fdfgdfgdgf: Flat IQ and colorsNikon D3300/5300 outperform it by a leap.
They need to move to APSC, then it will challenge DSLR's
...and your feet smell bad, troll. There!
MustangJoe: So I was at my local Chevy dealer yesterday and noticed that they had a Chevy Spark on the floor. I started shouting "this thing doesn't have 460 horsepower like the Corvette!" and "it can't even carry 2,000 pounds of cargo like the Silverado!" "What a useless vehicle!" I yelled to everyone in the place.
A salesman came over to me and asked me if I ever visited dpreview.com.
"Yes", I answered, "why do you ask?"
"Well, it explains a lot." he mumbled as he walked off to a different corner of the room.
Nice, but thing is that it's not going to compete with the heavyweights. It's not Spark vs Vette. It's not a T5 vs D7100. It can't even (spec wise) compete with Canon's own previous gen cameras. You shouted to that poor salesman for the wrong reason, I'm afraid.
MarshallG: What's with all the complaining? This camera is intended to be Canon's highest volume DSLR. They will stock these at every Wal-Mart, Costco and Target store. This model is intended to compete on a store shelf where price is king. Canon needs to cost down these consumer electronics models annually. That's just the business of entry-level cameras; no point in complaining that it doesn't meet the needs of the serious amateur or pro.
Come again Ben? My name anything to do with this?
BaldCol: Why so many complaints about DIGIC 4? Isn't the main difference between 4 and 5 the speed of processing. At 3fps Digic 4 will be more than able to cope. Why put in what is presumably a more expensive chip for no great benefit?
I see... Well, just don't give up, it'll dawn on you eventually.
I can, here it is (more or less):
kimsch: Well I am happy!
I have a T2I and it is now current again! This means that it must be worth more now ;-)
Come to think of it, that must be the greatest advantage of this camera, keeping previous buyers happy and content!
No no, not at all irrelevant. The query should be: what the heck is DIGIC 4 doing around in 2014? The 6 is here, it should be dead. The cost of producing the 5 should already have paid off and - in fact - be less than what was that of 4 when new. The car analogy makes more sense now?
A Toyota from the 90s would nicely cover most all your today's mobility needs. Entry level, basic equipment. Would you buy one as new today?
A forgotten robot must be stuck in the Canon factory, churning out the same camera for the last 4+ years. At least it was programmed to change name every year or so...
HomoSapiensWannaBe: Fuji should have made the Black X100s available at launch. I would have already bought one if that were true, but now other cameras have my attention, so I probably won't buy one now. Still, it's a great camera made even better (imo) in black.
True, but then there are people, like me, who were waiting for exactly that. A (small?) rise in sales is most probable.
topstuff: Interesting in that it tells us that IQ is not the top priority for people.
It also reveals the truth that people generally look at photography through an iPad or tablet and don't print large anymore.
It also reveals that a large percentage of shooters only really take pictures in undemanding situations, with good light and conditions.
Why else would a MFT camera win? ;)
>It also reveals that a large percentage of shooters only really take pictures in undemanding situations, with good light and conditions.
That's hardly news, really. I could safely guess that at least 95% do that, the other 5% being the enthusiasts, pros etc.
I'm pretty sure M1 will win but I voted for the Sigma because it's the only product that presents something totally new, never ever done before (RX100 did the same but that was last year, so I guess v.2 doesn't count...)
Also, kudos to Pentax for putting up with the heavyweights and win. Stunning feat.
peevee1: "Sony announces A7 and A7R: first full-frame mirrorless ILC cameras"
First of all, Leica M9 was the first full-frame mirrorless ILC camera, long time ago.
That's right. In fact the term mirroless has falsely been assigned only to modern digital cameras. 35mm format actually started life in mirrorless cameras!
They forgot to put a mirror and a pentaprism and the OVF protruding just above the phone screen. Pfft, rubbish...!
Thich Quang Duc died on June 11th, 1963, not 1968. This June was the 50th anniversary.
massimogori: You folks at Dpreview are in perfect position to change the balance. Just restart making reviews at decent pace.
While the article certainly refers to sites like DPR, how your comment has any to do with that?
But you have 4 exclamation marks at the end!!!!
Seriously though, fanboy-ism we encountered as well long before the internet and I think they're meant to live on. As long as there are products and people willing to buy, there will always be a "knowledgeable" person more than willing to give advice. Personally, I believe it all has to do with opinion and how people believe that theirs is the correct one. I can't see how anyone can get past this.
BTW, I'm quite sure it's "cursor" and not "curser". And it's not just my opinion! ;)
The yellow fish is on all three reviews, Olympus, Nikon and now Panasonic! You had a contract or something with this pro? :)
Great reviews all three, BTW.
Gully Foyle: Re-posting an answer of mine from below, why do I think this is a failed product:
1. Because there are others who can do better.2. Because Pentax could do better.3. Because its lifespan measured months (except for Japan, apparently).4. Because hardly a year after announcement it sell for half its initial price.5. Because the nicely build metal body was overwhelmed by funny plastics.6. Because the design belies its enormous capabilities.7. Because it's a genuine idea spoiled by bad execution.8. Because there are SO many things Pentax could have done right and didn't.
And to be clear, I truly admire and love Pentax, a K10D is the camera I've had used the most of all the cameras I had. But as I said, I admire them, not worship them.
Great, personal attacks. Run out of arguments eh?We are talking about a camera and I'm pointing out why I believe it was a failure. If you like it so much, that's great, it's not a bad camera, never said that. But don't pretend it was not a failure because even Pentax doesn't believe you.
leschnyhan: I have a lot of cameras, and only bought the K-01 because it was on clearance --you can currently get a K-01 kit in the US for less than half MSRP. The reviewers were right that this camera has useless autofocus, but I was able to buy several old Pentax manual-focus lenses for very little money. The image quality is very good. This camera uses the same sensor as the more expensive Sony NEX-6, which is similar to the one in the Nikon D7000 and Fujifilm X-M1. It's true this camera is not as compact as other mirrorless models, but once you put it in a small bag with a few lenses, the complete kit is essentially the same overall size as a Sony NEX rig or Fujifilm X-E1 rig. So, if image quality and low price are your priorities, the K-01 is not a bad purchase. With the Pentax FA 77mm f1.8 limited lens, portraits shot with the K-01 are as good as my Canon 7D and 85mm f1.2L -- and that's saying something.
leschnyhan, just wanted to make it clear. Clarified now, thanks.