kadardr: You can put a Wifi SD card into it, and chimp your phone...
Then tape your phone to the back of the camera.
ISO, aperture, *AND* shutter controls? Too distracting. I want to control exposure by removing and replacing the lens cap. Get on it Leica.
tecnoworld: Perhaps in 10 years this technology will be accessible to many (i.e. tools small enough and storage speed high enough at low cost).
Perhaps in 10 years all movies/TV/commercials will be photo-real CGI and the demand for expensive cameras that do novel tricks will be non-existent.
Kurt_K: 80% seems pretty high for what was called the "worst camera of the year" by the savvy folks at The Camera Store.
Maybe the zoom lens was accepted as equivalent.
PS. I misread Dale's post. He stated HD Tier 1 (I gave UHD Tier 1 req.), which is 50 Mbit/s inter-frame or 100 Mbit/s intra-frame.
Tier 1 classification requires 4k/UHD @ 200 Mbit/s or better.
CameraLabTester: Hold your horses and don't worry folks... It's just an APPLICATION for Patent.
April Fool or not, they may get to hold of this for about 14 to 20 years, depending on Utility or Design application.
But don't expect any development from Canon.
They just want to hold their aces up their armpits for this silly idea.
They cant even implement EYE CONTROL® on their DSLRs, let alone this.
They might not have something for 20 years. Or they might have a fully working prototype camera ready for commercialization.
Simply applying for a patent doesn't tell you where they are with the technology.
photominion: I really hope that they'll bring this!I hate EVF cameras and mostly end up using them at arms length, but the EVF in a DSLR would be great with adapted lenses.(focus peaking and magnification)
Or simply imagine the possibilities:Focus peaking, zebras, exp. Warning, etc overlayed on the optical viewfinder image!!!
I don't believe focus peaking will be possible on the optical image.
When you see the optical image, the mirror is down and blocking the sensor. So the camera has no image to process to give you zebra stripes, focus peaking, histogram, etc. It will only have access to the normal DSLR metering and AF data.
What it can do in optical mode is give you menus, show the photo you just took, etc. Anything not requiring the sensor.
But you should be able to quickly switch between optical and evf as needed. Swing the mirror up and the live view image can be streamed to the viewfinder just like a normal EVF. In that mode, its basically a mirrorless camera.
belle100: Is this a complicated and expensive solution to a non-existing problem? Why bother when something like A6300 EVF exists already. It's hard to understand.
I think the Canon management should give their engineers a break (perhaps a holiday) and buy the know how from Sony instead. That's what I call the best of both worlds ;-)
btw, happy birthday Canon.
Many people still prefer an OVF. Adding functionality to the OVF is welcome to these people.
If you prefer an EVF, then buy a camera with an EVF. Demanding that all cameras conform to your own narrow needs is silly.
pshummer: AF speed of my Sigma 150-600 C has substantially improved after I installed the new firmware update by a Sigma dock. Nikon/Canon should follow the Sigma's idea. The Sigma dock is such a huge time saver.
My understanding is that all new Canon lenses, from the release of the 40mm pancake (late 2012) and onward, can be updated using one of the newer camera bodies (5d3 and onward, 2012+).
Digitalis32: Neutrino coating? really?
How else are you going to stop tachyons from messing up your shots?
webrunner5: When you compare it to a Nikon 7200 well guess what it still is not as good. Nice try Canon. Better than before, but still behind.
I have been a Canon user for years and years, but 3 years ago I just gave up on their new stuff. They are living in the past. And still are.
They make darn good lenses, better than Nikon, and have more of what you need but...
.. but the small difference in DR performance still renders their entire camera system utterly useless despite having amazing lenses and more of what you need.
HansN46: Sorry folks, I don't want to play the wiseguy...., let me know if you think I'm wrong.
But, by photo 10 you suggest that the spring will save some battery life. I'm sorry but I don't think so. According to the law of physics (in this case: W=F*d, work = force multiplied by distance) this will not save any power. My physics teacher taught me the slogan (translated from Dutch...): "work will never be lost". He slammed it into my brain.The battery may not have to deliver power to move the lens forward because of the spring, but it has to deliver much more power the pull the lens back into the camera, against the tension of the spring.
I suppose the spring is to let the lens move more smoothly and evenly in and out. Right or not?
I'm wondering if the spring is to compensate for a slow focus motor. Perhaps the spring pushes the lens through its range, then the motor fine tunes the focus.
However, I've never handled a X100. My guess would be easy to test, as the camera would have different focus speeds for going to infinity and vice versa.
Lea5: too much envy here....
It's like in the Porsche Forum. When a new 911 will be released, all the Prius owners dive in and complain about cost, weight, speed and why their Prius is so much better than the 911 etc. envy, envy, envy. So funny.
I wish people would just stop with these analogies.
If the Leica SL system is better than a Sony A7 system (for example), you shouldn't have to make reference to the price or make analogies about cars. You should be able to clearly state why the system is better with objective statements in regard to the system's performance.
But all I see is "this expensive car is better than this cheaper car".... Relevance?
DPR's tests show the Leica sensor is not class leading, Sony's are. But let's talk about Ferraris instead. Reviews say AF speed is OK but not class leading and that focus tracking is inferior. But let's talk about BMWs. Build quality is very good, but also very heavy. We could discuss the pros/cons of that, or we could talk about Mercedes...
dka91: The question Im wondering is...will the AF assist light work on any of the MILC versions of this flash.
CDAF mirrorless and point & shoot cameras routinely have an "af illuminator", which is just a small red light that acts as a flashlight.
There's no reason why that light can't be on a flash unit for mirrorless cameras. Its usually not done because the camera usually has one already, so its redundant.
My 5D3 has no such illuminator, so its actually necessary for the Canon flashes to incorporate one.
The benefit of having it on the camera is that its always with you. The benefit of having it on the flash is that its further away from the body and isn't blocked by large lenses, hoods, or filters.
art99: Does the world need another aps size sensor ?Cannot Foveon make a real FF sensor with exceptional low light performance ? Like a sd quattro FF.
I'm guessing that if Sigma developed a FF Foveon sensor, the camera would cost even more than the original aps-c SD1 ($9000).
By using a modified version of their existing aps-c sensor, it likely allows them to offer a competitive price.
Horshack: This is what the RX100 would have been if Sony engineers were told the camera doesn't have to fit in a pocket. As it is, the DL 16-50 is thicker than an LX100:
DL 16-50: 106 x 63 x 58 mmLX100: 114.8 x 66.2 x 55.0 mm
My one annoyance with the LX100 is the lack of a titling screen, which the Nikon appears to have.
Chris Noble: This lens is actually a Panasonic lens, and the lens is called the "Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmar 100-400mm F4-6.3 ASPH". The name Leica is used as part of the lens name by license from Leica to Panasonic. Knowledgeable consumers know the branding agreement, and DPR does not hide it in other coverage, but you should refer to it by its whole name rather than cutting the manufacturer's name off the title of this article.
Your wish is my command:
DPR does not mention the manufacturer of the Zeiss Touit lenses, which is not Zeiss in Germany, but Cosina in Japan. The reason is that its not branded as a Cosina lens, but a Zeiss lens.
I'm not aware of any DPR article where they've injected the manufacturer of the lens into the title when it wasn't part of the branding.
sneakyracer: I would expect a variable f4-f6.3 zoom from Tamron but from Leica? I am sure the quality is great but still, I would prefer a constant 5.6 throughout the range. Canon was able to make a really good one.
It's trivial to adjust exposure for changing aperture, DSLR or mirrorless. However these lenses are most often used for wildlife and sports. You don't always have time to adjust exposure as you're panning/zooming, when most of your concentration needs to be on the animal/sport.
F5.6-6.3 is trivial in good light. However as illustrated by this article, finding good light with a F5.6 lens is much harder. You are having to balance shutter speed (to eliminate blur) against raising ISO (add noise). So for wildlife/sports, you're often looking at ISO 3200, a region where m43 sensors begin to struggle and any increase in ISO is undesirable.
So I agree with the OP in that F5.6 would have been preferred. I would happily trade some size/weight for an aperture that should be attainable in this price range.
But I don't think its a show-stopper at all. Ultimately, if this lens is sharp, it will find a use by m43 users.
Panasonic appears (based on their website) to have removed "Panasonic" from its official name and are now just calling it the the Leica DG ...
So yes, this is obviously a Panasonic lens. But DPR is using the correct product name.
With the 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 you can shoot a constant F5.6 through the entire range, which is what the OP stated. You put your aperture at F5.6 and you can zoom through the entire range without changing your exposure settings. This is critical in challenging lighting where you have to rely on manual exposure settings.