tabloid: Tools of the Trade.
A photographer went to a socialite party in New York.As he entered the front door, the host said "I love your pictures….they're wonderful, you must have a fantastic camera".He said nothing until dinner was finished, then he said "That was a wonderful dinner, you must have a terrific stove".
The moral of the story is obvious.So to all the people who are going to 'knock' Dp and every camera that they test….remember, good photography is down to you, and not the camera.
@KarlwunschI'm not a native english speaker and with my last sentence I meant to say that it could be you happened to have certain gear available or not available to you at a specific situation, so not a planned gig however because than you purposely bring your gear!
@ karlwunsch.No you are wrong, the vast majority of photography professionals DON'T use the best kit possible!Actually they don't upgrade as often as amateur gearheads!Upgrading costs money and is not commercially viable because most of the time there's just little to gain IQ wise. It could change workflow etc. etc.Only professionals who get "sponsored" might have the latest and greatest more often.If I had to consider to always have the best IQ I'd have new gear at least every half year.Probably you mean by best, 35mm camera's, but the ultimate best IQ isn't 35mm.Then again the best IQ could be with just a smartphone or 1" camera. It just depends on the situation.
G1Houston: Does it still show banding when the Panasonic 20/1.7 is used at high ISO? Could someone please check to see if they have finally go this issue under control?
Why is this Olympus' problem? has panasonic incorporated CA correction for Olympus lenses?They are competitors within the same format. I don't think Olympus is keen on you buying a Panasonic 20mm, they'd rather have you buy an Olympus 25mm F1.8.I agree it would be nice if they fixed it, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
Sdaniella: Powershot G-series dcams initially had larger pixels (larger than 3um), albeit with lower res fewer pixels, and over time, progressively got smaller pixels, sub-3um pixels, and then finally, sub-2um pixels, as the pursuit of more mp for higher res was achieved, and incremental improvements for IQ in lo-light at hi-ISOs
now, that the mp 'war' has cooled off for dcams, and interest has waned as smartphones have included its mp war (encroaching on smaller sensor dcam territory)
offering larger sensor in small dcam bodies (and smartphones, too) is much welcome, and long overdue:
it's nice to see Powershot G-series also returning to larger pixels, larger than 3um pixels for G1X-series, and larger than 2um pixels for G-series (G7X, even though this is more an S-series form factor model, like the S120)
sub-2um pixel dcams can remain reserved for super-zooms, sub-3um for medium zooms, which could mean many more short-zoom or prime lens models with sub-4um pixel sensors for fixed lens dcams
@Sdaniella This camera is major flawed. It has the same sensor as the RX100 yet Canon manages to fully destroy it's capabilities in video AND stills.The camera is veeeery slow in handling and focussing though has a better reach and remain brighter at most FL than the RX but with a soft result, it has no evf or possibility to add an external one.I was in the marked for a small compact but decided on GM1 (changing lenses was my deciding factor) but RX100III and G7X were competitors the G7X looses out bigtime imo to the RX100III.The guys at "thecamerastore" seem to agree on the same points.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_E6Mxxe_kG4
Marc J: I am horribly appalled by the marketing of this thing, and by the accompanying change in the marketing of the whole PEN line. I was fairly proud of my E-PL5, but with the current marketing, I should feel embarrassed to ever pull it out. What happened to photography? Anyone want to tell me that those who like to match their cameras with their purses have any clue of, say, sensor size? Or of a difference between lenses? And that they actually want to know about it?
Only wannabees would be embarrased at what they use.Camera's are tools and there's almost always a flavour for everybody. I think you'd better buy a Canon or Nikon and join the lemmings :-).
My personal opinion is that forum members lay much to much emphasis on the dislike of how an LCD folds (selfy mode) there's much more to this camera. And yes it helps if more people buy it if that's obtained by marketing at the youngsters, more power to Olympus.
So get over you inferiority complex and look at the total package!
richteed: Apart from the control dial, it's not really offering me much more than my epl-3, which I love. Looks like I'll be waiting for the epl-8 or maybe getting a secondhand omd5. C'mon Olympus ... It's high time you started innovating again or I might just jump ship to panasonic or Sony.
To be honest, The E-PL7 is way way better than an E-PL3, especially in your case, richteed. It has way faster and better AF, the sensor is a few notches up so IQ quality will be much better, it has WiFi, much better LCD screen, better handling (controls). The E-PL5 would already be a step up for you but the E-PL7 is a huge step up for you.
pacnwhobbyist: Will someone please explain, objectively, why this camera is a better buy than the OMD-EM10? I just don't see the point.
That's purely personal preference, like everything really is. The E-PL7 has a lower profile is a little smaller which could matter. But for someone else a built in flash and EVF could be important, so to each his/her own.
Chris62: 5100? Why? We know the Nikon 5100.The cameras names are horrible very often repeated.
Is it impossible to use unique names?
they are unique, its Nikon D5100 and Sony a5100.
agentlossing: BOO. Tamron, you can do better than that, since you seem to be finally noticing M4/3 exists why not try something we don't already have available from first-party manufacturers?
I agree to some extend, if they made it moisture proof, like the 28-300 for 35mm sensors, than it would have been worth the price too.
ChrisPercival: What lens was used for the studio scene test?
I'd use the 60mm Macro since it's in the same ballpark as the 50mm with regards to sharpness.
hajagosb: I wouldn't even consider these CX Nikons not just because they are overpriced, but why can't they sell the body only? I'm not paying for any kit including a bad zoom.
@retro76Don't spread misinformation.I wouldn't say the NEX and E-M5 are lightyears ahead but they do have noticible better IQ than Nikon 1. The difference in IQ is bigger between those then the diff between E-M5 and Fuji Trans-X sensors.
misolo: It's almost the same size as the GM1 (the S2 is a couple of mm larger), but has one less stop of light (compact zoom has same f-number, sensor has about half the area). The S2 will probably have to drop its price a little bit from the MSRP...
It's mor probably 1,5 to 2 stops.
Dirk Nuary: So much money for that 1 inch ILC? Nooooo... So many APSC ILC that give you cheaper yet better image.
I'm not a 1" fan but I wonder where you find that cheaper APS-C ILC's. You mean the Sony outdated models or old models from Samsung? If compared like for like at release prices than APS-C is more expensive. But I wouldn't bother with both, for me m43 is the sweet spot.
Calistoga_Guy: When the A77 was released years ago it was such a let down. Does so much, but that image sensor was and is just worthless to this event shooter that is now just starting to shoot weddings. So I moved on to the Fuji X100 watching and waiting for the next big thing. That next big thing is the Sony A7S. This mark 2, Sure the auto focus is great, and it is packed with features, but 24MP in APS-C means worthless for night sports, weddings, night events, etc. I'm not into the tricks like down sizing the image. dSLRs like this need better image sensors for high ISO work. Another camera to skip. For those shooting landscapes, and daytime sports, and anything that will allow you to shoot from base ISO to say ISO 800, this camera seems awesome.
Ben O Connor: How come a "fujisensor" cam can be rated higher than micro 43 cam. in spesific areas.
There is the ultimate art director of M43 ; Olympus E-M1There is the amazing movie director of M43; Panasonic GH-3
And does fuji better than those two in spesific areas such as ... almost all areas ? COME ON !!
Well APS-C is not necessarily better because it's bigger.IMO the X-T1 has a terrible user interface. The analog knobs are more a hindrance than a benefit.For Me the E-M1 is king. The very lttle difference in IQ is negligible.
fdfgdfgdgf: Very old news,good product for 5 years ago slow lens,no IBIS small sensori am getting sleepy from Nikon,sold the bulky DSLR
So what, it's an ILC?ILC doesn't have dedicated slow lenses per definition. It's not the domain of APS-C and 35mmFF only.There are Fuji and Panasonic with F1.2 lenses, not slow in my book, and then there's Voightlander for mFT F0.95 which is extremely fast.
beavertown: 900 buck for this cheap crap???
@beavertownQuiet right I have a 14-150 mFT lens that is half the price, and is similarly specced.
JKP: The connector looks a bit flimsy.
Yeah, that flash shoe better be robust
yonsarh: Sony A6000 vs Nikon 1 V3 which one will you choose ?
@hippo84, how come you think A6000 is faster than E-M1(0)Have you done a comparison of them in real life.
Jon Ingram: The reviewer is dead-wrong regarding "philosophical similarities" between the Df and the x-t1. First, the Df system is huge compared to the Fuji system. Second, Nikon forced a retro concept into their digital camera system. Fuji, on the other hand, has spent years developing their system with manual controls from the ground up, with enthusiast photographers in mind. Sure, at first glance, they are both are retro-looking expensive cameras, but that is where the similarities end. Philosophically, Nikon was targeting a fad; they were aiming for people who were willing to pay a premium simply for the look and feel of the camera. Fuji, on the other hand, are targeting enthusiast photographers, who value function just as much (or more) than the looks of the camera.
@KonstantinosK. Hooray for you.I'm in photography since 1976 and have seen the change from MF to AF and the change from all manual to program modes en using buttons iso all dials. Yes it was and is progress to be able to adjust settings with the camera in your face.With the X-T1 you get a camera with two locking dials ... WTF were they thinking.. back to the seventies or what.Retro looks ok, but retro functionallity? So you can see part of the settings when the camera is off, but does it make it that more ergonomic, I'd say, hell no.