joe6pack: EX-10:Weight (inc. batteries) 384 g (0.85 lb / 13.55 oz)Dimensions 120 x 68 x 49 mm (4.72 x 2.67 x 1.91?)
XZ-2:Weight (inc. batteries) 346 g (0.76 lb / 12.20 oz)Dimensions 113 x 65 x 48 mm (4.45 x 2.56 x 1.89?)
XZ-1:Weight (inc batt) • 275g / 9.2oz. (incl. Battery and card)Dimensions 111 x 65 x 42 mm (4.4 x 2.6 x 1.7")
Some how CASIO managed to make the camera even heavier and bigger!
EX-10 has 0.5" larger screen than XZ-2.This is where most of that additional weight coming from.
Let’s not complain about the price now. Sigma just dropped their price on Sigma 200-500mm f/2.8 APO EX DG. It went down from MSRP of $32,000 to very affordable $25,999 and they’ve included hard case, 2x teleconverter, battery pack & charger.
DPReview please correct 1920 x 810 (24 fps) under Videography features in Resolutions
Timmbits: Don't let the f1.8 number fool you! For all you guys who think that f1.8 is a big deal with a 1/2.3" sensor, it is equivalent to only f6.4 on an aps-c sensor camera.
According to the link below, you would need a f0.5 on a 1/2,3" sensor like this one in order to compete with an f1.8 on an aps-c sensor.
And we're not even comparing to FF (which is the more common reference).
Here is a very useful link for everyone in this forum: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm
Anyways, I realize that this is a high-end in the low-end cameras, and these comparisons aren't really relevant to it't target consumer market.
Just putting things into proper perspective here, so we can all understand what we are looking at.
Let me try a different way to explain why f/1.8 is a HUGE deal with any size sensor.
You are shooting ISO 400 test in same conditions and time. You have XZ-10 and D7000 with kit lens (ex. only, use any camera with kit lens, they usually start at 28mm and f/3.5) XZ-10 set @ 26mm at lowest f/1.8 had shutter speed of 1/30s.D7000 set @ 28mm at lowest f/3.5 had to use 1/8s.
I don’t know about you but at 1/30s I will get a sharp picture.On APS-C or even FF sensor shot at 1/8s not only I would have nicely blurred background (remember DoF) but also main subject.
You could use lower shutter speed on camera like XZ-10 to get sharp results because distance from the front of the lens to sensor will be shorter then the same distance on DSLR. When I used 35mm film SLR I learned that for every lens with X (mm) focal length I should use 1/Xs shutter speed to get sharp pictures. Why? 28mm lens was around 28mm in length (1/30s). 300mm lens around 300mm in length (1/250s or 1/500s).
I just love this statement:
•High resolution High pixel density with XGA resolution (1024 x RGB x 768, 2.36 megapixels)
When Sigma tells you their Foveon sensor is 46MP every one is quick to point out that it is only around 15MP, but when it comes down to EVF everyone is happy with 3 times multiplier.
1024 x 768 = 0.79MP and not 2.36MP
Multifot: If i want whole DP-system in my bag, why i should buy 3 camera bodies with lenses?!
You should not. Buy yourself SD1 Merrill and Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM lens and you might have some free space left in your bag.
More information and pictures of DP3 Merrill can be found here:
CameraLabTester: Hello Sigma...
Nice sensor. Really nice.
Now please allow this sensor to meet the other relatives of the clan...
Your other name brand lenses you peddle for other cameras.
Last time I checked you could get the same exact sensor as DP1/2/3 Merrill in SD1 Merrill and use all the Sigma mount lenses you’d like.
tutek: G15 with Fixed LCD, small sensor and only 12 megapixel, , is the canon slept a few years?
…and only 12 megapixel…
If you need very large prints you should look at Nikon D4 that lists at $5,999.95 and not Canon G15. D4 has sensor area that is almost 21 times larger than that in G15 and offers 16.2 megapixels. WHAT? Only 16.2 megapixels!
Sometimes less is more.
CameraLabTester: 1 is the system that Nikon shot themselves in the foot with.
Everytime they release something about 1...
They blast themselves in the foot again... with a shotgun, bazooka, RPGs...
They will soon be a crippled bloody mess if they don't ditch this silly 1 thingy...
Any additional feature you have in your disposal helps you become that much more creative. You are the photographer and camera is your tool. The more tools you have the easier it is to create something new and interesting right out of the camera.
My favorite double exposure technique is photographing same object with one frame being in focus and another slightly out of focus. That soft and dreamy effect it creates reminds me of paintings.It is so much easier and faster to do it on your camera’s LCD screen than in post.It is all about trying new things and in camera double exposure lets me do just that.
sirkhann: How pitty, all these people that call themselves "photographers" are just lusting for 20 fps, endless buffer, 5mm-1000mm/F1.4 zoom lenses.
The cold simple fact is that this little camera costs just as much as a comparable quality lens and weights much less. Still, it will put your precios 5D3 to shame for landscape, making you realize that your $3.5k camera and your $1.5k crappy 16-35/2.8 cound never reach the "already dead DP1m" in image quality, sharp edge to edge.
This camera just screams "landscape", equally good for achitecture or taking great pictures when you want to travel light.
If you cannot feel this camera, then you are a "Facebook" kind of photographer.
It is not the same lens. Only the focal length is.Look at lens specs for DP1M here:http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/dp1-merrill-compact-digital-cameraand for 19mm F2.8 EX DN here:http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/19mm-f28-ex-dnMain difference that I can see right away is lens construction and number of diaphragm blades.Sigma DP1M has 9 elements in 8 groups vs 8 elements in 6 groups on the lens for NEX and m43. DP1M also has 9 diaphragm blades vs 7 on 19mm F2.8 EX DN.
My slight adjustments of contrast and sharpness also increased existing noise even more. Next time I will adjust RAW file vs JPEG. This should give me better control over noise.
Thank you.I have started one night after midnight and played a bit with just the light from underneath. It came up too green. At least I figured out my best composition on my old Apple Quadra 630 MoBo (went to work this day with only couple of hours of sleep) :-).Back to work again after work.This time I used fluorescent from underneath and Cool White Led from right.Still not enough light. Added Warm White Led in front and above MoBo. Better, but not quite.Then I went and got Red Laser Level that draws straight line. During my 15 sec exposure I had to move laser beam back and forth over the mother board to "paint it". FINALLY!Total time on my second night to make it look interesting - about 2 hours.