bentheoandrews: Fuji X30 and XQ2 now officially discontinued. Keep up DPR.
I agree. I think the other makers could learn a lot from the XF/XQ compacts when it comes to making a good interface whether you want to point-and-shoot or take control.
I'd love to see that in a 1"-type compact some day.
There's a page of recommendations at the end of the article in which neither is included.
We haven't recommended them, which isn't the same thing as recommending against choosing them. I realise my phrasing is ambiguous.
Tactical Falcon: Now that the K-1 is available, I wonder when a review is coming.
Ricoh USA has not shipped review units out yet. We're poised to start testing the camera the moment it gets here.
Alhazen: With all the camera comparison tools on the site, why not add an equivalent aperture comparison tool? I mean, the equivalent aperture charts that show up in reviews are nice and all, but it would be much much handier to be able to choose which cameras show up in the chart, rather than needing to look at one of 9 lines in this chart and try to compare to one of another half dozen lines in another chart that doesn't have the same axis scaling.
At the moment the data is stored in an Excel spreadsheet I maintain. We'd need to get the data into the database, then set up the code to plot the curves and the interface for choosing the cameras for comparison.
photominion: Does the equivalency-comparison account for the fact that the LX100 uses a crop of the 4/3s sensor and not the entire surface at any given time?
Yes, both the LX100 and G1X II are calculated based on the crops of the sensor they can actually use.
nwfmike: Sorry, didn't read all the comments (628 and counting) so maybe this has been answered, but how does this score an 84 and get a Silver and the Sony a6000 scores an 80 and gets a Gold. The link http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Guides/dpreview_scores_and_ratings_01.htm that describes the scoring rules is down.
Not that it is a big deal, Gold and Silver stars don't mean much and these reviews with pros and cons can be a bit of a moving target...just wondering how the Gold and Silver is applied.
Try [this link](http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4416254604/camera-scores-ratings-explained) instead.
It tries to make clear that:
*They are not awarded to every camera, just those we feel deserve one.*
*There is no direct link between the overall score and the awards: they are not given automatically to cameras reaching a certain threshold. Crucially a camera can get an award even if a camera with a higher overall score didn't.*
The scores are mainly based on the objective measurements we make and are heavily weighted towards image quality. The awards are the lead reviewer's overall assessment of what the camera as a whole offers. We try to explain why one camera does and doesn't get an award.
The sources we ask say that they're still available. Ultimately, though, we don't recommend either of them, so you can just skip over those pages if you're not interested or they're not available.
CopCarSS: Reading any DPR article that discusses equivalency and the shouting match that it's sure to bring about gives me the equivalent heart burn of a chili cheese dog and an order of buffalo wings.
However, in an article that includes cameras with different sensor sizes pitted against one another, it makes sense to provide a way of visualising their lenses on a common basis.
Joel Ebel: Why does the line for the RX100 I/II end below 50mm on the equivalent aperture graph? Those cameras have a longer zoom range that the III/IV versions. That seems like an error.
Sorry about that. A really basic Excel error on my part had chopped the rest of the line off.
It should now be appearing.
JDar: Thanks for the post. Informative and nice update. You may consider to include an iPhone in comparison chart. It would be nice to get a perspective how much you gain by actually getting one of those cameras. A lot of people nowadays (including me) have their phones on them all the time. The newest one (6s+) has 4k video and optical image stabilization which I've got to say, works great. And of course touch screen. But how does the size of the sensor, depth of field and IQ compare to these cameras? Is it still worth to invest in another device to carry around. Or maybe just move on to DSLR, because at least we get APS-C sensor and some nice glass. Would love to see that kind of analysis.... For my part I was thinking of Pana LX-100 for it being the closest to DSLR experience in a small package. But the lack of IS in video and fixed touch-less screen made me wait for something new... And yeah, the build in ND would be nice too. Maybe film log...Still I love my cannon's color rendition.
The iPhone has a roughly 30mm equivalent field of view, I believe and its f/2.2 maximum aperture would be equivalent to roughly f/15.5.
aramgrg: Dear Dpreview, In G1X II "allowing you to maintain the same angle of view at 3:4 and 4:3" should probably be 3:2 and 4:3
That's true - only in 1:1 can you have the same angle of view in both portrait or landscape orientation.
DogsOdMarymoorPark: I have already limited my AF area mode selection (a9) but you say there is a quick way to change the AF area mode without pushing the AF mode button, can you explain how?
Most of the custom buttons can be set (Menu f1) to 'AF-area mode' or 'A-area mode + AF ON' depending on whether you want the camera to then refocus in your newly-chosen mode.
You get to specify which AF-area mode the camera jumps to.
Rambler358: I might just sell off my Sony gear for this.
Very few cameras feature built-in GPS - the logic is probably that those people who need it will be willing to pay for it, but there aren't enough of them to force everyone to have to pay for it (especially given this camera can pull location info across its link to a smartphone).
Again with the pop-up flash: I suspect Nikon felt more people would appreciate the bigger, better viewfinder of the D500, than would use the pop-up flash. I think they'd also like to encourage people into using the RF flash triggers via the 10-pin connector on the front of the camera.
TN Args: Referring to the long wait is as good as admitting that the D300 was uncompetitive since a long time ago.
The D300 was launched eight and a half years ago. I don't think there's anything controversial about suggesting it's no longer cutting-edge.
Alphoid: That's a pretty impressive camera. In the review, please review the lens quality. Bokeh, CA, distortion, coma, the full gamut. That's critical with a non-ILC camera.
We didn't go into quite *that* level of detail, I'm afraid, but we did take [a bit of a look at the lens](http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/power-zoom-panasonic-lumix-dmc-zs100-tz100-review).
maico: What is the lens shown at 1.35 min , the 70-200 f2.8 ?
300mm F4 PF
Reactive: I do hope Roger will be able to show us a Canon STM mechanism. If a huge manufacturer moves to a 'new' system like that there must be a good reason, and probably not just cost.
I think STM was mainly intended to improve live view and video focus (quieter and better suited to the drive patterns of hybrid AF), not because it was necessarily better in every respect.
It's interesting that the the 18-135mm STM has already been superseded by a version with Canon's new 'Nano USM' technology.
marios p: What about moire? Does 80d still has this problem like 70d? I recently shoot some video interviews with 70d and having moire on the suit and shirt was a terrible thing. I heard tha 7d mark ii doen't have this problem! So what about 80d?
Moire is a problem for video generally. If the suit and shirt you were trying to shoot include frequencies above the sampling frequency of your camera, then there's a risk of aliasing (because an AA filter strong enough to prevent it would render the camera useless for stills).
There's not much difference in the way the [70D and 7D II render our scene](http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr29_0=canon_eos7dii&attr29_1=canon_eos70d&attr72_0=1080&attr72_1=1080&normalization=full&widget=331&x=0.05530538801215485&y=-0.39213213708869316) which suggests they're sampling the scene in a similar way and would be similarly susceptible to moire.The Sony a7S, which 2X oversamples the scene and appears to filter before downsizing gives the result with [least aliasing](http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr29_0=canon_eos7dii&attr29_1=sony_a7s&attr72_0=1080&attr72_1=1080&normalization=full&widget=331&x=0.0625763125763125&y=-0.36094305326803044)
Mr Low Notes: I see that DPReview wasted no time getting to discussing Dynamic Range and ISO noise. That's why I call them DR Review! LOL!! ;-)
However I also know that DR is what most people on this site are concerned the most about because it is what is talked about the most from what I can tell / have read. So on a positive note DR Review knows it's readers. :-)
I'll read the entire post later when I get home. Looks like the new Nikon D500 is a fine camera.
There are already other images on the web, there isn't much informed discussion about DR.
We're not saying DR is the most important thing, we're just trying to add that piece of information to the jigsaw of available knowledge.
pcrossing: Are we going to get a full DP review of the D5. We never got one on the D4, D4s, or D3s.
I think if you look back across the whole history of DPReview, it's possible we've not reviewed more pro/sports bodies than we've reviewed. However, it is our intention to review the D5.
The D810 is an anomaly, and an unfortunate one. The Canon EOS 5DS and SR, and the Sony a7R II were released just as we thought the end was in sight for the D810 review. And, once a camera has fallen behind in the review schedule, it's very hard to go back and catch up (because there's always something newer that needs reviewing, too).
There will be a D810 review.