It's been clear for awhile that it is a two horse race between Fuji and Olympus. Both companies have brilliant engineers and foresight.
67gtonr: It seems to me that the Canon EOS M with its 22 f/2.0 lens would be better, it's roughly the same size with a better sensor, better screen, better built, providing better image quality and unlimited expansion possibilities, and it costs less!
Did you just fall out of a tree?
marike6: Another camera choice for "Gear of the Year" based mostly on convenience for walking around?
This new DPR theme of staff exaggerating DSLR size and the amount of effort it takes to shoot a DSLR is getting a bit old.
When you consider all the great cameras released this past year to have an untested, unreviewed camera that is Pentax Q tiny, and really TOO SMALL for even average sized hands is truly puzzling. Add the fact that it has no eye level viewfinder or the possibility to add one, makes this "Best of the Year" choice suspect at best.
If convenience for walking around and size/weight have become the new criterion for judging "the best of the best" cameras on DPR, I'll be inclined to seek out other review sites more focused on actual photography and less focused on ease of use and portability.
Exactly! marike6 gets upset whenever m4/3 is given positive press.
vFunct: Nikon makes the best cameras - better than Canon.
Nothing else is even in the same league.
Whenever I go to a press event, all the professional photographers are using Nikon or Canon.
There is absolutely nothing else.
Mirrorless cameras are garbage, strictly used by amateurs that do not know professional photography.
This new Nikon is just icing on their top-shelf cake.
By vFunct (2 hours ago)Nikon makes the best cameras - better than Canon.
There is absolutely nothing else.
You're up late for a school night.
Wow, look at the amazing "full frameness" of those images, horses nostrils in focus, some blurred thing sitting on it's saddle. You can see why FF is the only choice!
FreedomLover: With Samsung, Sony and Toshiba selling 4K TVs for under 4000 dollars already, the image quality offered by these small sensor cameras is visibly lacking. And dpReview's denial of the obvious double edges produced by shuttershock shown in their own samples is not going to help.
What "small sensor cameras" are you talking about. This is a discussion of the E-M1
harold1968: Inexplicable scoring.Dpreview's own partner DXOmARK has Nex 7 (just about to be replaced) significantly better then EM5 on every score.Sure the Olympus sensor (now they are using sony) is better then previous versions, but the quality of picture is still far behind APS-c. I know, after editing both, the Nex pictures take far more battering in pp.It is simply misleading to say otherwise
Absolute rubbish. You have to "batter" your files to get a decent image do you? Nice.
lolopasstrail: Probably a nice personality, if a little tubby. Price tag is nuts, however. A compact trying to pass for a non-compact in a quickly evaporating market needs aggressive pricing. $500 would be nice introductory, would like to see some Black Friday deals under $400. Otherwise this model will just be a footnote.
I ordered an XS1. Lovely camera but enormous, nearly D600 sized! Good EVF but the image was very soft at longer FL and EXR res was disappointing.
Darrell500: What I like is you can use the 4/3 lenses with this body and for those that don't already know they are some of the best lenses ever made for any format. When I travel I can remove the grip and adapter and mount a mZuiko 14-150 and maybe throw a macro in the bag and I'm ready to go.
Want narrow depth of field for shooting a wedding attach, a 35-100 f2 (70-200 FOV) on one body and a 14-35 f2 on another and your in narrow depth of field heaven, with sharpness that will rival and exceed most any other camera.
So hats off to all of you that are so good that this sensor size holds you back, please provide a link so that I may view these wonderful photos that the EM-1 or any 4/3rds camera isn't capable of.
You have to find two stops to match the creative DOF control of full-frame at equivalent crops. f/2.0 vs. f/2.8 is far from DOF equivalence, let alone "heaven". But go ahead and work closer so you can pretend. BTW, I have a full MFT system and an FX system. Horses for courses.
So do I, and you are talking nonsense. My D600 is a HUGE disappointment !
Read this from a pro. - Ming Thein. He thinks it's direct competitor is the D4. Pro enough for you.
By DavidKennard (11 hours ago)They need to get Zeiss designing some Contax G style lenses (assuming the sensor design is compatible with that design of lens). Maybe with their investment in Oly they could get some updates on the nice compact OM primes as well. No need for full frame lenses to be big.
Film SLR lenses did not require light to hit the film square on in the way digital sensors do. The light hitting the film edges did not cause too many problems. 35mm sensors have terrible problems with corners. The mount would need to be twice the diaganol sensor size to overcome this. Olympus came up with the 4/3 format precisely because of this, the largest sensor size and lens mount without impacting the corners.
stevens37y: Nikon is desperately searching for a niche market: nostalgic people who are willing to pay more for less.
Middle class Guardian readers then!
It's like trying to explain to children why there are no dinosaurs around anymore. They don't want to hear that they were slow, oversized, and failed. They just like that they were big and scary.
Great camera. Terrible lenses.
keepreal: I have found only one comment here critical of DP Review for buying into the Nikon story behind the D610.
"Nearly a year after the arrival of Nikon's full-frame D600, its replacement has arrived. The new D610 is a very minor upgrade to the D600, with just three new features"
and the forlorn hope that potential Nikon buyers will trust them after badly letting down D600 customers.
DP Review does give lots of info in most of their detailed reviews and this is useful but you have to read between the lines. In this instance they are economical with the obvious truth and I am afraid that makes them a littler less trustworthy and open to some suspicion where they get their funding from.
If it had been Pentax or Olympus, DPR would have been on them on a daily basis.
bilcobarnes21: Canon and Nikon bashers are losers, get a life. They both make good and bad Cameras, turns out the D600 was a bad one and Nikon should take responsibilty, its funny how some Canon users take some sort of victory away from this situation (Nikon users would be the same if the show was on the other foot), spend more time bashing your wives not the rival camera mark.
Bye for now, i am off to see my wife;-)
Enough from you for a psychiatrists conference.
lazy lightning: How about the massive shutter-shock present on the new Oly EM-1? How long until they come out with a new EM-1.1? Or maybe Oly will say, "what are you complaining about? You pay for only one camera but get double images!"
Now that's desperation!
Mike99999: With the FF NEX around the corner, even if the D600 drops to $1000 I would not touch it.
Buying a FF Nikon or Canon is like buying a giant CRT screen. It's ancient technology. The D600 and 6D are a desperate last fart from Canon and Nikon to push their remaining stock as the world switches to mirrorless.
Quite right. Seeing a non sports photographer staggering along with a 35mm DSLR is jaw dropping and hilarious. The rarely used tracking feature is the last gasp of a choking dinosaur.
Good old DPR. Praise the non Canikon before slipping in the coup de gras. Pentax, Panasonic, Fuji, Olympus..... and on it goes.
ijustloveshooting: sensor is dead...aps-c the least, rules!