phazelag: This is interesting. I am guessing this was just a test, but this shot could have been taken closer/wider at f1.8 with much lower ISO and still had the faces in focus.
curious about how a wide angle f/1.8 at ISO6400 cropped to the same FOV would have looked. (probably about the same or worse after the heavy crop)
JJLMD: You're fixation with clicking dials cost me money. I've been using the RX100 and RX100m2 with astonishing results. Both my brother and brother-in-law bought one when they saw the IQ coming out of something they can stuff in their pockets. Because of your persistent criticism of the RX100s as uninvolving, I bought the Olympus XZ-2. Yes, it has clicking dials and the colors were nice but the noise, limited dynamic range, and inferior resolution compelled me to sell it after one outing. Oh, and it's about as big as my RX1R.
With that experience, to see you dwell again on this issue strikes me as petty. The RX100s produce class-leading IQ, are built well, are snappy performers, and allow a lot of creative control even for experienced photographers.
I agree that Richard dwells too much on the clickless issue, but YOU on the other hand are ridiculous for complaining that his comments forced a poor decision on your part.
that is one of the least flattering 70mm equiv portraits I've seen. Was that really at full zoom? Seems very very close to subject for 70mm equiv.
shademaster: Dear Richard, Thanks for the quick and detailed review. But I'm puzzled by the emphasis (again) on the lack of clicks on the lens control dial. It doesn't seem to bother anyone else, and it seems like a very personal issue to get such a high profile on the list of "cons".
Although, I appreciate the colorful approaches you take with the english on the issue of the click-less wheel. "vague and unengaging" has now become "somewhat distancing and inert" :)
Dear Richard, Thanks for the quick and detailed review. But I'm puzzled by the emphasis (again) on the lack of clicks on the lens control dial. It doesn't seem to bother anyone else, and it seems like a very personal issue to get such a high profile on the list of "cons".
viking79: Now we know when the 16-50mm PZ is coming, as a kit with the NX3000. Was wondering where that lens was.
Wish they offered NX300 as a kit with the PZ. I got one a couple of weeks ago from Adorama for $400 with ANOTHER 20-50 (what to do with *this* one?). With a PZ at a stand-alone sticker price of $350, that would make it $750 for the combo :(. Maybe I'll send the 300 back and live with the 3000. It may outperform the 300, anyway. Who knows?
ShutterNot: Having to use an add-on EVF is a real pain in the a**. I bought the Panasonic GF1 with that add on when it first came out. That thing sticking out on top just doesn't work for me. I am a BIG fan of the PowerShot PRO 1 which I still have and use occasionally - and I am still waiting for it's modern replacement from Canon. I mostly use my Fuji X100 now, but would prefer Canon color rendition in that package. What is CANON really saving by not having the EVF built in ?
and why not complain the *Fuji* doesn't make a large sensor zoom with integrated EVF? Not Canon's fault. They can't make all cameras for all people, and I trust the marketing people know what the masses will buy.
by all accounts the VF on the G1X mk i was not so hot, so this seems like a very reasonable tradeoff.
really don't get it. not for soccer moms. not for enthusiasts. not small body for pros. not for face-bookers. who is it for? (I know, I'm a grumpy old man).
alffastar: Oly never made a micro 4/3 lens with 24-120mm equivalent and 2.8-4.0. Even if Oly makes such a lens it will cost more than this camera and will be both bigger and havier, so I am definitely buying this Canon to use it as everyday camera and also travel camera and will use only my primes with my OM-D!
optics sound "ambitious". Hope they hold up to scrutiny. If the lens is reasonable and the AF isn't too bad, I'm in. I've got an NX and had been holding out for Samsung to release something like the Fuji 18-55 f/2.8-f/4. But this guy is SO compact. I can live with the sub-optimal high ISO sensor, if they can give f/3.8 at 120mm equiv.
No pancake for the USA. Three cheers for the "bigger bigger bigger" stereotype.
Mirrorless Crusader: This is nothing special at all. All they did was make a stop-motion video out of long exposures taken at sixty-second intervals so that you see roughly an hour of time elapse per second. Anybody who's rich enough could do that with barely any skill at all.
please don't feed the trolls, you guys...
BarnET: Canon launches the eos m2 just an added WiFi module and minor tweaks. The comes a brand like samsung for Christ's sake with an weather sealed fastfocussing mirrorless powerhouse. With an f2.0-2.8 16-50mm to boot.
Damn I am impressed with samsung in serious mode. This is bound to get some attention.
I think the weather-sealing is on the bright zoom lens only and meant for a future body, not NX30. That's my reading of the press release.
why don't you guys make the horizontal scale also logarithmic like the vertical axis in these "effective aperture" charts? It would emphasize the fact that 24mm equiv is noticeably wider than 28mm and de-emphasize 100mm being bigger than 70mm. 100 would squeeze back in to where 75 is now.
Just a suggestion...
kimchiflower: Samsung ILC = Pentax DSLR:
[x] bodies well-featured and good value[x] some excellent lenses[x] top quality IQ[ ] available at all good quality camera retailers
@Marty, Most people get into NX because of the primes (size and price). They make sense. Sony's don't.
Next up, the 5DmkII
I just surfed over from the MILC poll. Man, these guys here look ginormous.