JEROME NOLAS: Another lens that will make me a better photographer....and yes, that click, click, click drives me crazy!!! :)
And a 50/1.9 could hardly be called a large aperture lens, yabokkie? I beg to differ.
Jogger: Why is the 25/1.8 more expensive than the already excellent and faster 50/1.8 from other makers? Even the excellent Nikon 35/1.8 is faster and less than $200.
halfwaythere, that's a good point. Let's take the Nikkor 32/1.2 lens they make for the 1 system. 9 elements in 7 groups like the Zuiko: Nikon's asking price is $900.
It's partly because of the economies of scale: The more you make of a product, the comparatively cheaper it will be to research, produce and market it. It's the same reason that kit lenses are cheaper.
But it's also a matter of supply and demand. I suspect there are several other manufacturers making relatively fast, normal lenses for the Nikon mount, but for the micro four-thirds mount, the competition is limited.
Rage Joe: "in our opinion ..... the EV dial is too stiff"
Sony α7/α7R Experience:
... "and the EV compensation dial turns accidentally in a bag, and even when I'm just hand-holding the camera - I have to check it every time I want to take a picture." - by Shawn Barnett
Yes, there is a middle ground.
icexe: Can someone explain why ISO100 is so difficult or impossible to engineer into some cameras? It seems many manufacturers either leave it out entirely, or resort to "special" settings in order to use it, even on their high-end cameras.
Caerolle, that claim warants an explanation?
Sensors have a physical limit to how intense light they can record. Once they reach this point, they clip and any further information is lost. The lower the ISO, the more intense light needs to be recorded, and simply put, the ISO 200-ish, is probably the best the manufacturers can do at the moment. Designing for a lower ISO would probably mean either deliberately making it bad and in effect put a ND filter over it, or tweaking it to the point where a lot more noise is produced. In either case, nothing is gained with regards to the better signal to noise ratio, people often associate with lower ISOs. The only thing gained would be convenience, but at the cost of performance on all the other ISO levels.
The most promising technology that might break this "base ISO wall" is the technology to read and reset the sensor several times during the exposure. This would mean that a higher intensity of light can be recorded without it clipping and thereby allowing for lower ISO photography.
framed1: Fuji have nailed it. They really are the "Apple" of camera manufacturers.
If this little guy's performance lives up to its spec sheet it will romp over the OM-D E-M1 with its unfortunate "bridge camera" styling. Heck, this little beauty might even sway on-the-fence FF shoppers.
I'd agree that it's a prettier camera than the E-M1, but ergonomics-wise, I don't think it's as clear-cut. The "2x2" dials on the E-M1 seems to be much more user-friendly than the dials on the X-T1, with the notable exception of having the aperture ring on the lens, which is a rarity among the M43 lenses.
Also, while the deeper grip on the E-M1 isn't pretty (the "unfortunate bridge camera styling", in your words), it is functional.
Austrian: 1.DP about the ISO dial : "The combination of its position and its lock means that you have to move your left hand away from supporting the lens, and you probably have to take your eye away from the viewfinder - both of which are unwelcome distractions from the experience of shooting." I never had the want to change ISO with my eye on the viewfinder. Who has it ?
2. DP about the Compensation dial " Unfortunately it's now too stiff to be easily turned by your right thumb with the camera to your eye, which we think is a step backwards."I hate my XE-1 because of his loose compensation dial. I will not check the right position before each shot. Stiffer can't be a step backwards - for me. What do you think about ?
It's a matter of shooting styles. If you prefer the film-like "ISO first" method, then no, you're probably fine. On the other hand, if you tend to think of your ISO-setting as dependant on your exposure values, then it becomes convenient to be able to change it effortlessly. Of course, if the Auto ISO-functionality is sufficiently good, that is a non-issue, too.
Rob Sims: Not that I necessarily disagree with points made in this article, but the article does read very negatively - especially considering that this is the cheapest FF camera on the market - the same price as some m43 cameras but with much better image quality (the first important thing...).
I've never taken a JPG photo out of this camera, so perhaps that's why I'm enjoying this camera so much. I'd go as far as to say I'm enjoying this camera even more than when I first got my Nikon D700 five years ago (for almost twice the price), and as a result it's coming everywhere with me (...the other most important thing).
I agree that this system probably just needs to mature a bit, and I look forward to where Sony is taking this. I can't help but be concerned about the choice of mount in combination with the larger sensor, but for all I know it seems to work.
It isn't the first 135 format mirrorless though as Leica has made those for a while now.
ragmanjin: This poll has already been answered by the previous polls, so I can't help but question the motive behind it — especially since, as far as I'm aware, this is the first year one of the leading cameras (let alone the all-out winner) hasn't already received its full review.Pentax K-3....................2529 votes (31.4% of the 8054 votes in its poll)Fuji X100s.....................2423 votesOlympus OM-D E-M1......2238 votesSony RX100...................1555 votesSigma 1.8/18-35............1331 votesI hate to keep kicking a dead horse but is this an attempt to avert attention while you finish up with the K-3?I mean no disrespect, DPR, I just feel the question needs to be put out there. If you guys were just waiting for the firmware update or the release of the Flucard for wireless tethering, that's totally fine. It would be nice if you would let us know that sort of thing is all I'm saying.
Vinc T: Exactly. The K-3 would be my choice for a DSLR, but if I had to choose between the K-3 and the E-M1, I'd choose the E-M1.
riveredger: 3 lenses ... and they say Sony's e-mount lens line up is lacking lol (and yes, both can use adapters)
Rather, the target market is going to be restricted to those who only want to chose between the big lens or the small.
Photomonkey: 1788 comments in 24 hours! Must be a record.
Some people can't fathom that something that doesn't have a mirror and is smaller than 135 format has an appeal to other people. Their minds are blown, yet they are compelled to comment.
johnmanoah: When talking about innovation, why aren't these companies considering these easy-to-have innovations?
1. Rotatable (up/down) flash head - so that we could bump the flash to a ceiling or elsewhere. Currently, the in-built flash forces light upon the target which usually results in bright spots or over exposure
2. 3G sim card slot - so that the camera is connected to the internet and sharing/storing is simple
4. Touch screen
Ricoh/Nikon/Canon - Are you listening?
Lots of cameras have touchscreens, but they tend to be useless while you use the viewfinder. For video use or live view however, they're great as you can easily change focus points, etc.
samhain: The good news is- there's nowhere to go but up from here. Can't effectively cram more pixels onto an aps-c sensor. Bring on the Pentax FF already!
And why would they want to go "full frame"? Aren't their lenses designed for the aps-c sensor?
Thomas Karlmann: Can anyone address what the Histogram is doing? Apparently there are FOUR colors displayed WITHIN the Histogram. Here is the bit from the E-M1's Manual:"Histogram display: Display a histogram showing the distribution of brightness in the image. The horizontal axis gives the brightness, the vertical axis the number of pixels of each brightness in the image. Areas above the upper limit at shooting are displayed in red, those below the lower limit in blue, and the area metered using spot metering in green."
Question: What are the Upper and Lower limits referred to here? Interesting!
You can set values to when you want highlight and shadow (over- and underexposure) warnings to appear.
guatitamasluz: "Sensor like this one has probably a NATIVE ISO of 204.800 or 102.400, so, YES, it is impressive in every way." ... Just two words: great news, if these ISO are correct.
The interesting bit is how noisy the images will be at those ISOs. The numbers themselves are sort of meaningless in this context.
MadManAce: imaging-resource dot com (IR) posted some test photos on their website. Compared to DPR, I always felt IR has better more controlled test scenes. With DPR the apertures are all over the place (EM-5 @ 4.5, E-M1 @ 5.6) and when one downloads the raw files from DPR, the luminance levels seem off between cameras. In other words, the jpeg shown on the website test scene are likely corrected for exposure. I downloaded the test samples from IR and open them with Olympus Viewer 3 making sure the settings were exactly the same.
Plastek, I'm not quite sure I understand exactly what your accusation is, and what you base it on?
DPReview claims that the E-M5 overexposes their JPEGs by 1/3 of a stop, and while that's a discrepancy it's nothing close to the full stop that you're talking about.
It sounds a bit like you're looking at the DxOMark measurements, but if that is the case, your conclusion is wrong. Have a look at this article http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2845734946/behind-the-scenes-extended-highlights It should clear things up.
photohounds: Ah, amnother poster who "thinks" less glass/metal means the lens is "worth" less.They'll buy an f150 truck rather than a Ferrari because more metal for the money is "better".Making excellent small things is harder and costs MORE, not less.
Some people appreciate the price of everything and the value of nothing.
More compact cameras often translate into more/better photo opportunities.
Agree, Nuno, I don't hang around the CaNikon forums either. Too busy enjoying my camera.
These cross brand whiners are a very sad lot and it must be very depressing in CaNikon land for them to enjoy spending so much time here ....
First: Price is a function of supply and demand; not cost.
Second: Optical correction isn't in itself better than software correction. Both create a loss of contrast, resolution and noise/aberrations. Both are used to keep costs, weight and size of the lenses down. Sometimes optical correction will give a better end image, sometimes software correction will; as mentioned above, the end result is what matters.
Third: Optical corrections have been a necessity because of optical viewfinders, and if you're using a DSLR you'll want to use such lenses to give you the corrected view in your finder, but mirrorless cameras do not have OVFs so they have more freedom to choose how to correct the lens. For mirrorless there's no inherent disadvantage to software correction, but even so you often see a combo of the two in lenses for mirrorless.
That's why we see software correction for mirrorless. Not because they're junk or cheap, but because they're an option we didn't really have with DSLRs.
Thomas Karlmann: I am seeing a growing and unsettling trend in DPR reviews -- no picture of the focus points. In this review, I had hopes, as you showed the legacy 4/3 phase detection points. Where are the m4/3 Contrast AF points? You have also missed this important depiction in many other reviews to the point where I have to go looking elsewhere to find it. DPR is deviating from what used to be an all-inclusive review to one of smart phone connections and some other stuff. You spend an entire page or two on all sorts of irrelevant-to-me connections to some smart phones while ignoring a far more fundamental topic. Is DPR is becoming a smart phone accessories forum? I'm not going to bother checking back for your Conclusion, because, well, without the smart phone, why bother?
In fairness, this is more of a "first look", not their final review.
Actrurus: I like the HDR function you didn't mention :-)
The camera can be setup to shoot up to 7 exposures with a 2ev increment - brilliant for me shooting HDR panoramas, no longer any need to adjust the shutter speed manually anymore!!! Now, will my Olympus Fisheye work with the adapter....
Kay, if you set it to sequential mode and hold down the shutter button, it fires off the series in a snap. Consider getting a cable remote for the tripod shots, though. Third-party ones are fairly cheap. (I suppose on the E-M1 you could also just use your smart phone/tablet as remote)