thx1138: Why not down sample the 64MP RAWs to 40MP rather than post them at 64MP?
While I can many improvements over the original E-M5, IQ has barely budged and this is my main bugbear with the m4/3 sensors, they seem stuck in a time warp. While I love my E-M5 going forward I'm not sure I'll stay in that ecosystem unless there is a genuine breakthrough on the sensor front soon. But I do love the lenses so hard to give those up.
Also disappointing to see the woeful menu system still in place by Olympus and I guess the manual is still as bad as ever.
Yes, you do. Sometimes.
I have compared landscape photographs for competitions with a maximum size permitted of 36". The difference between a 36MP and 16MP camera is quite noticeable.
It all depends on what you shoot and the distance you view from.
duckling: Lets face it, 16MP are more than enough for almost anything. And no, more pixels cannot substitute a proper focal length for the job.
It's about time DPReview gave more consideration to the overall useability of the tools they review. Perhaps they should change the scoring system and evaluate cameras according to their potential performance in various genres. It might be more useful than comparing features, many of which are obviously above and beyond the strictest of requirements. Let versatility and usefulness guide you.When I choose a camera I want to know how it is expected to behave in landscape , portraiture, travel, night, social, nature and hiking scenarios (to name just a few). Those aspects of a camera are far more meaningful than infinitesimal differences in noise or DR at ISOxxxx.
The whole point about knowing resolution, weight, DR and ISO quality is that it would tell you if it was any good for you, whatever photography you do.
Two travel photographers may have very different requirements for resolution. Ones who specialise in landscapes would want more resolution, those who do street work would want better high ISO, and those that travel light want a smaller camera.
See the problem?
Karl Summers: I'm probably in the minority here, but those bags are not very attractive nor "low-profile" if you compare them to the retrospective line. I still see a brand name.
Yeah, they are fine too. Just a bit big for a CSC kit (good for DSLR though).
Go for it. Buy a couple of Domke inserts or a Crumpler Banana Bowl. You can keep your camera in them and move them from bag to bag.
I can buy a nice canvas bag and an insert for about $50 total, wax it myself to make it rain resistant and have something that looks 100X nicer and totally unlike a camera bag. That's the best thing about mirrorless cameras.
Thinktank's Retrospective is much nicer but really expensive and heavier than the camera.
Interesting. There is an implication that Canon listen to their channels and their pros, but don't have a direct interaction with normal consumers. They leave that to the channels. They in turn listen to their pros and the big-box dealers. Nowhere in this loop is anyone listening to consumers.
mpgxsvcd: “I’m saying “sell it!” but it’s their decision whether they want to or not.”
The one thing he got right someone else in the company got wrong. They are doomed!
I won't speak for Rishi, but I believe DSLRs are finding a new level. It is lower than the previous one, but higher value in terms of unit margin. In a way, it's similar to what happened to laptops when tablets came on the scene. Many users who didn't need the high end functions and OS just bought an iPad, but laptops continue to sell and offer good value, just like a Rebel, or workstation-level features like quad core i7 processors and high resolution displays.
However, Canon needs to sell mirrorless too. The real damage to DSLRs is being done at the low end, not the high end, and the competition is from both CSCs and phones. In the end, CSCs are unquestionably a more successful format for hybrid stills and video photography.
Daniel Lauring: American's don't want small cameras. HUH?!?f
This was the worst interview yet.
Canon or Maeda as it's rep, seems to lack any bit of humility and this interview only enforces that fact that Canon is a poor listener and completely detached from reality.
Blame Canon USA. Clearly that's what they are feeding back.
alcaher: manufactured landscape... nothing nice about it, very robotic-posthuman enviroment. But that is what it is and we use their products.
Post-humans are so last year.
QuarryCat: so true!
a man with the courage to speak out why is fact!Thank you Mr. Iida
Fujifilm has really good prime lenses, but they are all slow and the are all missing stabilization!
And a even better camera with a better AF won't change this on the lenses we have right now. That should be clear.It is not a camera fault alone - so for faster AF they will need new lenses.It was the same with Nikon before AF-S, Sony, Olympus E-Mount and others more.
And Fujifilm needs to think about the stabilization - if the built an even higher resolution sensor - people have to use tripods or very fast times - so it will be better to have stabilization in every lens or even in the body.
And Fujifilm should rethink the aperture - I don't like 1/3 steps, I don't like the loose aperture rings and I dislike the sunshades on Fujifilm lenses.They should be harder and get precise in place.
Yes, but the EM1 was plagued by it and the EM5 if I am not mistaken has an electronic first curtain specifically to avoid the issue. EM1 had the same thing added in firmware.
A7R has a terrible shutter with no damping - doesn't help. But if you implement IBIS you just make the problem even harder to deal with. Not saying you can't, just that it's a lot harder.
At least with the Pentax electromagnetic system, the sensor is locked rigidly in place when IS is not enabled.
ot73: i had canon 50D, 5D2. and now the xt-1.i had problems with the canon AF and fast primes (35L, 85 1.8) . many OOF.the AF of the fuji is much more accurate. maybe not as fast as the canon (depend on the lens), but much more accurate. almost no OOF.
the thing that bother me the most with the fuji is the battery life.
I have had 2 18-55 lenses - the first was very unreliable. It may have been a malfunctioning IOS system, but it wasn't that good when it was off either.
Second one is way better. So much so I cannot remember any specific issues that were not related to IBC (Idiot Behind Camera). Combination of lens and Fuji XE2 has so far been close to faultless.
There were months of forum discussions on this very subject when I was a Pentax user (K10, K20 and K7) so it is not 'nonsense'.
I gather the K3 incorporated a damping mechanism to combat this (or mirror shock, same issue).
IBIS is far from a perfect solution. Makes the camera more susceptible to shutter shock (so does IS/VR to a lesser extent). Doesn't matter what type of camera you put it in either. Pentax, Oly and Sony have all had issues in this regard.
Zvonimir Tosic: Nice to know Fuji did not dare to compare Total_size-vs-Performance quotient of their cameras with Pentax K-3 armed with, say, 6 DA Limiteds.
But instead with 7DII which has .. ~8 years old sensor tech and no lenses that can compare with Fuji's or Pentax APS-C optimised primes.
He was comparing the AF systems, not the cameras or sensors. Do try and keep up.
Probably great if you don't want a £100 Wacom, but anyone who doesn't think pressure sensitivity matters hasn't used any of the brush tools in Photoshop....
Marty4650: Of course, the really big news here is "new sensor" and not "top panel LCD" or "electronic leveler."
We will have to wait for actual reviews to find out more about that sensor.
All true, of course, and there has never been much wrong with Canon's small SLRs control wise. But the D7100 is only £100 more than the 760D and the D5300 is cheaper than the 750D.
Canon certainly fill every possible niche in this crowded space.
Boss of Sony: Although I think the option to have a top-mounted LCD screen is great, I think this is a bit late, most entry level budding photographers will be more attracted to mirrorless cameras right now or if not now, then very soon as the technology takes off.
Does that mean they are better?
If not, it doesn't really matter in the long run, does it. Trends don't look encouraging either.
This is true, but what are the odds.
Indulis Bernsteins: The "not wanting to cannibalize its own market" is the result of corporate "silo mentality" where the company tries to make each division its own little profit centre (e.g. DSLR division vs mirrorless division). What you end up with is less focus and effort on what customers want, and more focus on internal squabbling and infighting (and backstabbing) to stop another division's good product being released and biting into your division's mediocre or aging product. A sign of weak and lazy management at the top- and the reason why smaller "single product" focus companies continue to advance the state of the art..
Agree, seen it too many times (been stuck in an 'engineering silo' myself a few times).
57even: I think Damien hit the nail squarely on the head. Nikon and Canon should have produced CSC models that complimented their professional DSLRs. In other words, a professional CSC.
No professional I know owns a D800 or 5Dmk3 uses a D3XXX or a Rebel as their backup camera. Where is the alternative? Fuji in particular has benefited from this niche, but I suspect Oly has done well too.
And much as I like my Fuji, a Canon professional would probably choose the product that was compatible with the same workflow and accessories that he or she already had - flash, remote, software, etc. That is, if such a product existed.
Is it the EOS M3? Not without an EVF a decent prime lens lineup, no. But it proves they can do it.
All metal, premium quality, $1200 + price bracket, high quality lens range, lightweight full-function flash units.
Perfect companion to a 5DS.
My point is that it is NOT a backup camera for professionals. It is a consumer oriented product, whatever the price tag. At $300 it would be a good deal.