Didn't Pentax get the memo-quota of cameras with "X" in the model name has been exceeded for the next decade.
I think Nikon D3200 and EOS 650D give us baseline value DSLRs. Now, it will be interesting to see how Pentax K-30 and Sony A57 compare.
Atlasman: The press release makes no reference to Four-Thirds (FT), it just acknowledges that the E-M5 is not capable of utilizing existing FT lenses.
The solution that they are working on could still be something other than a new pro E-System.
Olympus would do better to develop a smart adapter for m4/3 that utilizes the existing pro-grade lenses. The adapter could actually help Olympus expand their market to sell more of the FT pro-grade lenses. Another pro-level E-System would only be sold to existing lens owners.
Yes. Because the OM-D EM-5 has from the start begged the question "What would come next." We have an improved sensor, a retro form factor with an EVF, so would the next camera be a lower-priced model, more upscale, etc. Also, what next for the Digital PEN line?
Samsung has 16mm, 20mm, 30mm and 60mm for its APS-C sensor compact system cameras. I expect these NEX cameras are excellent, but the interface is not agile, even in simple mode. Sometimes, less is not more.
One of first digital cameras, the Kodak DC290, could be "programmed." All these (brief) years and the full potential of camera as computer has yet to be realized. Manufacturers want the DSLR, etc. to be relevant in the age of smartphones, etc. Why not exploit these potentials?
Wish these were longer demonstrations, including standing in front of some real scenes, plus, as someone suggested video. Also, the issue could be speed as related to accuracy. Is one mode faster or faster and more accurate.
First. Just because we've gone digital, I still wish cameras had multiple exposure capability like this. Second. Clearly, the still camera, even super high-end ones, are under duress. Video. Multiple exposure. HDR. Needed to compete with other formats.
Charrick: Oh yeah... This is a real question that I don't know the answer to.
Would using a lower resolution mode in a high megapixel camera be much worse than having a lower resolution sensor to begin with? If so, why exactly? (And would it make a difference if exactly four larger pixels were combined into one smaller pixel?) If not, why complain about more megapixels?
Good question. Have yet to see an explanation.
It is amazing. Samsung and others can embed Wi-Fi into a small, point and shoot camera and here we need an adapter, at extra cost, that looks awkward to use.
"As we said in the introduction to this review, the D3200 doesn't need to represent a massive leap forward from its predecessor in order to be sucessful. What it does need to be is competitive in an entry-level DSLR market" Wouldn't it be nice if a manufacturer exceeded expectations. Well-measured review. Based on preview info, I expected something that would shout "tremendous value."
Looks good. Sony does have some relatively affordable primes. Otherwise, someone buys an SLR with kit lens, where can they go if additional lenses are $400-$500-$600.
Despite the complexity of this site, it loads rather quickly. Please keep it that way. We all don't have the latest and greatest computer or multitudes of memory. In fact, I often switch to dpreview to get out of a "spinning" site.
DoctorJerry: I just wish you spent more resources on writing reviews. That is what made your site great. I fail to understand the lack of reviews done when it really matters, like as soon after a camera's release.
I'd rather wait for the "real thing." Not interested in a rush to judgment. I think you can also be more selective (as in the past) as to whether a camera gets reviewed. I think it must be significant to that camera line or the marketplace.
No doubt this will be a very good camera-image quality-wise. But very conservative. Take an already existing sensor and touch interface; use an Elph platform; etc. For the price, it should have been a two-lens kit.
I do give Nikon credit for trying to stretch the envelope performance-wise and we can see the strategy of each. Expand to new users. Don't tread on existing DSLRs. Those with less market share must be the innovators.
kakman: It looks like a nice start and it would be fun to play with. I wouldn't buy one though, I'd want a viewfinder and better control layout. Being able to use DSLR lenses is nice but if I'm going to lug around L Series lenses I'd just use my DSLR.
For this style of camera I think Fuji have the overall design right with the X Series, they just need to sort out a few issues and it will be great. I'm looking for a digital replacement for my much loved Contax G series which was small, light and extremely well performed.
"I'm looking for a digital replacement for my much loved Contax G series which was small, light and extremely well performed." Exactly. And Contax, and now Fuji, are the only ones I am aware of that have tried to advance viewer technology.
NikonScavenger: Every mirrorless camera seems to be a mess of compromises. You give up a big sensor, or a viewfinder, or external controls, a lens library, or a flash hotshoe. What is the point of having a camera system if there are 3-4 lenses for it? Canon is now going to spend time and money developing their mirrorless lenses, but most kit buyers will NEVER take off the 18-55 once they first install it. Once you put a flash on it and a walkaround lens, the mirrorless camera becomes big once again.
Do the majority of the people who buy these things have a huge lens library, do DSLR owners really want a scaled down SLR? I've gone on vacations, planes, trains and have just taken creative measures to cram my D300 into my luggage.
I had a m4/3 camera. It wasn't very portable. The pictures weren't as good as my Nikon, the AF wasn't as advanced, you could put a flash on it, but the flash was twice the size and weight of the camera. You could put it in a pocket, as long as you took the lens and hood off.
The answer to your question is Samsung NX5/10/11/20 or Panasonic G or GH series. The Samsung is what Canon or Nikon could have come up with, an APS-C sensor, an exceptional form factor and EVF in place of OVF, which I have come to accept. NO ONE is pushing the boundaries of what a viewfinder could do except Fuji.
Francis Sawyer: Still no intervalometer. On a MIRRORLESS camera, ideal for time lapse. Not to mention the other uses; people don't realize how much easier it is to get a group shot if you just start the camera firing every couple of seconds and then get into the picture. You have a much higher chance of getting everyone looking decent if you roll off a bunch of shots.
Instead of this practically free-to-implement feature, Canon gives us asinine "filters" in the camera. Useless crap.
Canon is just going farther into the weeds every day.
Olympus PEN has a nice delay feature before shutter trips.
I wish they had called this mirrorless IXUS and IXUS-M mount.
Boerseuntjie: It's about time Canon made one of these, but did they have to make it this ugly?I will give them credit for not doing what "Samsung" A.K.A Copy master have done and just copy what Sony has done.
Not to mention that the Samsung cameras have flat-out stupendous interface. Best ergonomics I have ever found in a digital camera.