D 503: Dynamic range is irrelevant in a time when no one prints. This is a digital camera for the digital age. I have never printed with digital.
Do you mean pixel count is irrelevant, because if so, I sort of agree.
Dynamic range is still important though, whether you print or not.
En Trance: 5D IV would be the equivalent of Canon running back home with its tail between its legs. No turning back now. UNLESS you think one 5D at 50MP and one 5D at 22MP is somehow REASONABLE and not INSANITY!
Canon is making a 5D-4. This isn't meant to replace it.
That's why they didn't call it the 5D Mk-IV. ;)
And this is why I don't understand the complaints and disappointment.
photoclassestampa: What a disappointment. I was hoping the new iteration of the 5D (I have the MK III) would be higher resolution (yep), with wi-fi, even higher expandable ISO, more FPS and 4k or better video. So disappointed! I thought the 7D MKII was a hand down meaning the new 5D would kick. But nuttin'. I am a photojournalist and need a camera that keeps up with the latest technology, not one that can deliver more pixels than I could ever use. C'mon Canon. You used to be better than this.
Then just wait for the 5D-4. This doesn't replace it.
I don't know why you're disappointed. I don't get disappointed by camera releases that clearly weren't aimed for me.
Mike FL: I like "The wheel around the shutter release... can be used as a fully rotating control wheel".
It is not a bad ideal, and hopefully other mfc will follow.
No thanks. I'd rather the on/off switch be wrapped around the shutter button. Besides, I wouldn't want to rotate a dial around in circles using my index finger. It would feel unnatural to move it that way.
SW Anderson: The design looks well thought out and the size decent. Should have built-in EVF or a very affordable add on EVF.
I wonder why Canon is shunning the U.S. market when it comes to its lone mirrorless model. Competition too tough? Stung by less-than-stellar reviews of the first model? Afraid of cannibalizing DSLR sales? Seems as though U.S. photography enthusiasts deserve the courtesy of an explanation, at least.
Actually, in Japan, Canon doesn't get slammed by Fuji. Canon's earlier mirrorless cameras were, very surprisingly, more popular than Fuji's sales. Makes no sense to me, except perhaps brand loyalty is much stronger there. That, and EOS-M are cheap ways to get into mirrorless while using existing Canon DSLR lenses.
Jonathan F/2: What's with the tie at first place? They only award prizes like that to little elementary school kids. It would of been entertaining hearing all the gear heads cry like babies (on the forums) wondering why their prized camera didn't win!
While all the real photographers just shrug their shoulders waiting for these guys to sell their current cameras on the cheap when next new shiny gadget gets released!
"What's with the tie at first place? They only award prizes like that to little elementary school kids."
Because it was a tie after a vote? If you read Chapter 1 of any statistics textbook, you'd know DPR has a strong case against awarding a winner when the difference in votes was just a few. Statistically, it is a tie.
I would have been happy if DPR awarded only one winner, even if the difference in votes was negligible. However, ranking a #1 and #2 based on a handful of votes simply exacerbates the difference between the #1 and #2 voted cameras, because people look at them and assume that people really thought #1 was better than #2, when statistically, considering standard deviations, that's not really true.
RichRMA: Canon and Nikon were idle as Sony got a respectable foothold in the DSLR and mirrorless markets. Canon and Nikon have nothing comparable to this revolutionary Samsung. Once Samsung gets its lens inventory going, it will be a force to be reckoned with. Canon and Nikon still dominate by virtue of their names, but this will not last.
You've never heard of photozone.de, but you actually think people should think your self-tests are good with no factual data to back it up?
Where are your references, son?
Talk about a bunch of crap.
Quite frankly, your tests could be total crap. Nobody knows how you test them, or if you know what you're doing. I'll look at 3rd party test websites like photozone.de rather than a guy who, from the top of his head, can tell me what's good and what's not.
ThePhilips: "Panasonic's JPEG high ISO noise reduction continues to disappoint us."
Hehe. A trait typical to female writing: "I like it" but "it disappoints us". For positive or neutral opinion - "I", but for the (esp strong) negative one - "we". :)
Considering that it is your only slip on the whole "Shooting Experience" page, I think it highlights the biggest disappointment with the little camera you had.
Yes, it's sexist because if the writer were male, nobody would have commented on the writing style being, "typical male response".
kpaddler: "Not built for extended use in cold conditions"
As usual, DP doesn't disappoint with its useless points raised.
The camera lasts in cold weather longer than the people who carry it.
@Richard Murdey: She was making an observation based on her own usage.
If she had tested the camera in hot weather, she would, very understandably, have missed that point about the cold weather. However, if she observed something that may be of interest to people, why not report it?
It's not part of the objective testing procedure, but personal experiences do matter, and add value to reviews.
mpgxsvcd: So the GM5 with the kit lens has a 35mm equivalent depth of field like an F7.0 – F11.2 full frame camera. The LX100 has the equivalent of F3.74 – F6.16 for depth of field and the LX100 has a little more focal length reach. Even the mighty Olympus 12mm F2.0 lens has deeper depth of field on the GM5 than the LX100 does.
The GM5 with the kit lens just doesn’t makes sense over the LX100.
Why would you assume that? People buy DSLRs and only use the kit lens. ;)
You think the way dumb people think.
See what I did there?
EDIT: And yeah......flag me as inappropriate. Barney may be aware of your comment, but I flagged your comment anyway.
#1, 2, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15.
All fantastic. :)
I like #1, 3, 6, and 11.
11 is my favourite.then 3 and 6.
#1 is cheezy, but still great because I'm a sucker for that sort of photo. :)
Is hiring a freelance photographer all year cheaper than keeping a full-time staff photographer? I doubt it. I always thought "freelance" means you pay more per hour, or per job, than you would have a full-time employee.
Obviously, the freelance staff member won't get work benefits and such, but.......I don't know. I'm not an accountant. I just know how it works in several other industries.
Sannaborjeson: I wish Fuji would think of FF one day.
Perhaps, but if you're talking about major work, that takes years to do.
In the interim, Sony sells, and will continue to sell, the same "old" sensors for awhile (the "old" 16 MP sensor some cameras still use, 24 and 36 MP full-frame, and their brand new (???) 12 MP full frame used in the A7S) until they move forward with new stuff.
People complain, but it's not like it's easy to improve upon something that's very good already.
What? Sony still develops high-end APS-C sensors. They just haven't for awhile.After all, Sony's camera division is completely independent of their semiconductor business, which has to thrive on its own. Sony Semiconductor has a lot of customers to appease, and one of those customers is Sony's camera division.
Perhaps developing a sensor requires time? ;) Even with regards to FF, they really haven't made significant strides since the sensor used in the Nikon D800 was released.
moji: Is this an advertisement?
For who, Fuji?
whyamihere: I like the adorable grumpiness and lack of awareness of the anti-selfie, anti-social media crowd. It's as if nobody in the history of the world ever photographed (or painted, or sketched) a self-portrait, published that picture in a public location for all to see (like an art gallery, or an online portfolio), or shared their photos with friends and family (photo albums, 35mm slide shows).
It's not narcissism. It's the same thing as before, just in a form you're all uncomfortable with because you don't know how it works.
To me, selfies are at the same level as the ho-hum "Super-duper macro close-up portrait of an old man/woman from a 3rd world country with a face filled with wrinkles, which means he/she must surely be wise".
Both are cliché. The only difference is that one is taken by "real photographers" , and may prompt other pro photographers to hand out awards and pat each other on the back for a job well done, while the other is taken by real people who actually intend on cataloguing a moment in their life so that they can look back later and say, "I was with someone special in my life, at this location, and it was awesome."
phazelag: So Panasonic makes the LX100, FZ1000, GH4, and GM5 all of which are innovative and they make one camera with one feature possibly aimed at a younger market and people act like its a photography apocalypse is happening.
I have been told the photography doomsday has been here since I was 16 years old with my Minolta X370. These days any young whipper snapper with a disposable kodak can take photos. What will the world do with "real" photographers!
OMG with a flip screen people will actually be able to take photos of themselves to remember important moments. Whats next robotic cameras that follow us around with their helicopter wings? Oh yeah we have those too.
@brownie314: Very true.