Francis Sawyer: Apple thinks you're stupid enough to buy a phone with no headphone jack. Nobody should reward that offense with his money, regardless of what kind of camera the phone has.
Not to mention that 95 percent of computer users don't have any apparent way to get the pictures from their iPhone onto their computer. Or that the ever-more-pathetic iPhone battery will be long dead before you're done taking pictures.
Thanks to Jony Ive, we're going to be living in a "post-Apple" world soon. When even Apple adherents start fleeing your platform, you suck as a designer.
That's a super relevant comment. Good job.
Jacques Cornell: I wish DPR would define "dual camera". Are we talking about two sensor+lens units on the back of the phone, or just one sensor with two lenses or focal lengths?
I was starting to so I wanted to stop.
Well dual-cam/camera is the industry term being used for the new feature so I'm not sure what you think DPR should call it. But arguing over semantics on the internet is silly, so the answer is that dual cam refers to using two cameras where you previously would use one to increase image quality and/or provide some kind of optical zooming.
Almost all smartphones have two cameras, it is logical to assume that since dual-cam is a brand new feature they must be referring to something other than the front and back cameras totaling two. To be fair, if English is not your primary language the phrasing may be more confusing to you.
Jacques... do you really say camera to refer to just the sensor or just lens?
tecnoworld: HAHA, 91%. NX1 came 2 years ago, with faster burst, 40% more MP, BSI sensor, much better video and scored 87%.
Oh, yes, it was just a Samsung.
We're back at my not working for DPR. Perhaps you should ask them instead of speculating.
Yeah. No emotion in that post. Sure. That must be why you're fighting so hard for justice for an inanimate object produced by a faceless corporation.
The only reason why the NX1 isn't a small step in Samsung's roadmap is that Samsung killed it.
If the NX1 were better it would have received a higher number.
Yeah. Samsung killed its cameras because the NX1 scored less than a camera which wasn't even released. Lots of cameras score the same or less than the NX1 and they are still around.
Face it, you;'re upset that you can't point to a higher number when saying the D500 sucks.
Its the same fanboy absolutism you see in smartphones and gaming consoles.
I never said it wasn't good, just that its a dead system and Samsung kicked its cameras to the curb because not enough people wanted them. You don't want Justice, you just want a shiny number to point at and say "look guys, my camera is better".
Then you would be emotionally invested in your Casio NX1.
I don't have a Nikon and don't care about them, but you guys sound emotionally invested in your Samsungs. Sucks that they kicked your cameras to the curb. At least they threw you a bone with that paltry firmware update.
It should have gotten a 50% since in the future cameras will be twice as good.
I don't work for DPR so I don't know why it got the score it did. I don't really care either because I'm capable of reading a review and deciding for myself what I think its total value is and whether its worth it for me to buy. But if you tie your self-esteem to the % of a camera reviewed two years ago when compared to a camera reviewed today it might bother you.
The conclusion is that the NX1 uses a dead mount because Samsung's cameras weren't turning enough of a profit to matter. There will be no NX2.
The % value has to be based on current cameras, not past cameras.
The mammoths are extinct, the elephants are not.
And for all intents and purposes a dead system.
Utterlyotter: Well, the Canons are indubitably the redheaded stepchildren of the bunch...
If Canon doesn't care about their M cameras, why should we?