When we look at a preview, review, camera in the archive, there's are always links to Amazon and some other retailers. Will there now be GearShop links?
RichRMA: In the late 1980's a magazine called, "Astronomy" had an editor named Richard Berry. Berry was a straight-shooter and started to review telescopes and other astronomical products with a critical eye. This was a time when a lot of trash was being turned out because comet Halley's appearance was causing telescope makers to ramp up production and avoid proper testing. Berry said as much and shortly thereafter was relieved of duty of the magazine by the Board because he was slagging advertiser's products.
Didn't Olympus E-10/E-20 have something similar for boosting ISO. But one would think we'd have seen more ideas like this.
They don't attach to the visceral senses in the same way (anyone who has developed black and white film negatives understands), but certainly digital generated images are as magical as those generated by silver halide chemistry. Can't judge this work, but I welcome those, like Fuji or Foveon, that are trying to look at these arrays in a different way. Why can't the array be non-symmetrical, not homogeneous, for example.
tecnoworld: Finally nx support! After so long this great system is getting recognized.
Others have nailed it for Samsung NX.-APS-C sensor-outstanding gestalt of body shape, size, construction-good to excellent image quality-kit lens is excellent-superb, best-in-class ergonomics and interface-works well w/legacy lenses, including new 5x, 8x enlargement-nice, useful post-exposure in-camera options-easy control of focus spot and location-everything works: focus, exposure, white balance-excellent implementation of Wi-Fi
I'm almost glad these cameras are under-appreciated. Keeps prices reasonable.
AllBrands: Any chance these cameras were actually tested to see how waterproof they really are? There are loads of consumer complaints about Panasonic waterproof cameras that got water inside and failed at, allegedly, the first hint of any water. Panasonic then denies warranty coverage claiming abuse or user error in each case. Sure there are a lot of dummies out there but many of the complaints I've read sound very credible. Doubly so in light of the many horror stories I've read time and again about Panasonic warranty support in general here in the USA. Just saying - I don't care how good the image quality is if the camera fails the first time it's used as designed. It would be good to test that too, no?
Yes, but did you take it down the Marianas Trench.
There's a new tyranny. We must work without wheels, dials and buttons, waving our fingers in front of our field of vision constantly. There is a place and use for touch screens, but far, far greater proprioceptive and information processing power in the simple computer mouse, even given the new touchscreen "gestures." Or as we advance in voice commands, do folks really want to talk their way through everything.
RadPhoto: Doesn't this look like Sony NEX? Can't Samsung come up with something original?
Night and day. The Samsungs are simply more agile and powerful cameras due to the superior interface.
JWest: I wish DPReview would stop insulting my NX100's appearance by recycling their "unlovable molten plastic" comment every single time they review any Samsung NX product. :)
The camera that gets no respect. Great for users; keeps prices low. Outstanding cameras.
guyfawkes: I was surprised at how poor the image quality appeared, even at base IS0, to the Sony Nex 5N. Check the comparator images, I invariably use the top portion of the globe, that I had to double check that the Samsung used an APS-C sensor.
The results seemed at odds with the assessment of image quality. Was there a problem with the studio set up for the Samsung session? Not enough depth of field, perhaps? Or is the result indeed indicative of the (lack of?) quality from this camera?
Given usability, richness of interface and capabilities, world-class ergonomics, even an old-timer like myself would say "image ain't everything." The Samung sensors are no slouches.
mcshan: I have kept my EPL1. With the Pan 20 1.7 it is a nice combination. As others have noted I don't see a notable increase in IQ etc. The pictures are just samples of real world shooting and not meant to be art but IF I had not owned the EPL1 there isn't much in these photos to get excited about.
If there is still a banding problem with the above mentioned 20 lens it would be a game changer for me as it was my favorite M4/3 lens. The funny part is there was never a banding problem with the EPL1 but seemed to come in with later models the OMD most notably.
Thanks for the samples.
Good to know. But @ $129 for a factory demo from Cameta, I've been pleased with the E-PL1.
Bobby Handal: Yep, I am guilty. But if you already own your home, put your children through college, have a very decent income - why not? whats the point of being the richest man in the cemetery?.
Are you saving money so that when you pass away, your wife's new husband enjoys it ?
I am going to enjoy my life. I am going to buy whatever I can afford , not more.
I love waiting for that recently announced camera, I love reading rumors, sheesh I even sit down and design on paper what would be the perfect camera for me.
The main problem for me? is what equipment to take oin a photo shoot !!! I love it. yep, I am guilty.
Accumulate experiences, not possessions, but, yes, your reasoning is sound. There are a lot worse addictions/hobbies/obsessions than cameras.
That EPL1 was very well wrought for its time (admittedly EVF not the greatest and 12 versus 16 MP sensor; noisy shutter) and remains one of the best values in photography given current prices. The image quality is excellent and "good at 100 percent," unlike so many cameras. Shake reduction, good dust reduction system, has a flash, can take a viewfinder, every custom setting imaginable.
JPR.lda: No need to change the concept, just implement properly a few things:1- built in WIFI across the full Nikon camera range, without limitations2- make Nikon 1, ergonomically compatible with D4, D8003- make Nikon 1 compatible with CLS flash system4- make a Nikon 1 top of the line, with a 6Mpx Hi ISO sensor V#x and V#h5- Articulated LCD
I explain what I mean by the above requests:1- communications are important, just build WIFI inside the camera, not a stupid adapter at silly prices. In a shoot I need to show the customer the photos on a tablet, or post them iImmediately for approval.
2- I am a Pro using D3s and V2, each one for different jobs. It's crazy to memorize all the different ways to set the camera. V2 and lens are priced at pro level, so make it easier for a pro to use it
3- I want to be able to Nikon flash and Pocket Wizards
4- there is a D3s and a D3x, I would love a V3s, with better ISO then standard V# and 6Mpx is enough for most jobs
Good thoughts. Recent 8-page Nikon-Best Buy insert in USA Today-not cheap. Page after page, WiFi with optional adapter, while Canon, Samsung, Panasonic? are already there. Samsung, in particular, gets it.
Does G5 already have low light focus and silent mode?
Alec: Judging by the fit and finish, this must be one of the very old and/or lower end homebrew 3D printers. I've seen the results from current commercial grade 3D printers in metal and several plastics - if you know what to look for, you can still tell it was 3D-printed rather than conventionally manufactured, but just barely.
I am convinced this ugly duckling is the writing on the wall. I believe personal 3D printers will follow the path of conventional desktop printers. In 1992 many people had dot matrix printers, equivalent in the crudeness of results to the camera above. Then Epson came out with the 720dpi Stylus Color. With that relatively affordable printer and inks and good paper, everybody could suddenly produce vibrant and sharp results. You could see the dots, but more to the point, you could see a beautiful document or photo. That's the level of quality attainable today from many 3D print shops.
I think even more so at the consumer level. I see very few photo inkjet papers at a Target or OfficeMax. Folks are uploading to a Walgreens and picking up the prints in store, I believe.
Paul Janders: My favorite Nikon compacts were the 950, 4500 and S 10. Each of those had a split body that somewhat replicated the convenience of an articulated viewing screen. I still use my S 10 from time to time and I'm still waiting for Nikon to bring an articulated view screen to a professional grade SLR. The screen on the new Canon 70D really looks nice. If I had Canon lenses I would snap that body up in a second.
Just took my Coolpix 800 camera for a spin-one of the first digital cameras that demonstrated the potential of the medium. That swivel, split design is superb. I agree.
Gully Foyle: Re-posting an answer of mine from below, why do I think this is a failed product:
1. Because there are others who can do better.2. Because Pentax could do better.3. Because its lifespan measured months (except for Japan, apparently).4. Because hardly a year after announcement it sell for half its initial price.5. Because the nicely build metal body was overwhelmed by funny plastics.6. Because the design belies its enormous capabilities.7. Because it's a genuine idea spoiled by bad execution.8. Because there are SO many things Pentax could have done right and didn't.
And to be clear, I truly admire and love Pentax, a K10D is the camera I've had used the most of all the cameras I had. But as I said, I admire them, not worship them.
A mirrorless camera really needs a shorter flange distance: makes the camera more compact; allows one to use thousands of extant lenses. Then, make an affordable, quality adapter for your K-mount glass and include it with the camera.
The Samsung NX1000 (now available for $300 w/lens) runs rings around a camera like this. Same APS-C size sensor, compact as any interchangeable lens camera out there, excellent video and world-class interface and ergonomics. Only thing lacking from K-01 is in-body shake reduction.
If the reviews were harsher (i.e. more honest rating), it might encourage the OEMs to develop models with better image quality. I don't get it. This is one of the only compact camera segments with strong growth potential, but .... What happened, Nikon, to the Nikonos legacy.
Rod McD: Quote from the conclusion :- "Details are smudged at base ISO (though likely not an issue for target audience)"
Why is there this ongoing assumption that people who like the outdoors aren't interested in better IQ? In my experience, people who want tough, WR cameras to take to wild places greatly value where they go and the images they bring back. Perhaps the target audience who buy these cameras do so because there's simply nothing better available. It doesn't mean it isn't wanted and wouldn't sell. And no, one shouldn't have to carry a D4 in housing. We need something in-between - a modern day Nikonos with a fixed wide to standard zoom.
Surely someone could make a better small WR camera with a 1"- APSC sensor, a WA zoom, and real O-ring seals? Yes it would weigh more and cost more, but many would be prepared to pay more for a comprehensively better outdoor camera.
How else should an image be judged but at 100 percent pixel view. This "it will look better when downsampled" defies logic/common sense. I've looked at many a camera's output and there is a difference. My Kodak Z8612 IS can stand scrutiny at per pixel level, but of course Kodak failed in the marketplace!