After seeing several ISO 6400 photos, I think ISO 3200 is probably the max you'd want to use.
That's still incredible for a phone though. I'm a fan. May need to get one for myself.
The photo is keepable if you wanted to.
Doesn't sound like much praise, but it's actually a huge compliment.
They call me Hans: I shutter (no pun intended) to think how much the phone that employs this will cost...
It's shudder. No pun for you!
And iPhones already cost a lot! I think that the entire "smart"phone idea has lost a lot of steam, and the camera is one of the few places where a company can try to differentiate itself.
digiart: I may be wrong but it looks like Apple is yet again copying other companies technology...
Actually, I think they're copying another company's idea. Even if Olympus isn't the first to do it, they should be considered the company who brought the idea back from the dead and popularized the idea once again. Apple hadn't heard of it before, but when they did (because Olympus was in the news...), they thought it was a great idea, and figured out a slightly different method to produce the same thing.
GabrielZ: I think the new APS-C sensor is the one heading for the rumored Fujifilm X-Pro2! Here's hoping, looking forward to that camera a lot, as an X-E2 user myself.
Fuji uses Sony sensors. It's just the colour filter that's Fuji's own design.
PerL: Weight 586 g = combined with a m43 Olympus OM-D E-M1, 497g = 1.080 g
And as comparison:
Nikon 20 1,8G, 357g, combined with a FF Nikon D750, 750g = 1.107 g
"...lightness is supposed to be the main advantage of a smaller sensor system, right?"
Who said that?
I bought my Fuji X100 because it's small and lightweight. I didn't buy my X-Pro1 because it's lighter and smaller than a DSLR.
Petrogel: If this isn't an April's fools day article, then this will be my new tablet-workstation
Meh, I have edited 16 MP RAWs from Fuji cameras on a 2011 11-inch MBA with an i5 of some sort, and Lightroom runs quite well on it. It's not fast, but it's certainly manageable.
I wonder if the performance of this Atom cpu even matches my 3.5 year old MBA?
sderdiarian: Bad timing, DPR, Samsung releases the S6 in literally a couple of days and you use their outgoing model for a comparison? Makes you appear out of touch, which I know you're certainly not, so why?
There's always something new coming soon.
Don't write any reviews, ever. ;)
Toccata47: This article either turns a blind eye or worse, reflects ignorance of phone photography to such a degree that one must question the authors authority on the subject.
There are an array of sites that have this subject well covered. If dpr can't be an authority in this space it should get out rather than erode brand confidence.
One vote for closing down Connect alongside gear shop.
No crybabies allowed.
Cameracist: The sluggish camera startup is not true anymore for Luisa. For Nokia 1520 and 930 there was a complete remake of the Lumia Camera app, which is fast. Try the Denim version for yourselves:)
I have a Nokia 930. Bought it 3 weeks ago. It's not slow at all. Maybe it was, but right now, the app comes up instantly.
Also, the Nokia has a physical shutter button that launches the camera app when pressed. The iPhone is the one that's slow.
NJOceanView: I'm surprised they don't make a true laptop replacement -- huge screen, lots of RAM and more SSD space. It would be great for photographers to use it flat with a sylus for retouching, and would serve as a true alternative to other tablets. But at least it's a true Windows machine for those who like W8.
I'm not sure if this is sarcasm or not, but yeah.......the Surface Pro 3.
Wally Brooks: I have a Surface Pro 3 and use it in the field for offloading images and processing in lightroom. The Surface Pro has either i5 or i7 processors needed for using Photoshop or Lightroom and is a true laptop replacement. The Surface and its Atom processor may not be strong enough to run Lightroom and Photoshop. It would be great at off loading imqges in the field.
Core M has had throttling issues in all the machines I've read early reviews on (e.g. Lenovo Yoga 3 Pro), but that may simply be due to poor design.
I don't know about the new MacBook, but I doubt Apple would have released an all-new, ground-up product design like the Macbook if their machine sucked. Product modifications that don't quite work out (e.g. the first 13" MBP with Retina display)? Sure, but I doubt Apple would release something like the Lenovo Y3P, which is rather slow.
I'll wait for reviews to be released, but I think the SP3 is probably still the machine I'd get.
I wonder how well apps like Lightroom will work on an Intel Atom processor though?
The article does mention Lightroom, but if it's going to choke on an Atom cpu, I'd rather not waste my time trying to make this work for me somehow.
Perhaps it'll be useful for people who simply want to import images from their camera?
KodaChrome25: So what is the difference between this announced SP3 and the one I purchased last summer?
This isn't an SP3?
It's a "Surface 3", or S3.
mick232: As for the RAW compression issue - the same compression algorithm is used in the A99 and other Sony cameras such as the RX1. Not the dpreview review of the A99 nor any other review I am aware of has found this to be an issue when they reviewed the A99.
Now that there is a hype around the issue all over, it suddenly is a big deal even in reviews. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
You know, sometimes DPReview writers probably learn something from their experience in dealing with various types of RAW files, and this experience takes time. You need to develop a feel for a certain type of RAW file before noticing.
You believe that DPReview is being inconsistent in not mentioning the "less malleable" RAW files in previous reviews. I don't think that's fair, because it may have been something this particular reviewer noticed between then and now.
Anyway, I think the A7-II deserves the score it got. It's a good camera, but really doesn't deserve a higher score than it got.
theprehistorian: Am I alone in finding the image quality on offer from this camera wholly inadequate, considering its price? I really don't understand it. I had the X100s for a while, and while I agree it looks funky and feels nice to use, it suffers from hideous lens flare and the files look weird and mushy, even without pixel peeping. It's just a fashion accessory, I'm afraid.
I don't know.
I have the original X100, and love it. My X-Pro1 doesn't give me nearly the same amount of joy. :O
zink: Thanks for the review. I enjoyed it.But 16MP is beginning to look low by contemporary standards is one of your cons. I think you should applaud Fuji for not joining the MP race.
The "MP race" is a bit of a misnomer, because it's not a matter of racing. For most manufacturers, it's simply buying a sensor that's made available to them.
People will move on from the 16 MP sensor when Sony stops selling them to Fuji, and when Panasonic (and Sony?) stop making it for m4/3. They'd be forced to.
Besides, I don't care about an increase in MP if the image quality of a new generation 20+ MP APS-C sensor was better in every way. Sure, you can argue that some would prefer a lower MP version of the same, next generation sensor, but if they don't make it, you can't buy it.
Also, Sony makes a 12 MP sensor for their A7s, and it's not necessarily better than the chip in the A7/A7-II, or A7R at ISOs that most people would use most frequently (say (arbitrarily) ISO 6400 and below), so sensor size isn't everything.
pppp: "But there's currently nothing to touch it in terms of the size/price/image quality balance"
YES, there is the Ricoh GR APS-C !
The key term here is quality "balance".
I don't believe the Ricoh GR wins this contest.
JeanPierre Thibaudeau: Typo mistake on conclusion page/image quality, the word form should be from: I've rarely found myself thinking 'I think this image would benefit form Vivid mode,...
Only seven pages long review? Where are the 30-40 pages review we use to have? Or is there nothing more to say about today's cameras?
And also, this is only the second review in the last 50 news. Should DPR change it's name to: DPnews?
But good concise review nonetheless.
Other than the button layout, new OVF feature, improvement in exposure comp and aperture selection ring, there's really not that much to review. It's a slight improvement over the X100S, and it's getting the review treatment required.
Besides, reviews were never quick to be released, or plentiful on this site, even when Phil Askey was running the show alone.
Pitchertaker: Trying to choose my first digital SLR to upgrade from my Canon Powershot 40 2MP point-and-shoot, which I love but have advanced enough to want something more powerful and full featured.
I'd like some advice if possible in choosing a make/model based on the types of photography I enjoy, and what you think would serve me best for such subject matter: nature, landscape/cityscape, portraits, street/candid, macro, winter, B&W, flora/fauna, architecture/perspective.
Been looking at the Sony A7, A7s, A7r, and the Alpha a-6000; Olympus OM-D E-M1 and Nikon D7100.
So.....you shoot nearly every type of photography? ;) Also, I don't know what your definition of "street photography" is, but have you managed to get the street photography results you're after using your Canon p&s? Just curious.
Personally, I don't know what to tell you, since you're interested in so much (which is good), but I think anything would be OK for you at this point. Sorry, but all the cameras you mentioned are extremely capable, so pick up any of them and get great results in most cases. Buy the most well-priced option, or wait for a sale and let that decide your fate.
If you want more specific advice, then you'll need to either narrow down your interests to be more specific, or tell us which focal lengths you're most interested in shooting.
On that last note, I"m not sure if you know which focal length is if you're coming from a point and shoot! Do you know if you mostly shoot wide, or do you zoom in a lot?
Also, what's your budget???