Petak: How is a camera without a viewfinder a rangefiner-style camera? I'd say it's closer to a tv-style camera :-)))
"Anyway a6000 is a real bargain, giving the best IQ for aps-c in a small package WITH evf. Samsung is far from offering a similar value in its products."
As a body, yes. As a whole system (counting in the price / quality of the lens), in no way.
Mike FL: For the same price @499, you can get Sony NEX-6 with16-50mm Power Zoom. Plus:- Build in EVF,- Build in flash, and - Better brand name.
BTW: I'm not sure if NX3000 could have batter IQ than Sony NEX-6 even sub $500 Fuji XA1 and M1 have better IQ than NEX-6 (especially Fuji has better color rendition).
"I have a Fuji X-E1, very nice color, but sometimes color is over the top and can look a bit plasitic."
Are you sure you refer to the X-E1 JPEG's and not those of 2013+ Fuji cameras?
"Well... the X-E2 is kind of there. So if expect for some specific feature update, is rather the X-E3 (or maybe X-Pro2) that you are waiting for :)"
Frankly, I don't think the Pro2 or the E3 would have the distinctive goodies (separate ISO dial; huuuuuuuge EVF, WR) of the T1. I'm afraid only the DSLR-shaped T2 will have those, regrettably.
Well, not a problem - I save myself a lot of money by not upgrading from my X-E1. Particularly if the new models won't have a 24+ Mpixel sensor (I bet they will - after all, Sony's current 24 Mpixel sensors (A6000 etc.) are in every respect as good as their prev-gen 16 Mpixel ones (NEX-3N, all Fuji MILC's etc.)).
Fazal Majid: It's 2014. A camera's video features are not "impressive" if it's not 4K.
"Sony allready reads out every pixel for video on the A5100, they said so on the press release -"
It has been removed in the meantime, regretfully.
Michael Piziak: Microsoft missed the ship on smart phones.
" nearly laughed myself out of my seat when I read that you typed that Microsoft invented the smartphone. "
Well, actually, the first true smartphone powerhouses, starting with 2004, did run Windows Mobile. They were, hardware capabilities-wise, far superior to Symbian (the then-common smartphone OS) and Palm OS only later received GSM support.
"All of this at the same time can ONLY be accomplished by a rangefinder (like Sony a6000 or Fuji x-e2)."
Exactly this is why I'm secretly hping for a rangefinder-shaped Fuji X-T1 successor, with all its goodies (separate ISO dial; huuuuuuuge EVF, WR).
uRebel Rob: This app (Google Camera) is not comparable with my android phone (Galaxy S3), and it's now an iPhone app. Hmm, I wonder why I can't use it, and which android devices can and cannot use it? (About time to upgrade my phone...)
"MS ICE has an app on iOS as well called Photosynth - I haven't gotten a chance to compare the too but Photosynth works pretty well."
On iOS (more precisely, iPhones), I'd stick with the built-in pano. As it only samples the innermost 150-200 pixels at a time (which means the subject doesn't change much when you turn around), it practically eliminates parallax errors. Of course it has its share of problems (significantly worse low-light performance; no immunity to flickering etc.) but, when you don't have a pano head but still want to shoot panos including close subjects, it's clearly superior to anything traditionally stitched.
SeeRoy: Having been creating spherical panos for many years - quite a bit of it commercially, I'll believe this works properly when I see it. Unless it defeats the laws of optics - namely parallax errors - it's impossible to get accurate stitches if there are foreground elements. To do so requires rotation around, or at least close to, the no-parallax point of the lens. Even with the best stitchers such as PTGui or Autopano this is required.No doubt this will work after a fashion, with horrible stitching errors visible, which may well satisfy the selfie obsessed knuckle-draggers.
All you need to do is getting a decent pano head and properly adjust the camera - even a smartphone.
Of course the Google app can't fix parallax errors (no stitcher can).
Strange it isn't compatible. Nevertheless, you can always shoot a lot of stills on your phone even using its stock Camera app and, then, use desktop stitchers - for example, Hugin or MS ICE. I bet they're far superior to Google's stitcher.
Rob Sims: Just a word about the cheap $100 kit lens, that keeps getting bashed by photo purists. Yes, everyone knows this lens was designed with software correction in mind... it suffers from barrel distortion at the wide end, CA and also vignetting. But for the target audience shooting JPG (All corrected automatically in camera) won't see this, and those dabbling in RAW (corrected automatically in LR) will be able to work around it. More important, is that the is sharp at the center, and sharp at the edges when down even 1 or 2 stops. Doesn't seem any worse than most other kit lenses (Fuji's expensive F2.8-4.0 excluded).
All comparisons I've seen point to it being as sharp as the original 18-55... and certainly no worse than the Pana 12-35 m43 lens that keeps getting mentioned. First 3 reviews that popped up in Google:http://erphotoreview.com/wordpress/?p=3618http://camerahoarders.com/sony-e_pz_16-50mm-e-mount-lens-review/2/http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/842-sony1650f3556oss?start=2
"he real shame is that they don't have anything that sits price wise between the SEL1650/SEL1855 and the Zeiss 16-70/4.0 (which really is excellent). Sony have managed to produced excellent inexpensive prime lenses (I'm thinking the 20/2.8, 35/1.8 and 50/1.8), and a few very excellent but expensive ones (24/1.8 and 55/1.8)... again, very little in between!"
beavertown: Best IQ in its class of cameras.
"right some only shoot jpeg, but then you can't adjust WB after the fact well."
Sure. This is why I generally shoot RAF + JPEG on my X-E1, even if I seldom PP my (mostly family) images. RAW's are so much more powerful.
"It is a bold claim, but if the camera shoots raw, jpeg quality is not the way to judge a camera's IQ."
Well, a lot of us love excellent OOC JPEG's to avoid having to do any PP.
(contd from above)
This is why camera geeks (and even this site! See its A6000 review and compare their praising of the 12-32) tend to "trash" the 16-50. Sony could surely have produced something significantly better, while not (or only slightly) exceeding the size / weight of the 16-50. Other manufacturers did it.
"The 16mm end of the SEL1650 that is noticeably weaker than the rest of the zoom range... but for a kit lens, it falls into the range that most lenses fall (basically very average)."
I don't think the 12-32 is as bad as the 16-50PZ at the wide end. Under the worst circumstances (wide open), corner sharpness is about 37% worse than that of the center (2819/2065). It's a far cry away from the significantly worse ratio the Sony has: 1510 (corrected) or 1903 (uncorrected) / 3346, that is, 65% / 44% lower resolution in the corners... also, the barrel distortion of the Pana is significantly better (~6.3% vs. 7.6%) and it has 5 times lower(!) vignetting.
Again, the size / weight of the 12-32 is also much more compact: 65 x 30 mm/116 g vs. 55 x 24 mm / 70g. Even if you count in the sensor size difference...
"That's an very bold claim"
Exactly. I really don't think the Samsung JPEG engine has magically been fixed and can now beat that of Fuji or Oly...
Menneisyys: DPReview, please consider including a shot of at the, for compact 24mm equiv zooms, most problematic FL (that is, at 24mm equiv), wide open and at f/5.6 and f/8, of, say, a brick wall. A lot of us are really interested in the 24mm equiv image (particularly corner) quality of the new Samsung power zoom.
Unfortunately, the gallery only seems to have two 24mm shots (ISO100-SAM_0409 and ISO100-SAM_0500), with only the center area in focus, making properly evaluating the corners impossible.
"Wouldn't it be a lot easier and more meaningful to type 16mm instead of 24 mm equivalent?"
It is, but as I very frequently refer to the m43 12-32 Pana in posts about pancake kit lens, I tend to use equiv FL's to make sure figures don't get mixed up.
peevee1: and nobody still cared...
"So even you don't care about the camera. :)"
Yup, not about this one. However, the new lens itself is much-much more interesting - did they manage to beat the Sony 16-50?
M0P03: I want Sony to make this camera and A6000 without slow and bulky interchangeble lens. Fixed 24-100/2-4 same size would be much useful.
Already done. Nevertheless, as a camera geek and architecture photographer for some smaller Finnish towns / villages, I'm very frequently asked for my opinion on camera purchasing. This is why I'm more than interested in all kinds of cameras / lens, even if, currently, I don't plan / need to purchase them, having an optically vastly superior system (Fuji X).
joe6pack: Wish it can be made dual boot just like the HTC HD2.
In XDA-Devs we trust ;-)
wetsleet: Recall when everybody was pleading with Nokia to release their great phone hardware ... in Android?
Well, given that there still isn't a single Android handset to dethrone the 808 (or even the 1020), I can rightfully assume Nokia could have been much more successful with high-end Android handsets; for example, with a direct Android-based remake (with an armv7 CPU and a higher-res screen, obviously) of the 808.