zodiacfml: Awesome DR at base ISO found in DXO. Though the NX1 is even better, the price is out of reach for many. I also appreciate they have reduced the weight so much that it weighs less than a d3300. More than a decade ago, Japanese were trying to reduce fuel consumption even though fuel prices were affordable or few was asking for it.
That battery life is something too for something like a day of travel as a tourist.
I know what fibreglass is. I am wondering why you have such a downer on fibre reinforced thermoplastic, since it uses a similar principle.
Fibreglass uses short strands and is multidirectional. It does not matter whether the fibres are moulded in a thermoplastic or imbedded in resin, the effect is the same.
Polycarbonate has to be quite thick to provide good rigidity and resistance to stress fractures, especially around corners and accessory holes. This material seemingly solves that issue and allows use of thinner mouldings.
Why don't you read something about it?
Never heard of fibreglass then....?
D1N0: With aps-c moving to 24mp and even 28, 16 is just not going to cut it anymore. Eventually m43 will be a niche for street photographers who don't crop.
Rishi, you said "hiking up the ISO 2 EV (say to ISO 800) on FF does not mean it's going to have more noise than mFT at 2 EV lower ISO (ISO 200). It means that the noise advantage of FF will disappear, bringing it down to mFT levels."
Noise based on sensor size is an approximation and a poor one at that. It assumes that the sensor architecture and generation are the same.
Using 'speed' to denote lens aperture causes more confusion than anything else, especially when used to define 'equivalency'. Equivalency should relate to the final image, in which case it should apply for the same DOF in both images.
This requires 2 stops more ISO or lower shutter speed on the FF camera.
The whole 'equivalency' nonsense is predicated on the fact that 'less DOF' is always 'better' when most of the time it's the opposite.
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.
The days of major improvements from model to model are long gone. They already have read noise reduced to tiny levels and there is nothing you can do about shot noise.
This leaves the camera exactly where it should be in terms of comparable performance with other cameras. Slightly worse than APSC Sony, but only a small amount.
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.
If you don't like what you read on a free site, pay for one you do like and stop whining.
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.
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.