i perceive Samsung differently. With respect.

0 upvotes
JWest
By JWest (Dec 21, 2011)

I think Samsung have to take at least some of the blame for this. My friends have been pretty impressed with my new Samsung NX100. But when they looked into buying one for themselves, they found none of the shops stocked it, even many online retailers didn't sell it, and hardly any sites had reviews for it. This worried them, and they asked me questions like "don't most people prefer the Sony cameras?"

Samsung have made a brilliant range of mirrorless cameras, and an even greater range of lenses to go with them, but so far they've failed miserably in the marketing department.

0 upvotes
Tanngrisnir3
By Tanngrisnir3 (Dec 20, 2011)

Well, the Leica worshipers are here. Time to fold up the tents and move the show down the road.

4 upvotes
Marty4650
By Marty4650 (Dec 20, 2011)

Given the fact that very few cameras have identical features and capabilities, you could make a case for 40 different "product categories" if you tried hard enough.

In the practical world, people see broad categories based on price and features. The best example might be that there is very little confusion about "entry level DSLR".... "Midrange DSLR".... and ""Semipro DSLRs." The same standards could be applied to MILC cameras too.

Generally speaking most people realize that the Olympus EPM1, Panasonic GF3, Sony NEX C3, Nikon J1 and Pentax Q are in the bottom tier, and the Olympus EP3, Sony NEX 7, and Panasonic GH2 are in the top. It's the ones in the middle that are difficult to categorize because the feature set can defy traditional categorization.

Example: the mid model Olympus EPL3 has a tilt screen that the top model EP3 lacks. And the mid level Sony NEX 5N has a touch screen that the top model NEX7 lacks.

So, categorizing these cameras can be a difficult and thankless task..

9 upvotes
micahmedia
By micahmedia (Feb 29, 2012)

Thankless...and maybe bootless.

0 upvotes
Klimt z
By Klimt z (Dec 20, 2011)

Thanks, This line of cameras has always confused me. You have organized them logically.
As far as the who buys what categories, I think most of us here, have several cameras for various purposes.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
BG_CX3_DPREVIEW
By BG_CX3_DPREVIEW (Dec 20, 2011)

The others, should we read this as, those who do not sponsor us?

First of all ,congrats in trying to set up for the first time some kind of category system for mirrorless, this group seems to grow and grow, i wonder which types are sold the most, so we could anaylse why it grows, is it because it looks like a PxS, hence gaining PxS members, or, is it because it has superb Q in a small body, and winning DSLR members?

I agree the others are a class on their own, so can we expect a new review for those? For instance; the GXR+M vs a Leica, a GH2 vs some video cameras?

1 upvote
iudex
By iudex (Dec 20, 2011)

The answer is, that the CSC segment gains buyers from both sides, p&s, as well as SLR owners. The former hoping to get the SLR picture quality and the latter looking for something smaller and more portable than a DSLR. It´s always a compromise between picture quality, speed and size. Once the buyer understands this he will be satisfied.

2 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (Dec 20, 2011)

Ill tell you what I am looking for. A compact system camera that focusses on the sensor. As a side benefit, it would be nice to use my Pentax K lenses and M42 lenses. I think it should be APS-C. m43 I think is somewhat too small and FF too large. A good electronic view finder also is more or less a requirement.

Now - where do I com from? I have Pentax DSLR and I have a Canon G10, i.e. a slightly larger and more serious compact. I hope to get a camera that is nearly as portable as G10 and nearly as good as my DSLR and can take optional lenses.

If it works out well, both my other options might get almost retired. A pity for the K-5 though ... and I really like my G10. So ... whi knows ...

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Dec 20, 2011)

Roland: have you considered the X series by Fuji? I am a Pentax DSLR owner, but I think that one day when I get tired of carrying the DSLR I will buy something like that. The X10 looks like an ideal compromise between size and image quality (and of course money). If money was no problem, then the X100 might do the job.
However now I am in a phase of collecting lenses for my Pentax (so that I can sell it all one day :-) So when your K-5 and lenses retire, let me know. ;-)

Comment edited 11 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Roland Karlsson
By Roland Karlsson (Dec 20, 2011)

Ok - nice with such a roundup. As have been seen by other posters its not easy to categorize things. It would be nice to have a table where different features are ticked off to see how the cameras compare. Then you could see whats the difference between the categories. Or maybe see that the categories are bogus. I dont know.

As a potential mirrorless system camera buyer for my Pentax lenses, I do appreciate it though. Hmmm ... but in this case only really the APS-C cameras are interesting; Sony and Samsung that is.

2 upvotes
HDaRt
By HDaRt (Dec 20, 2011)

This 'Round Up' is yet another attempt to program site users to see things as DPR does. Categorization is a continuing thread in DPR-land and they do that well, even when they exclude consideration as to what actual photographers and/or digital artists are using as tools.

I have always liked the DPR camera reviews, however, the never ending need to spew drivel articles like this one shows the glaring lack of vision and competence at DPR.

Exactly what is substantive about this article? Nothing. Then again, if you are even vaguely familiar with photography you can diss this is garbage. If you are new to photography, read Popular Photography.

Comment edited 42 seconds after posting
7 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Dec 20, 2011)

Realize Chrismtas time is comming and for someone buying a camera (e.g for someone else) it is a good guide, short enough, yet informative. And also for experienced photographers who are not familiar with this new category it´s a good introduction.

8 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Dec 20, 2011)

Group reviews make perfect sense. Buyers can't possibly research or remember individual reviews for a dozen different products. Reviews are more economical and rational when there are apples to apples comparisons. Of course, the final choice often boils down to price and fondness for a certain design.

1 upvote
unknown member
By (unknown member) (Dec 20, 2011)

I am sometimes baffled and left wondering who is driving the bus at DPR. Look at the photos above. All display a really shallow DOF to accentuate the cameras, even the one under "Beginner's Cameras". I am convinced of one thing - you guys do not shoot moving subjects .... EVER. I am also convinced that you have one notion of "Enthusiast" and that you also apply that notion to beginners. In the same way a monkey is fascinated by shiny objects you seem fixated on things like pixel-count and wine bottles. Oh, and who is doing the math at DPR?

I do have to give you credit for good up-to-the-minute news articles.

1 upvote
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Dec 20, 2011)

How would you rank and score the respective cameras? What's your math?
[...Silence...]
Yeah, I though so. Just another grumpy ape.

1 upvote
PicOne
By PicOne (Dec 20, 2011)

Not sure about this statement: "intermediate class... are aimed at people who have perhaps already owned a enthusiast compact or a DSLR and want a more capable camera." I could agree on mention of enthusiast compact, but to blanket indicate that the Intermediate level of these mirrorless cameras are more capable than DSLRs..?

2 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (Dec 20, 2011)

It is puzzling. Why would a DSLR owner want a crippled compact camera for casual photos? At least with P&S cameras the DOF is so great that everything is in focus. Using essentially the same focus system as P&S cameras in a camera with a large sensor forces you back to the DSLR for family photos of the kids, which was the reason you wanted a compact camera in the first place.
For the most part these mirrorless cameras are for the same people who enjoyed shooting with manual focus film cameras and are willing to live with the same limitations. Nothing wrong with that, but I don't think that fits for most DSLR owners.

Comment edited 46 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
RPJG
By RPJG (Dec 20, 2011)

Of course. Anyone who owns a DSLR *always* wants to lug it around, and *always* wants shallow DOF or rapid FPS or low-light capability, etc.

Or maybe, just maybe, he/she sometimes just wants nice quality images from a convenient package.

The camera you have with you, etc.

10 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Dec 20, 2011)

Sorry, I meant the Mirrorless camera would be more capable because it's newer, not because they're more capable than DSLRs. No-one in the office had interpreted the sentence that way but I see it's ambiguous so have tried to clarify it.

0 upvotes
JWest
By JWest (Dec 21, 2011)

@BackInTheGame - I bought my SLR for "photos of the kids"? I didn't even know I had any kids! Could you put me in touch with the mother, please?

1 upvote
AnHund
By AnHund (Dec 20, 2011)

It is absolutely a mistake to think that J1/V1 is aimed at beginners only. It can be used by beginners, but it is also aimed at intermediate to advanced users as a second camera.

The statement that the J1/V1 price is "significantly higher than 4/3 cameras" is completely wrong.

Here in DK the price of the E-P3 with the double kit zoom is about 200 Euros more expensive than the J1.

If you compare it to the V1 you have to add a view finder which again makes the E-P3 more expensive than the corresponding V1.

6 upvotes
jeffharris
By jeffharris (Dec 20, 2011)

The GH2 is "a pretty capable stills camera in its own right"?

Pretty capable? That's a pretty funny quote, since it's the best stills camera of all the Micro Four Thirds cameras to date. It's very high quality video is a bonus feature, not it's primary with stills tossed in, just because.

How about a little mention of the multi-aspect ratio sensor, which really is one of it's primary features and separates the GH2 from the rest of the M4/3 line-up.

Quick, if a bit rough, description: it's an 18MP "oversized" sensor that adjusts the area of the sensor that is used for shooting different aspect ratios (4:3, 3:2, 16:9, 1:1). It maximizes final image resolution with this technique, rather than cropping a full-sensor image and losing resolution to simulate differing aspect ratios.

Good and informative article! Thanks.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
11 upvotes
PicOne
By PicOne (Dec 20, 2011)

Of course it crops to provide those aspect ratios.. otherwise you would be able to get a 4976 x 3456 image as an option, but you can't. It's an 18.3mp sensor that gives you up to 16mp result. Then again, perhaps there's a raw converter that can get you the whole sensor's image?

0 upvotes
fcast
By fcast (Dec 20, 2011)

No, PicOne, it doesn't crop: it uses different areas of the sensor, optimizing aspect ratios inside lens coverage

3 upvotes
Jerodequin
By Jerodequin (Dec 20, 2011)

I agree here, it seems rather odd to call it a 'specialist camera' - so it has amazing video features... true, but as you say, it's also the best performing M4/3 camera as well as delivering the best overall image quality - and the multi-aspect sensor is all about stills, not video.

Odd, odd, odd!

1 upvote
PicOne
By PicOne (Dec 20, 2011)

fcast.. I think its semantics.. what do you think a 18.3mp sensor that yields a 16mp image is doing. I would refer to this as cropping.

4 upvotes
Steen Bay
By Steen Bay (Dec 20, 2011)

Resolution is only maximized for the 4:3, 3:2 and 16:9 aspect ratios. 1:1 is (unfortunately) just a 11.9mp crop from the 15.9mp 4:3 image.

0 upvotes
Fois Giovanni
By Fois Giovanni (Dec 20, 2011)

We say that Lumix GH 2 doesn´t crop because the sensor corners goes beyond the resolution circle of the lens, this is the reason why no format selection give you 18 MPixels. The others use a sensor inside the resolution circle of the lens and get diferent aspect ratios by cropping. I hope someday Panasonic give the option to save the entire 18 MPixels data and let me do the crop. If I have blue sky on the upper corners and grey asphalt on the botom corners, I would have no concerns about CA, distortion, blure or vignetting... Could even be interesting pictures...

1 upvote
oWarchild
By oWarchild (Dec 20, 2011)

Great article! It may not be perfect but it's the best attempt I've seen to categorise current mirrorless trends.
Even though I understand why you putted the Nikon V1 on the Specialist category I agree with other commentators it should be in the beginners as it's marketed that way, even if pricey.
Anyway congratulations R Butler!

2 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Dec 20, 2011)

Or the Nikon 1 can be divided into two categories: the J1 being aimed at beginners, whereas the V1 can be put in the middle (EVF, more features).

0 upvotes
PenFTGuy
By PenFTGuy (Dec 20, 2011)

Thank you for the time and effort that you have put into making a list of the various mirrorless ILCs. AFIK the perfect person is not on this earth and we can't please everyone. I purchased the E-P3 simply because I am an Olympus Pen lover.

Oops, I goofed some of the mirrorless cameras are not ILCs. Oh well!

0 upvotes
Paulo Ferreira
By Paulo Ferreira (Dec 20, 2011)

Nikon J1 and V1 in "specialist"? This makes dpreview ranking "not so special" apart their "special" relationship with you know what 2 brands. Had Canon made a mirrorless camera, any camera, (where is it by the way Canon) it would also be "special" too!

1 upvote
rishi o'
By rishi o' (Dec 20, 2011)

I felt the article did a good job of simplifying the array of choices we have in mirrorless cameras for those looking to buy one - but the categorization doesn't really work perfectly. Some of these cameras can go in more than one category. The NEX 7 could be considered a hybrid camera. The GH2 could be considered an enthusiast. The Nikon J1 could be considered beginner.

1 upvote
kevinschoenmakers
By kevinschoenmakers (Dec 20, 2011)

Whatever categorisation one would choose, there'd always be people arguing the opposite.

1 upvote
tominhk
By tominhk (Dec 20, 2011)

I am a soccer dad, have a Canon 20D and LX5.
Problems with the 20D is the size and therefore less likely to have with me, whilst the LX5 focusing in low light is not great.
While the Nikon 1 system is reported as the best in continuous AF, but is not so good in low light, does this mean I need to wait for the next generation?

0 upvotes
Magnus W
By Magnus W (Dec 20, 2011)

Yes, you should wait for other mirrorless cameras with large sensors to get faster AF.

1 upvote
pixelesque
By pixelesque (Dec 20, 2011)

Nah, using the center focus point is stellar in low light. I only get noticeable hunting when using the "auto area", and to a lesser extent the "subject tracking".

The upcoming fast primes will be key for low-light sports shooting.

1 upvote
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Dec 20, 2011)

The S100 may be worth a soccer dad's look-see. The trouble is, though, all those scrimages held near dusk on unlighted fields. My suspicion is that the players must be very close, to allow maximum aperture, or the shutter speed and focus response will be too slow.

0 upvotes
jorepuusa
By jorepuusa (Dec 20, 2011)

Lots of cameras, lots of comments about those cameras.
But the main thing is missing. The visual quality of pictures taken by dpreview staffers is bad! Pictures are sadly amateurish, composition is nonexistence and there is no story in the pics.
World leading site should have pleasing pictures of people holding cameras but it does not.
But neither do other sites. It is a saddening truth that sites writing about cameras use pictures that are of very low visual standard.
Now what does this mean?
It means that people who write these laughable comments about how wrong tests or roundups are, do not understand about pictures at all cause never are the pictures estimated in these sites. So the only thing that matters are the knobs and pixels and those have nothing to do with pictures.
Photography is really dying. This article and its comments are one proof about it.

5 upvotes
Austrian
By Austrian (Dec 20, 2011)

I disagree completly. What do you want ? The best FREE information for photogs worldwide, the most spontaneous and informative forums worldwide (Reality) and also testshots which can compete with people , who spend her whole time to take photos and not to test cameras. I dont understand ungrateful snobs like you !.

19 upvotes
Gao Gao
By Gao Gao (Dec 20, 2011)

This site is focused on helping photographers to find the suitable tool, not to teach or inspire photographic work. Pictures without much substance in photographic sense is actually preferred, since interesting photo content will bias the opinion on equipment.

11 upvotes
TakisL
By TakisL (Dec 20, 2011)

You are absulutely right. The dpreview staff is very good in laboratory testing but they don't know photography...

2 upvotes
cdleon
By cdleon (Dec 20, 2011)

Amen to that!

0 upvotes
oWarchild
By oWarchild (Dec 20, 2011)

For composition and story I think you are better served by websites like Luminous Landscape. I think DPreview does an amazing job at what they aim. Objective and comprehensive information about photographic tools.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
11 upvotes
Michael Berg
By Michael Berg (Dec 20, 2011)

What a subjective and irrelevant comment.

We're reviewing the cameras, not the photographers.

0 upvotes
HaiderAfridi
By HaiderAfridi (Dec 20, 2011)

I think DPreview soes an excellent job. Whenever I want to buy a camera or find out what the State of the art is with regards to equipment, I come to this site.

Great reviews and excellent forums outweigh criticisms of the quality of photographs.

1 upvote
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Dec 20, 2011)

whatever...dpreview has been doing this for years.
i even think their sample galleries is awesome in which you could easily see limitations of each camera. artists get around limitations to produce well thought art.

1 upvote
Chillbert
By Chillbert (Dec 21, 2011)

DPR does some really great - I'd go so far as to say extraordinary - technical reviews which aren't available elsewhere. You can easily find vast troves of sample images on sites like Flickr if you need to evaluate image quality.

0 upvotes
migus
By migus (Dec 21, 2011)

Let's be fair to all these sites: They operate under constraints and time pressure most of us can't imagine - daily stress that can crack the toughest... How would you fare having daily to get/return pack/unpack dozens of products, learn them, hunt for shooting sites and meteo, haul and deploy a bunch of cams on a site, try to shoot with all, set, tune, change... then return and select, PPS, write reviews etc....? I could do it once, perhaps for 2-3 cams, given enough time, space, good weather and resources. That's it. Probably i wouldn't have any time left to dream about composition and art when running on a schedule. You think you can do a better job? Great! Give it it try... Mitch

0 upvotes
jorepuusa
By jorepuusa (Dec 21, 2011)

I am a professional pressphotographer for 37 years.
Make about 4-7 gigs a day.
These pictures are poorly amateurish on any standard. I work also as a picture editor. I´d never buy a picture like these. For some reason people think that good photography is different thing that writing about cameras that take those pictures. It makes a bad site to show this kind of low quality pictures. Words are OK though. If one knows how to photograph, the limitations told by migus are no problem.
For amateurs like people in this thread photography is only pixel peeping about cameras, not really using them.
That can be told about the attitude here, people get angry when bad pictures are criticized.
I´m pretty sure that if this bunch is given a specified gig 99% of these people who seem to know everything about cameras could not bring a decent picture home.

0 upvotes
RPJG
By RPJG (Dec 20, 2011)

Nice roundup!

To add to someone else's similar comment, it would be great to see a similar roundup based on camera size (and maybe price), to help those people looking for a high-quality, reasonably pocketable, smaller-than-DSLR cameras.

Such a roundup might include some of these cameras, plus the LX5, the XZ-1 and the X10. Obviously the MILCs are differentated by their interchangeable lenses, but that might not be a major criteria for the market listed above.

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Dec 20, 2011)

Scroll down on the front page, december 15..
www.dpreview.com/articles/4333175133/buyers-guide-enthusiast-raw-shooting-compact-cameras

0 upvotes
RPJG
By RPJG (Dec 20, 2011)

Yep, I saw that. But that roundup doesn't include any of these MILC cameras, even though someone looking for a smaller-than-DSLR camera that gives good image quality will (probably) be looking across both these segments.

At least, I know I am :-)

0 upvotes
Jonathan F/2
By Jonathan F/2 (Dec 20, 2011)

I don't get how the Nikon J1 gets placed in the specialist camera segment? It's essentially Nikon's entry level mirrorless camera. Not to mention the GH2 is priced far cheaper than the NEX-7 yet the NEX-7 is in the enthusiast section? This whole guide is confusing.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
1 upvote
dscottsatx
By dscottsatx (Dec 20, 2011)

They probably would have done better to classify things as cameras with less complex interfaces, cameras with more complex interfaces, and cameras with really complex interfaces, but that wouldn't help sell cameras nor would it stroke the egos of people buying cameras or whisper into their ears "you don't really want a 'beginner's' camera, do you? People will think you are an inexperienced woman. Buy a camera that will show everyone you know what you're doing."

0 upvotes
Jay Kelbley
By Jay Kelbley (Dec 20, 2011)

Hmmm....
Why no Samsung NX200 in the roundup photo?

It's top in resolution of all of the shipping cameras..

Very much in the running for "best image quality"..

-Jay
(Samsung Electronics)

3 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Dec 20, 2011)

Because it wasn't in the office the day we took the photos - it's out being shot with, so we can draw our own conclusions about IQ.

2 upvotes
DioCanon
By DioCanon (Dec 20, 2011)

why is also the sub 4/3 sized nikon in the fight?

it should go in the compact cameras section along with the pentax!

3 upvotes
iudex
By iudex (Dec 20, 2011)

DioCanon: because it truly is a compact system camera (interechangeable lenses, external flash units, viewfinder...) THe sensor size is not a criteria to decide whether you put a camera into this category.

0 upvotes
shademaster
By shademaster (Dec 20, 2011)

Jay... why don't you send these guys another camera? ;)

1 upvote
jj74e
By jj74e (Dec 20, 2011)

a trivial thing, but why is the nx200 the only one to not have its preview linked in its description?

1 upvote
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Dec 20, 2011)

Fixed

0 upvotes
TClair
By TClair (Dec 20, 2011)

You have the screen size for the Nikon J1 and V1 reversed! The V1 has the 920K screen.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Dec 20, 2011)

I hate tables. Fixed.

0 upvotes
Jacques Gilbert
By Jacques Gilbert (Dec 20, 2011)

I think 90% of the comments can be replaced with this one:

This is a very confusing article. You list a number of cameras, in a well defined category, and place them in groups according to criteria that you explain. But, somehow, you manage to ignore the one I just bought and I have crowned my favorite after extensive research. To add insult to injury, you list cameras that I absolutely despise - again on the strength of my extensive research on the web - as if they were worthy of mention. I cannot understand your motivations, you must either be incompetent (as shown by the errors that I can catch), or bribed by all the companies that have to resort to such shady practices to compete with my favorite brand.

If this is what you wanted to say, please just copy and paste, the rest of us can then save time and skip your comment.

20 upvotes
increments
By increments (Dec 20, 2011)

I think the problems arise precisely because the categories are not well defined. Part of which is because, as stated in the article, the market has not really settled down yet.

There are lots of potential segments, some of which may only contain 1 or 2 cameras.

Perhaps in a few years the categories will be clearer, but now the only true way to band them might be on price.

1 upvote
Fois Giovanni
By Fois Giovanni (Dec 20, 2011)

God Job! If so many people are here discussing about this roundup means that there´s a lot of interest in this area! You get a HIT !!! Now, complete with missing points, give more detais and you´ll get a herd of people visiting your page! Congratulations!

0 upvotes
kev777zero
By kev777zero (Dec 20, 2011)

isn't G3 essentially a GX1 with an EVF? I wonder what GX1 has that G3 doesn't to make it more "enthusiast worthy."

5 upvotes
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (Dec 20, 2011)

1080i is not the maximum movie mode for the GH2. It does 1080p @ 24 FPS and 1080p @ 30 FPS encapsulated in 1080i. Please correct the chart. It is completely misleading.

Thanks for correcting it so quickly. However, you need to change all of them if you change the GH2. Technically the GH2 is the only one that shoots true 1080i. All of the rest of them shoot 1080i/30p PSF.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Dec 20, 2011)

Actually I think the latest Sonys might record true interlaced footage (from 60p) but that's just another of the rabbit holes it didn't make sense to venture too far down.

2 upvotes
Henzapper
By Henzapper (Dec 20, 2011)

On the Specialist cameras chart on the first page, the video capability of the GH2 is shown to be 1080i60 at 17Mbps, but if you're really showing the best video it can offer, shouldn't it be 1080p24 at 24Mbps. Actually, wasn't there a firmware update that brought 1080p30 at 24Mbps? Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure the GH2's screen isn't OLED.

Overall, this is a very informative guide, though I'd still put the GX1 as a competitor to the 5N in the Intermediate category, but then again I'm not exactly sure as to how you categorize these.

1 upvote
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Dec 20, 2011)

The table is an error, sorry about that. I've corrected it.

0 upvotes
Snapshot7
By Snapshot7 (Dec 20, 2011)

I also don't think the Panasonic GH2 should be grouped with the Nikons and Pentax Q.

If anything, the Nikons should be grouped with the BEGINNERS' cameras.

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Dec 20, 2011)

I explain twice why I haven't put the Nikon 1 in Beginners' (Price, sensor size, conceptual differences), as such, the last page is 'other interesting cameras.' I haven't grouped them and compared them, I've chosen to not group them with cameras they aren't directly comparable with.

4 upvotes
DioCanon
By DioCanon (Dec 20, 2011)

I agree,

why is also the sub 4/3 sized nikon in the fight?

it should go in the compact cameras section along with the pentax!

1 upvote
increments
By increments (Dec 20, 2011)

The fact that the Nikon 1s are overpriced doesn't make them special.

The J1 is certainly aimed at beginners (just look at Nikon's marketing). The V1, I don't know, I've never really worked that one out.

Why the smaller sensor size (it still has comparable performance in many areas) should stop them from being on the standard lists, is unclear.

Why is m4/3 comparable to APS-C, but 1" not to m4/3?

1 upvote
carpediem007
By carpediem007 (Dec 20, 2011)

And again, no Ricoh GXR... :-(

More specifically Ricoh GXR with Mount A12

Why???

Comment edited 51 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Dec 20, 2011)

I've had to overlook some borderline cases, such as Leica's M system and Ricoh's GXR because the article would have taken much, much longer. With Leica the cost and manual focus lenses make it much more niche (like the X100, there are unlikely to be people deciding between multiple products - you're either going to buy an M9 or you're not).

Is GXR a Mirrorless camera or a series of large sensor compacts? Either way, trying to explain it and compare a range of modules with varying sensor sizes and fixed focal lengths would have taken several pages on its own.

Would you treat each module separately? Because the focus speed between the 50mm equiv and 28mm equiv are different enough that you can't consider them together. Would you add the mount module?

Comment edited 55 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
carpediem007
By carpediem007 (Dec 20, 2011)

Actually I said that I'm talking about the Mount A12 module specifically.

The GXR with Mount A12 is most definitely a mirrorless camera with an almost endless supply of interchangeable lenses...

Dismissing Leica on price is like reviewing DSLRs but not including Canon 1Dx or Nikon D3s.

I certainly didn't expect a multi-page in-depth review of all the virtues of the GXR but to omit it entirely???

But then again, after re-reading your Sony NEX-5N article, one you call your "pick as the standout camera in this class" although its "lack of lenses available for the system is something of a concern" I'm even more confused... :-(

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Dec 20, 2011)

I take your point about the A12 mount. I didn't include it initially because it didn't make sense on the pages where I found myself writing about AF. Once I separated some of the less obviously categorised cameras off into the last page, I should have slotted it in.

2 upvotes
sroute
By sroute (Dec 20, 2011)

Having now worked with the X100 (rather extensively), the NEX-5N (1600 images, only six with a Sony E mount lens) and the GXR Mount A12, it is clear to me that the GXR with Mount A12 is either an enthusiast or specialist's camera. It has an excellent UI and for me has delivered image quality, at lower ISO sensitivity, that exceeds what I was getting from the NEX or X100 and of course I can use my M mount lenses on the GXR (or NEX) where that wasn't possible with the X100.

Ricoh's decision to eschew the anti-alias filter on the GXR Mount A12 has paid off handsomely. The company appears to be getting ready to release the Mount A12 with the same 16MP sensor the NEX sports, but again without an anti-alias filter.

Hopefully if/when that happens early in the new year, the GXR / Mount A16 won't remain unreviewed much longer.

4 upvotes
Mike Ronesia
By Mike Ronesia (Dec 20, 2011)

GH2 not an Enthusiast and grouped with the J1 as a niche? Also the video transfer rate is now 24MBPS with the new FW.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Dec 20, 2011)

As I understand it, it currently offers 24Mbps at 24p and 23Mbps at 60i, which I tried to sum-up as '1080i60 or 1080p24 at bitrates of around 24Mbps.'

0 upvotes
Mike Ronesia
By Mike Ronesia (Dec 20, 2011)

Panasonic has released its promised firmware update for the DMC-GH2, enabling 24Mbps video to be captured at 1080p30 ( From your site.)

On the first page the info is wrong at 17Mbps

Not that it matters but I would take the GH2 for stills over the GX1, but you make it sound like photos are an afterthought. I se it as the best enthusiast camera of the whole bunch.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Dec 20, 2011)

It's the 30p distinction I'd missed. I've corrected that.

The point is that the GH2 and GX1 are rather different cameras, so it doesn't make sense to compare them. The GX1 is more of a direct competitor to the E-P3 and NEX-7 than the GH2.

0 upvotes
Mike Ronesia
By Mike Ronesia (Dec 20, 2011)

We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think the Pen belongs in that category at all and to dis the GH2 just because it has better video seems wrong. Can you tell I have one. ;) I didn't buy it for video either, I bought it because it's the best M4/3's stills camera on the market. It just looks like you didn't want to put two Panasonic's in the enthusiast category even though they both fit and threw Oly a bone. Nothing against the oly but with the aging sensor and no viewfinder it just doesn't make the cut in my mind.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Dec 20, 2011)

Nobody (and certainly no corporate entity) gets thrown a bone, I just believe the NEX-7/GX1/E-P3 group makes more sense than a NEX-7/GH2/GX1. I'm not dissing the GH2 for being better at video, I just think its appeal isn't to quite the same audience (or, at least, not all of it).

1 upvote
Mike Ronesia
By Mike Ronesia (Dec 20, 2011)

I didn't mean to imply you were doing anything unethical. Just that maybe you were looking for a mix of venders in each category for balance. I know this stuff can be tough and it's even harder with instant feedback from the rabid masses so please forgive me if I cam across that way. It just seems that 90% of the GH2 owners bought it to take pictures and not video because of the features and tech. I know I did. Thanks for correcting the specs and have a good evening and Merry Christmas.

0 upvotes
increments
By increments (Dec 20, 2011)

Possibly, a large body mirrorless section would have made sense for the GH2, unfortunately there's only really Samsung and Panasonic that make these at the moment.

0 upvotes
ivey3721
By ivey3721 (Dec 20, 2011)

I second Mike.
To me, NEX-5/GX1/E-P3 group makes more sense than NEX-7/GX1/E-P3. Did Panasonic claim that GX1 compete against NEX5, not NEX7?

0 upvotes
SF Photo Gal
By SF Photo Gal (Dec 20, 2011)

Not sure I quite got the "Specialist" category. Seems like those all could be placed in the other categories.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Dec 20, 2011)

They're the cameras that don't fit perfectly into other categories. You could argue most of them into the other groups but they'd be an odd fit and end up being more contentious with no real benefit.

'I'm only interested in video, how can you compare the EP-3...'

2 upvotes
increments
By increments (Dec 20, 2011)

I agree that something like Miscellaneous might have been more apt

0 upvotes
ivey3721
By ivey3721 (Dec 20, 2011)

I bought my GH2 for its high quality still picture, not just for video. It is interesting that now GH2 is in the same group as Pentax Q.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 429
123