Princess Leia: Canon is falling behind this market. Nikon high end compact is in the works and Sony is way ahead with Rx1.
Han Solo would disagree. About the Canon part. Canon is the "Millenium Falcon" of the industry, even if Sony is the "Empire". Cheers! :)
Recently I've read a comparative test: the new Audi A6 vs the new BMW 5. One of these at the end of the review got the first place. Let's say it was the Audi (I can't remember). But does this mean that the BMW 5 is "worse"?!? So, if you want to compare the D600 with the 6D and claim that the 6D got "just" the silver... then please remember that it is a wonderful camera and the real world is only about personal taste at this quality level. Driving any of the A6 or 5 series will be a pleasure, taking photos with the D600 or the 6D will be the same. Cheers! :)
Please read carefully and don't be fooled: this is "usual" corporate "smoke screen". The quantity of information you (we) got is (almost) "zero", this gentleman (Mr. Maeda) is very good. Cheers! :)
Mmmm... nope, not for me (I had a look on it as a side camera for my 5DIII). My take: for Canon owners with FF desire/need, aspirations, but tight budget, yes, for neophytes either this or the D600 will do the job (many will eventually end up on this site, posting comments about "mine is better than yours"). Cheers! :)
Once upon a time I was the proud owner of the S3IS... Since then, I went the DSLR "way", owning various APS-C & FF camera bodies from Canon. Now, I was curious about the 50X "performance", because as I do not make money from photography, a (=THE) 1200 mm lens is out of scope - otherwise my wife will prepare an IED or equivalent. Just one opinion: at the "perceived quality" level, the SX50 looks... cheap (well, at least compared with the G series). It seems that indeed Canon is doing some hard "cost cutting" work. For the rest, however, I was impressed - and I will certainly buy one, just for the fun to have access to that amazing zoom range... as per the IQ, you cannot have the 5DIII quality here, right? :) Cheers! :)
Michael Yung: I wonder ... if the winner is Canon, Nikon, or Sony, would people say the "poll" is "meaningless" ?
@Timmbits: there is no such thing as the "perfect" camera, therefore each camera is a compromise. For instance, I also shoot macro (I am a big fan of it, and I am using the Canon MP-E 65 f/2.8 & 100 f/2.8 IS & the Tamron 180 f/3.5), and cropping "ability" is an important factor (for me, anyway). The bigger the resolution of the sensor, the better. Cheers! :) (P.S.: again, please don't get me wrong, 5D III is outstanding, but not "perfect").
I don't know about the others, but as a Canon 5D Mk III user, I will. Because only THE OWNER can define the BEST CAMERA for its needs. If printing on A2 format and above is what I will ever need, then Nikon D800 (or medium format) might be the answer, and I will certainly buy one. If photographing my kids or other "reasonably fast" moving objects (or low light items) is my primary need, then I will stay with the 5D III. And for me, that is THE BEST CAMERA (a compromise, obviously). Fiat Panda might be The CAR of the YEAR, but what if I need 7 places? Happy New Year & Cheers! :)
stefano888: CameraLabTester wrote:"Interesting outcome as of closing time.
Of the Top Ten cameras, by BRAND:
Nikon is No.1 (4,429 votes) and Sony is No.2 (2,504 votes)
Where's Canon?"Is Olympus N°.2 (3,568 votes)...
@stefano888 - here is Canon, oh dear oh dear: http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/12/canon-sells-more-dslrs-than-anyone/Cheers! :) :) :)
Zerg2905: History repeating: the Tiger I (or II) had a huge 88 mm gun (like the sensor on the D800) but was a sluggish and non-reliable (mechanichally) piece of machinery. It was devastating however, but only in open field and in perfect conditions. The Pershing tank was a very good all-rounder (like the Canon 5D Mk III), but even if it was reliable, relatively quick and had a powerful gun it was perceived as "inferior" to the Tiger, and arived very late. And, in the end, the T-34 (OM-D) was the one that made the difference. Ha-haaaa... Cheers! :)
Saumur & Bovington, done. Munster & Kubinka, not done yet. But you see, they have a Maus in Kubinka... But both Maus (worked only as prototype) & Jagdtiger were not that "mobile" (Jagdtiger was more used in "fixed" positions and hat terrible combat disadvantages). You cannot compare 88 Jagdtigers with thousands of T-34s, Shermans, ISs, ISUs etc - and this to your point about "superiority". In this case, "production" superiority. Cheers! :) :) :) P. S.: I will stop here (I appreciated the discussion), and wish you all a Happy New Year! :)
@illy: well, well, then in your opinion the biggest CORPORATION with photography as main business is (pick one from Canon, Nikon, Olympus)? Oh dear, Canon is an easy winner. "Bombing" everyone else with their production facilities, R&D etc. So, "poor factual evidence"? Cheers! :) P.S.: yes, it took 5 Shermans to take out a single Tiger, but there were exceptions - a) if the Sherman was the British modified Firefly with the 17pdr gun, ask Wittman what happened with his Tiger...; b) playing "hide & seek" in Normandy, the Shermans were able to outmaneuver the Tiger and bang, hit them from the back! c) there were other examples as well... But I will get back to my T-34 example - in Kursk, the Tigers were no match for the armada of T-34s... And more, just for the sake of "factual evidence": IS-2, ISU 122 & even ISU-152 were also operational... Not sure if you have seen one of these "lifesize". Hope we will see one camera equivalent in 2013! :) :) :)
:-) - - - @Peter 1745 et al.: exactly! So, "The Best Camera"?!?!?!? No way. Cheers! :) P.S.: Sherman = a good example, too.
History repeating: the Tiger I (or II) had a huge 88 mm gun (like the sensor on the D800) but was a sluggish and non-reliable (mechanichally) piece of machinery. It was devastating however, but only in open field and in perfect conditions. The Pershing tank was a very good all-rounder (like the Canon 5D Mk III), but even if it was reliable, relatively quick and had a powerful gun it was perceived as "inferior" to the Tiger, and arived very late. And, in the end, the T-34 (OM-D) was the one that made the difference. Ha-haaaa... Cheers! :)
A-haaa: a good Sigma! Cheers! :)
whiteheat: What is meant by and how is "Best Camera of 2012" defined? Best is so imprecise and can be used to mean or measure a multitude facets and characteristics, that it is meaningless to ask such a question.
"Genau". Cheers! :)
Market research tool: with a slight to huge (=No. of fanboys) degree of error, this will show the camera users that are accessing DPR by brand. This and nothing else (= the best camera, no way). It is impossible to have an accurate determination without comparing the sales of brand x model y with those of brand z model t for an identical period. This, ultimately, determines "the best camera". My take. Cheers! :) P. S.: I will vote for the Canon 1DX (reason: it is the camera that reset the pro clock, again).
Long live PR! Long live Marketing! (oops, Canon did a better job/time unit, right? 80 m EF lenses since 1987...) - Cheers! :) :) :) P. S.: this was an intentional "tsk...tsk...tsk..." - please don't take it seriously! :)
"Customers have no idea about what they want; we tell them what they want.", Steve Jobs said. Sony got it (since they failed to invent iPod, the natural evolution of the Walkman), and many will love the "Underdog" (a false Underdog, just another greedy Corporation, but still...). Cheers! :)
Vitruvius: I shoot about 95% with articulated screen so I am really disappointed that Canon would "upgrade" by REMOVING the articulated screen. It is something they helped pioneer and they did it well and some of us actually NEED it for what we do. So why would they reduce their own potential market by removing this? Makes no sense to me. They have already developed it. There is very little extra cost to add it. And how much camera thickness does it really save to remove it? Likey not much.
@ Francis Carver: so? If true, then the laws of Capitalism will send Canon in the history books, and quickly. Let's discuss again when this will happen. Cheers! :)
Looks good. Once upon a time I sold all my Sigma lenses because...well, you know why. Hope the results will be replicated on a larger scale and many of the "copies" will be at the same level. And now, tadaaaa: let's bet - Canon will introduce a new 35 mm ("the sharpest ever made"...) f/1.4 at... 2500 USD/EUR (optimistic scenario). Cheers! :)
cgarrard: The only problem I have worth mentioning with Canon's image quality on their DSLRS is banding. Looks like the 6D is yet another camera with this issue.
Canon and Panasonic are notorious for it, and to me, it's nearly a complete deal breaker for Canon. Luckily their Powershot Camera division got the message and can produce ISO 12,800 images from the G15 that are actually pretty decent with zero banding.
It's odd to me to watch Canon lose their grip as a market leader. Not sending DPR a review sample (been an issue for a while now and not just with DPR), not catching up in sensor technology, and not being as competitive as Nikon on DSLR's.... one has to wonder who's calling the shots over there at Canon (both USA and Japan that is).
It's pretty clear to see from the outside that Canon seems to be losing ground on reality, even though they continue to post profits. That won't last long and I dare say next year they might get a big dose of reality.
@All (no offense intended): Learn the ways of the CORPORATION, you must... Cheers! :) P.S.: I've just had a terrible experience - my Teutonic car entered the scheduled maintenance (1 day) and I got a Toyota Avensis as a spare car. There was no "Vorsprung Durch Technik" feeling at all, it was the most boring thing I was able to drive so far, but it did the job. I think this will be the role of the 6D.: to do the job. Each and every day.