yabokkie: a little bit embarassing
When calculating equivalence on 135 format (fullframe), lens speed doesn't change. So, the 24/1.8 is 36/1.8 on FF, which means it has an angle/field of view (AoV or FoV) equivalent to a 36mm FF lens because of the 1.5 crop factor, but the light gathering ability is still F/1.8.
You only multiply the f-number by the crop factor to calculate equivalent depth of field (DoF) on FF, which would be like the FF 36mm lens stopped down to F/2.7. This is either better or worst depending on your preference and situation.
Michael de Ruijter: What are we supposed to do? Grab a fistful of dollars and toss it away?
You can start by doing small things locally, like donating food, clothes, and some time voluteering. Giving money, even a tiny bit, to charities help as every bit counts. No need to "Grab a fistful of dollars and toss it away".
Chris Renton: I'm really interested to hear how the movie servo AF performs tracking moving subjects.. I guess you'll need a STM lens for it to work smoothly?
AF with non-STM lenses should be fine since the lens won't have to go back and forth with PDAF as much as in CDAF. The problem is the noisy AF motor in those older lenses that can get picked up by the mic.
Adrian Van: The 70D meets or exceeds (with new AF) all (or most) of the functionality features and performance of the current 7D in specs (dpreview suggests in their summary section), so does this means it is the current flagship APS-C for Canon, until a 7D mark 2 comes out next? If it works as well as it appears by specs, it is a solid competitor to Nikon D7100. Although what lenses you already have will make a difference on which brand to choose. Both cameras are very good! Like the articulating screen of 70D which is exceedingly useful for live view video recording. Canon and Nikon continue to step up the functions of their top APS-C in latest models, especially with video functions, and better AF during recording.
Depends on your priorities/preferences. The D7100 has more AF points and I expect the 7D replacement to have more too but the 70D has PD on 80% of the sensor (for better LV). Both 7D and D7100 have OVF with 100% coverage while the 70D is only 98% but has articulating touchscreen. There are more differences (like slower burst rate and less robust than the 7D, etc.) but you start to see where Canon is positioning the 70D.
happypoppeye: EM-5 is $1000 ...this is an under $1000 list. Ok, so its close, but how is a $1000 body with no lens a best ILC or SLR?
@Timmbits: I initially thought DPR "also mean the under $1000 limit is placed on list prices, not street prices" but that's not true as the K-5 and the D7000 all had much higher list price than $1000 but currently have sub $1000 street price currently.
That said, I agree that the E-PL5 probably should've have been listed instead of the E-M5 as it is almost half the price for the same IQ; it is the better option if you don't need the EVF, weather sealing, etc. While I'm at it, I would've put a Samsung NX20 or NX300 than any Canon as well.
@happypoppeye @Valterj: try again - http://www.amazon.com/Olympus-Interchangeable-3-0-Inch-Tilting-Touchscreen/dp/B0074WDEY6/ref=lh_ni_t?ie=UTF8&psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER
The $1149 is with the weather sealed 12-50mm. The 14-42mm (with the $999 kit option) is cheaper and is equivalent to the non-weather sealed kit lens of the other cameras on the list. So the E-M5 with a lens is indeed less than $1000 currently.
I was also figuring out why the E-M5 was in the sub $1000 list and that was the reason I found.
I know Amazon "owns" DPR and one would expect DPR to know the price but actual/street prices do fluctuate and a lot of products are sold via Amazon from various stores, further complicating things. Looking at Amazon right now for example, the GX1 body is $244.99, $5 cheaper than what is listed on the article, and the the kit is currently $439.29, also lower than the article.
Because DPR listed it's MSRP instead. If you bothered to click the link to the Amazon page before commenting, you'll see the body is actually $899. With a kit lens, its $999... so it's under.
Why do so many people speak/comment first before looking for info for themselves?
peevee1: Really and truly, choosing a Rebel shows how disingenuous this list is. Rebel is a literally WORST camera in its category - it has the worst sensor=image quality (the worst dynamic range, the worst noise, the worst color depth), it has the worst tiny pentamirror viewfinder not even covering the whole scene, it has slow processor/sequential shooting speed, it has weak 9-point AF system, it has the worst 1-dial control, it has the worst plastic non-weather-sealed body... What kind of service do you do to your readers putting the worst camera in its category to the top 10 list? Sheesh! I understand that is the best seller because of the brand name Canon had earned - up to 4 years ago - but since then they only sell their name piece by piece, and your site should inform public about things like that.
A bit harsh but I agree. Anyone I know who started with a Rebel and didn't stay with the basic kit setup, have either gone with a FF Canon or moved to other brands completely.
But the reality is, a potential iLC user buys Canon and sticks to the kit only. If other companies do as well as Canon in marketing and stores like BestBuy don't just try to sell you a Canon by default, other brands would do much better as so many cameras these days are better than the Rebels in many ways.
ezradja: Probably it's just me, but I find the selections not very good anymore. Probably because of new breeds of serious compact camera such as x100, rx100, g1x etc even pentax q or nikon 1 are more interesting to me these days...
sensibill: Omission of cheap SLT models such as the A57 is odd, given the broad lens assortment and quite low price vs. the Nikon and Canon low to mid DSLR options.
The inclusion of models that obviously are NOT "under $1000" like the OM-D is similarly confusing. I don't see why body-only pricing qualifies for a list like this.
On the other hand, it's refreshing to see the ridiculous 'CSC' term being forcibly retired. ILC isn't perfect, but better.
A new E-M5 w/ 14-42mm is $999 on Amazon... could be found cheaper if you look around.
I thought I would be compelled to replace my Mk1. Good thing I don't have to, phew. Or is it a good thing? Panasonic updated the 14-140mm, and the new one is smaller, lighter, brighter and cheaper! Olympus updated the kit 14-42mm so it's smaller, lighter, faster and quieter. Did Panasonic get lazy with this one?
The 20/1.7 MkII is still a good lens though, but I'd get the Mk1 for the lower price if I hadn't already.
Gaffman: The fact that this camera can mount an electronic viewfinder sounds great until you learn its the same near $400+ unit that goes with the RX1.
I still see the hot shoe benefits for flash shooters and video users but this viewfinder thing is a joke.
I agree that the Sony EVF for this seems expensive. It would've been better if Sony had multiple options that are reasonably priced, like Olympus. Olympus has 3 starting from $150 and the new VF-4 with 2.36M dots is only $280, only $80 more than the VF-2.
Marvol: "we'll look at how well it performs just as soon as we can"
Why are you already committing to review a fairly specialised lens of a rather unimpressive mirrorless system? Surely you can do better things with your time?
For comparison I noticed that, unless I am missing something (I searched this site), you haven't reviewed the EOS M itself. I can only find a preview from July 2012. So you're willing to review this lens (not the kit lens, not the prime) on a camera you haven't reviewed in nearly a year? Srsly?
@Henry M. Hertz: so you would rather get the EOS-M than say an E-PL5, which has better IQ, more features (IBIS, tilting screen, optional EVF, etc.) for the same money? Then there's the m43 lens line up, which has lenses performing better than many EF/EF-S lens mounted on cropped Canon.
Marc Lorenz: Why so slow? Canon's 22mm pancake is f2.
Too bad the Canon 22/2 can only be mounted on an EOS-M, lol. Kidding aside, I'd like to see reasonably priced pancake with f/2 or faster from Fuji.
yabokkie: I use EF40/2.8 as "lens cap" that almost as good as some f/2.8 zooms. if this lens delivers as good resolution it could be a good lens cap for XF cameras.
since f/2.8 on APS-C is about 1.3 stops darker than f/2.8 on 35mm full-frame, the price should also be about 1.3 stops lower, or at least at half price of EF40/2.8.
@yabokkie: the f-number is light intensity, it doesn't get brighter or darker on larger or smaller format - think PSI (pressure)! So take a picture on FF with the 40/2.8, then crop the file so it's 2/3 the size. That basically what happens when you mount the same lens on a Rebel and take the same photo with the same settings (albeit with different resulting IQ).
radissimo: Seems that price/value is BETTER than Olympus E-p5 ,but NOT Sony NEX-5R...Competition is good...
@Raist3d - the PanyLeica 25/1.4 and Oly 60mm macro are cheaper than the Fuji alternatives: 35/1.4 and 60mm macro. Also, other m43 lenses like the Pany 20/1.7 and Oly 45/1.8 are very good and affordable.
BJL: A better solution would be normal cameras controls plus WiFi or bluetooth connection to the phone that most NX camera users will be carrying anyway.
This instead seems like a toaster-fridge: a camera with the size and bulk of a DSLR, but with all the DLR controls replaced by a phone's touch so that the controls that you most often want to adjust while using the EVF cannot be, because they rely on looking at the touch screen.
Agree... the EVF will be awkward to use since there are essentially no physical controls.
Also, a full Android OS is overkill and will just wast the battery.
SemperAugustus: My first thought when I held this camera in my hand was "here is the mirrorless killer" ... anybody who appreciates the capabilities of a dSLR but wants a small, light package, this is it!... here is a photo taken handhled with this SL1 http://fineartamerica.com/featured/not-a-semper-agustus-levin-rodriguez.html
Except that it isn't as small as pretty much any mirrorless w/ an EVF (EVIL). Here's how it compares to mirrorless from Fuji, Panasonic, Olympus and Sony, all with a standard zoom lens: http://j.mp/19iNmDg
Also, those mirrorless (like the E-M5) have more physical dials/buttons and 3 of those mirrorless have articulated screen while having a smaller body. All, except for the G6, have better IQ than the Canon as well.
As Canon user who has switched to m43, this won't make me go back and is far from being a "mirrorless killer". For me, the only Canon I would consider is a fullframe, like the 6D, but the size, weight and mainly the price deter me.
bluevellet: Is this... the highest rating for an entry-level, mirrorless camera at DPR? It looks like it.
What makes this camera slightly better than, say, the NEXF3 (closest rival reviewed at DPR)?
4) IBIS5) hotshoe6) EVF option
Mescalamba: - Slow AF in live view and video modes (compared to mirrorless APS-C cameras)
Suprising really. And as its supposedly big enough problem, are you aware of any dSLR that has fast AF in LV or video mode? I would be suprised if you know about one.
I have nothing agaisnt if you mention somewhere that it doesnt have fast AF in LV or video mode. For those who have no idea how AF works or they were under rock when mirrorless came. But it shouldnt be con for simple reason. LIVE VIEW CANT BE FAST WITH DSLR!
Unless you for that purpose put AF sensors directly on sensor (ala NEX-6 and others). Which Nikon didnt. Neither Canon, or Pentax. And I doubt they will.
I commonly see friends, family and other people who just got a DSLR or rarely shoot one use it like a P&S and get annoyed because of the slow LV. For the D5200, the problem is more of an issue as the articulated screen is a major selling point over other Nikon models. Anyway, both Nikon and Canon are behind in this regard. What's funny is that a T5i, even with its on sensor PDAF and STM lens, is still slower in LV than Olympus/Panasonic with purely CDAF. Nikon and Canon need to work on their CDAF implementation since its not just the case of PDAF only lenses.