You couldn't really change the ISO in the film days without opening the back [and replacing the film], so no loss of functionality there.
Great - now my cat can take better pictures than I can. If I had a cat. Good thing they only wasted 24 hours developing it.
WTG Dov - well deserved recognition!
What's with the Aussie "developed here" rant - does that really matter? And who cares who was first? Apple didn't produce the first music player with its own internal storage system, but they did produce the best and sold the most.
As for wifi - its eventual incorporation was rather obvious and obiquitous.
To ask which camera is best but limit the choices to these14 is ridiculous! What you're really asking is 'Which of these 14 cameras is best". And, as others have suggested, the answer is NONE as everybody's needs and every camera's capabilities differ.
fletchcanonbootcamp: Might I suggest having another voting category for best camera, i.e. Which DSLR shoots the best video?
Why DSLR? Take those blinders off! ;)
jonikon: Does anyone care about these pencil eraser sized sensors anymore? Most of the lenses that are installed in front of them are cheap junk anyway, so what's the point of improving these tiny sensors? Sony should be putting their efforts into the further development of the 1" sensor with PDAF. That's where the future of pocket cameras lies.
There's nothing wrong with improving any sensor size. 35mm was too small at one time - improvements in these smaller sensors continue to erode the high end while offering smaller cameras at lower cost. There are some pretty amazing 1/2.3" class cameras that could possibly benefit from this new 1/1.7"sensor in the near future. Take off your blinders and look at the entire market - it might not be right for you but it might be good for a very large market segment.
zstan: very very interesting! finally apps are coming to cameras!
Why sad? You don't have to buy apps and I'm sure the cameras will continue to provide minimal feature sets as they do now.
But this could provide some real useful or specialized features that wouldn't be possible from standard firmware builds. Say you are into macro - an app could provide automatic focus stacking using your desired start/end/interval, etc.
RAG64: "This new concept of PlayMemories Camera Apps is the world’s first application download service in an interchangeable lens camera that allows consumers to install new functions on demand, tailoring their cameras to fit their personal shooting needs. Available apps at launch, outside of “Direct Upload” as mentioned earlier, will include “Picture Effect+”; “Bracket Pro”; “Multi Frame NR”; “Photo Retouch”; and “Smart Remote Control. A variety of other apps including “Time-Lapse” and “Cinematic Photo” are also planned for release."
So let me see if I get this right: the purpose of a NEX apps store is to allow me to pay extra money for extended capabilities which would have otherwise been included for free by Sony with the camera upon their development, added to the software package or made available by 3rd party hacks...? Cool! :P
If they aren't providing the features with the cameras now, at least this gives us an option. They may try to squeeze more money out of us, but at least they're opening the camera up for developers. I've been waiting a long time for this to happen and hope it spurs other manufacturers to do the same. I'm sick of being stuck with the often paltry set of feaures provided. Let's hope these apps are highly configurable as well so we aren't stuck with single-purpose expenses we rarely use but rather can be leveraged.
Just one example is the self-timer on the camera - replace the standard 2 or 10 second delay with whatever you want or fits your need. Allow specifying the number of exposures, interval, etc. and you've got a highly customizable intervalometer.
In-camera stacking is another rarely-provided feature. These apps could not only provide it, but again possibly in a more customizable versin than the canned features normally provided in the firmware.
BeanyPic: I wish DP Review would stop allowing comments. Cameras like these are for the masses and the people who comment here and have no idea about cameras in this category. Brands don't make full frame or APSC sensors with 100 focus points and shoot at 20fps with full HD with manual audio control and a battery that never goes flat for these prices and if the did they would be £20K or more. So just get with the real world please...
Hey BeanyPic - while I'm at it, here's a comment regarding the FZ200 superzoom that doesn't merit RAW from someone who's actually owned your dream camera:http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1033&message=42326083
You obviously have no idea about cameras in this category either. The announcment above states these are "mid-range super zoom" cameras. As such, they offer snapshot capability with extended zoom ranges, not full frame pie-in-the-sky capabilities that costs thousands. Everybody agrees these are intended for the mass market and that's what they were designed for - you are providing nothing new.
I see from your profile that you are dreaming about a nice DSLR - do you really want to be known for trolling this junk which is obviously below you?
thomas2279f: These look ok for the job - not sure on having 16mp on sensor like this. Not only Canon doing this but Nikon & Sony.
Wished Canon put Raw featutre on the SX500 - unless I didn't pick it up.
I believe it's more the size of the pixels that matters, not the size of the sensor. Increasing the number of pixels - without also increasing the sensor size - simply results in smaller receptors that aren't as good because they get less light to work with.
More than one manufacturer has actually reduced the number of pixels while keeping the same sensor size to greatly improve IQ - the Panasonic FZ100 was panned at 14MP but the upgrade FZ150 using the same size sensor with 12 MP has been lauded.
Koulang: Canon should have released the higher class super-zoom compact with RAW format, latest Digic and good ISO performance like Panasonic FZ200.
The mass market will not be spending nearly $600 for the FZ200 with its paltry 24X zoom when they can spend hundreds less and get more MP and bigger zoom. The FZ200 is more of an enthusiasts camera with its f/2.8 lens throughout the zoom range. Many of us can't afford the equivalent DSLR system with its better IQ costing thousands. And we may not print posters - that doesn't mean we shouldn't be able to get the best we can out of it.
The FZ200 also sports features their rivals often leave out, like the hot shoe, or filter threads, or remote control, or RAW. Why RAW? Why not? It's the same reason DSLRs offer RAW - to provide the ability to process the image as desired. This is not exclusive to DSLRs and may be even more important for superzooms to get the best out of their pinhead sensors. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. It may not be the best, but what's wrong with better?
The first line of the review's Overall Conclusion reads:
"The Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX200V is a super zoom camera that has virtually every bell and whistle ever created."
Since this model lacks RAW support, hot shoe, remote control, filter threads, MAC support, >1 second burst, etc. I must disagree.
According to DPR, the HX100V bests the HX200V by a score of 73-72. Being relative to the megazoom category and the time of the review, the HX100V bests the HX200V simply because the bar has been raised by the FZ150 since the HX100V was reviewed. Something's broke when relative comparisons aren't really relative at all.
In DPR's case, its lack of reviews now limits their megazoom category to three models:- Sony HX100V- Sony HX200V- Panasonic FZ150
Why bother with these /relative/ ratings when they include different generations and disclude the rest of the competition? Where are the reviews for Olympus, Fuji, Canon, Samsung, Nikon, Kodak, etc. megazooms?
canonluber: A week ago I considered buying one of these new for $434 on Amazon but held off , because I want a smaller camera with raw, gps and a decent amount of zoom (200-400mm equiv). What I really wanted was a versatile pocket-able camera with short shutter lag and decent quality so that I always have a camera with me. But now the price has skyrocketed over night, so I'll stick with my I-phone and my Canon 7d a little awhile longer. The only real drawback to this camera is the size and it has no GPS.
You're looking at the wrong Panasonic series - their pocketable superzooms belong to the ZS/TZ lines, not the FZ line. The ZS20/TZ30 would come closest to meeting your needs at 480mm/20X with GPS but doesn not support RAW.
IcyVeins: DPR Please stop reviewing 8-month old cameras, especially compacts, when there are newer cameras that need to be reviewed, if it's not an important enough camera to review when you first get it then just move onto the newer ones and skip it. This camera is probably going to be obsoleted by a newer version in the summer anyways.
/I think it's timely enough, but it's confusing why you picked this "also ran" not so super zoom with all of the other options on the market./Just because the competition finally got around to releasing updated models doesn't necessarily make the FZ150 an "also ran". In fact, it is still arguably the best superzoom camera on the market [depending on your needs] and definitely provides more features than any other while delivering equal or better results.
If all you care about is zoom, then look at the longer competition and ignore the fact that they may not have filter threads or hot shoe or RAW or 12fps or 1080p60 or remote capability, or articulating screen, or responsive performance, etc. The FZ150 is simply a more complete and flexible camera. Plus, if you seriously need more reach in either direction, at least the FZ150 supports teleconverters and macro lenses.
kkardster: Wow - I'm impressed with the rapid responses by DPR to several of these posts - how come DPR refuses to update their incorrect specs in such a timely manner when errata are reported via the "Have you spotted an error? Report it ..." link?
"DP can please some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but DP can not please all of the people all of the time."
True, but it's not too much to ask that DPR corrects errors in their mistated specs that have been pointed out to them multiple times by multiple members. Side-by-side comparisons are an important feature of DPR and inaccurate specs don't help their reputation nor help us make proper decisions.
Wow - I'm impressed with the rapid responses by DPR to several of these posts - how come DPR refuses to update their incorrect specs in such a timely manner when errata are reported via the "Have you spotted an error? Report it ..." link?
Tim in upstate NY: What happened to the list of pros and cons in the conclusion?
"This review is written in a condensed format, designed to help us get more reviews out faster"
Based on the fact that this camera has been available for 6 months, I think it's more designed to satisfy the demands for a belated review than to actually provide one.
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review