 |
Jerodequin
Lives in
Swindon, United Kingdom
Works as a
Chartered Engineer
Joined on
Mar 1, 2009
|
   |
|
Connect with dpreview
|
jon404: Great. Just what we need... a new technology allowing even-smaller viewfinders. Hey, camera makers! We baby boomers, the only segment left with some savings, have poor eyesight! All the pixels in the world can't help if the display device is physically very small...
On most mirrorless cameras, my experience is that using an EVF uses less power than using the main LCD screen - many others have reported the same within the mirrorless forums.
Winston Loo: just look at this and tell me that Canon's strategy makes any sense?
http://camerasize.com/compact/#289.96,448.134,ha,t
A comparison of equivalent lenses (18-36mm equiv):
Olympus E-M5 + Olympus 9-18mm f/4-5.6 -- 555g Filter size 52mm
Canon 100D + Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 - - 1077g Filter size 82mm
And the Olympus lens is slightly faster! but has no hood.
Ooh we could all do this all day couldn't we?!
How about this one?
http://camerasize.com/compact/#289.335,448.23,ha,t
Zigadiboom: Nikon D5000 - 12mp - DXO Mark sensor score: 72
Nikon D5100 - 16mp - DXO Mark sensor score: 80
Nikon D3200 - 24mp - DXO Mark sensor score: 82
Nikon D5200 - 24mp - DXO Mark sensor score: 84
Canon 550d - 18mp - DXO Mark sensor score: 66
Canon 600d - 18mp - DXO Mark sensor score: 65
Canon 650d - 18mp - DXO Mark sensor score: 62
Canon 100d/700d - 18mp - DXO Mark sensor score: 6?
Nikon sensors over time have continously been improving in dynamic range, color depth and high ISO even as the megapixels have been increasing. Canon on the other hand have been relatively stagnant in its sensor innovation and in its inexcsuable that in four iterations at such a competitive segment of the market that it cannot come up with anything better. I'm a Canon man if owning a G1X and a SX260HS counts. However if I'm going to upgrade to an entry or mid tier DSLR based on curent offerings I really cannot see why I would choose Canon over Nikon other than maybe lens selection and shooting video.
Lets add in some of the current M4/3 scores too...
Olympus EM5 - 16mp - DXO Mark sensor score: 71
Olympus EPL5 - 16mp - DXO Mark sensor score: 72
Panasonic GH3 - 16mp - DXO Mark sensor score: 7?
Panasonic G5 - 16mp - DXO Mark sensor score: 61
They don't exactly look too shabby compared to the current Canon line-up, especially given the smaller sensor size.
Not that the DXO mark on its own is really a good way to evaluate overall sensor performance, but it's a comparable number and people seem to enjoy comparing ;-)
How is one supposed to know where most of these are based? Many are just names with no location. And why is there no link to the source article at Panasonic UK???
Donnie G: I'm not a compact system camera fan. Probably will never buy one, but that doesn't mean that I can't express appreciation for what I see as good design. The standout feature for me in the NEX-6, as well as the rest of the NEX lineup is its grip. Sony is to be commended for putting serious effort into making the cameras comfortable to hold. So, for that feature and for the sheer weight of numbers of models that they are bringing to market, I hereby declare Sony to be the king of compact system camera manufacturers. Hail to the King! :)
Sure doesn't look like 40% less IQ based on the images in this article
Why? As far as I can see, because it's smaller and plays to the smaller camera and lens benefit that comes with m4/3. Aside from price, which is always more for a new product, it seems like a fairly good alternative to the 45-200 for someone who is more concerned about the size of their camera and lens (especially if the IQ is improved over the 45-200).
Certainly not a lens I am excited about, but I can see how it makes sense as part of the overall system and as a decent new double kit lens for something like the G5.
jeffharris: The GH2 is "a pretty capable stills camera in its own right"?
Pretty capable? That's a pretty funny quote, since it's the best stills camera of all the Micro Four Thirds cameras to date. It's very high quality video is a bonus feature, not it's primary with stills tossed in, just because.
How about a little mention of the multi-aspect ratio sensor, which really is one of it's primary features and separates the GH2 from the rest of the M4/3 line-up.
Quick, if a bit rough, description: it's an 18MP "oversized" sensor that adjusts the area of the sensor that is used for shooting different aspect ratios (4:3, 3:2, 16:9, 1:1). It maximizes final image resolution with this technique, rather than cropping a full-sensor image and losing resolution to simulate differing aspect ratios.
Good and informative article! Thanks.
I agree here, it seems rather odd to call it a 'specialist camera' - so it has amazing video features... true, but as you say, it's also the best performing M4/3 camera as well as delivering the best overall image quality - and the multi-aspect sensor is all about stills, not video.
Odd, odd, odd!
So what is really the differences between these two - one has a larger LCD screen? What is it about the 8250 that means it produces ultimate quality vs. superior quality claimed for the 6250? They both seem to have the same dpi etc...
I like the composition, but doesn't it look like the lady in the picture has very painful sunburn?? It stops me finding it a relaxing picture due to this :(