AdamT: The a6000 is a way better deal (UK anyway) than the relatively overpriced A5100 and the J5 , Yeah right ..... Whatever DPR - (Eyes roll) .. as others have said, the Nikon D5300 kills the lot of them for value , bang for buck and as a system ......
if I had to choose two from those , it`d be the GF7 (GM1 even better) for compactness, fantastic kit lens and the superb lens system .. and the Fuji XA1 for being a Fuji with a proper sensor (not Shonky X-Trans in the XA cameras) , decent kit lens and excellent lens system ......
DPR screw up yet another supertest
It's irrelevant (to this category) how expensive the a6000 is, since it's a less good camera for this audience, just as the a5100 is a terrible substitute for would-be a6000 buyers.
If you've ever seen the stats for 'attachment rate' in this class, then you probably wouldn't worry too much about lens ranges.
At current UK prices, I'd probably go for the GF7, though.
TriezeA72: I own a FZ1000, would I call it a compact camera, probably not, but that all depends how you define compact. Compact to me is a camera that fits into the pocket of your jacket or pants, and the FZ1000 is not that, it might be more compact than a dslr equivalent, but that's only the lens, because the body is of similar proportions to an entry level dslr.It's definitely a great long zoom camera, and for the price I think it's the best buy from this round-up, but those wanting a pocketable camera will look elsewhere
We've tended to use 'Compact' to define cameras with built-in lenses, rather than as a description of their size. This becomes more awkward than usual when you end up with cameras such as the FZ1000. They are, at least, more compact than a DSLR offering comparable zoom ranges.
But I'm hoping people can look beyond the title.
The a6000 and a5100 are very different cameras. If you're willing to spend a6000 money and want the a6000's features, then you suddenly bring a lot more (and more serious) competition into the frame.
If you prefer the GF7 then fair enough: there's not a lot between that and the a5100. However, the D5300's replacement came out over six months ago, as did the X-A1's, so we were never going to include end-of-life models that may disappear from the shelves at any moment.
random78: Does this mean that A7II will now do PDAF with LA-EA3 adapter? I would be much more interested in buying into the A7 system if I could use A-mount lenses on it with decent PDAF. (Not interested in LA-EA4 due to light loss etc).
Dr_Jon: I think using MSRP is probably not the best move, as for a lot of models it's so far from the street price to be meaningless and is mainly there for the punter to think they are getting a good deal at the street price.
Sadly it rejects requests from outside the UK, it seems.
Jorginho: From what I have seen the Sony does not have the best allround AF at all. It hesitates on low light where the Panasonic does not. Also EPL7 is the only one here that lets you put a EVF on it. Also Nikon J5 and the m43 cams are considerably smaller once you add lenses. But we all see it coming, don't we.
But it is all clear to me: this years winners will be Sony, Sony, Sony, Sony. Dpreview lately is mostly all about Sony. Understandable partly, Sony no doubt deserves a lot of credit for what they did with their A7 system. But dpreview is a bit too much into that brand for my taste.
The gaps between all these cameras seem to be closing but our experience has been that the a5100 is the best all-rounder here: it has really good focus, really strong video and impressive image quality. The GF7 is also very good but we felt the a5100 just edged it (you're welcome to disagree, but that was the editorial team's collective call).
It's not about brand, though. We've written a lot about Sony recently because they've released a handful of interesting cameras with advanced technology (stacked CMOS in RX100 IV, Full Frame BSI in a7R II, the ability to AF third party lenses, etc).
However, not all of what we've written has been positive and we still have reservations about some aspects of the Sony user interface, for instance. Please don't confuse us finding something *interesting* with thinking we're uncritical towards that thing.
The problem is that street prices fluctuate over time and between countries - it's hard to place a flag in shifting sands.
There's no perfect way of dividing up the market and there are always a couple of end-of-life models being flogged-off cheaply that temporarily distort the picture (but may only be available in one country and may run out within the lifetime that the roundup is meant to serve).
We've done our best to group cameras of similar price and similar intent together and we will cover (almost) every model we believe will still be widely available for the next couple of months.
Spellbinder: Any word about minimal shutter speed in auto iso?
No, just those three things listed.
NCB: The reason the a5100 shouldn't get it is that, as you pointed out, it lacks a load of stuff such as a viewfinder that the a6000 offers, and indeed so do other cameras which are on your list.
NCB - the fact that so many manufacturers offer simplified, viewfinderless models at the bottom of their lineups suggests that they believe there's a market of people who want them.
The a51000 is a remarkably different camera from the a6000, given how much they have in common under the skin. There are people I'd recommend an a5100 to and some I'd recommend an a6000 to, because the other model would serve them less well.
We'll cover the a6000 and its rivals that have additional control points and viewfinders in one of our later roundups.
rrccad: your summary is messed up more than Reuters.
The 26.5 was billions of yen, not percentage.
Cameras sales are down 7.6% (14.2% local currency)Actual profit is essentially the same.
taking into account current variations probably isn't a valid marker, since canon has aggressively lowered non-domestic prices especially in the US.
canon's segment summary:
As a result, sales for the business unit decreased by 4.2% to ¥302.5 billion, while operating profit totaled ¥41.7 billion, a decline of 3.8%. Sales for the combined first nine months of the year totaled ¥897.7 billion, a year-on-year decrease of 4.6%, while operating profit totaled ¥121.3 billion, declining 11.0% year on year.
Absolutely my fault. I added some detail to an existing story and some of my additions got jumbled up.
Polacofede: i wonder why Pentax K3 was not even considered as a candidate
The K3 II was on the longlist but didn't collect enough votes to be included on the shortlists published here.
Paniko: DXO Clip on?! Where is Olympus Air A01?
The Olympus Air was on the original long-list but didn't make the cut down to the shortlist.
MikeDPR: That 16MP sensor spec should not be used for this camera. Tallest photo is 3088 pixels tall (from 4:3) and widest photo is 4480 pixels wide (from 16:9). That makes it only 4480*3088=13.8M pixels for the largest rectangle area that encompasses all aspect ratios options. I think it's fine to say it has 13.8M sensor even though not all of them is used for a given aspect ratio. But to say it has a 16MP sensor is quite misleading.
@TimAZ - the diagram on page 1 of this article shows how odd it is that the LX100 doesn't offer 3456 x 3456 (which it probably could).
I don't think that, logically, you'd plan a model around using imperfect sensors. Assume a certain percentage rate for significant imperfections on GH4 sensors. Then consider that only a sub-set of these would then be usable for LX100. What's the cost of finding and selecting this handful of sensors, vs just using fully up-to-spec sensors?
I will try to ask Panasonic why the LX100 can't use its full sensor height in the central region, though.
fenceSitter: @dpreview editors:
I'm a bit confused about the first page (1. Introduction), where the comparison table contradicts dpreview's own test of the a7 II.
Said test claims that "The body of the a7 II is [...] comprised entirely of magnesium alloy like the a7S", in line with Sony's own product description, to wit: "a top cover, front cover, and internal structure constructed of rigid magnesium alloy"
In the aforementioned table, the a7 II's front plate is said to be made of "Composite" all of a sudden? Is that a mutation, or was Sony defrauding their customers all the time?
I know a lot of both cameras are mag alloy. I thought that the a7 II and a7R II followed the same pattern as the a7 and a7R, with the a7 having a different front plate. I'll check.
cgarrard: Interesting on the actual ISO ratings vs stated ISO ratings by Sony, pretty big drop from what they say it is.
Regardless lots of DR, and a very good performing sensor.
Define 'actual ISO' ;)
aftab: One should compare each camera shadow pushed at base ISO with its 0EV. If you do so it would be pretty evident that even with these so called mind blowing DR cameras one shouldn't push shadows beyond +2EV.Clearly we are far from a reasonably good sensor when it comes to pushing deep shadows.
If you're talking about the Exposure Latitude test, then please note that the pushed shots are made using shorter exposure: meaning that the shot is noisier because it's made of less light (it's [shot noise](http://bit.ly/shotnoise) you're seeing).
Not quite, in that the D800 *doesn't* have a medium format sensor in it. By contrast, I have no reason to believe Panasonic hasn't used it's off-the-shelf 16MP Four Thirds sensor.
However, the third paragraph of this review, a diagram and a data table all make clear that you don't get the benefit of that whole sensor, and I don't think we ever repeat the '16MP' claim without qualifying it.
I think that everywhere in this review that we mention 16MP, we make clear that it can't use the whole pixel count. If there's anywhere that's not clear, please let me know and I'll change it.
I agree it would be misleading to say it has a 16MP sensor without qualifying that statement. It may be literally true, but it's academic, since you can't ever use the whole area.
brownie314: Since this camera is not using the full m4/3 sensor - I wonder how close this sensor is in actual area to the 1" sensors. m4/3 was already kind of close in size to 1".
The 4:3 region that this camera uses is around 180mm sq, which is around 50% larger than a 1"-type sensor.
For reference:1"-type = ~116mm sq4/3"-type/Four Thirds = ~224mm sqAPS-C = ~360mm sq
Jonathan Brady: http://www.canonrumors.com/samsung-leaving-the-camera-business/
Just saw this the other day. Giving away inventory to (theoretically) create long-term customers would be an odd move for a company looking to get out of the business.
However, giving away inventory (and creating headlines) that's not selling because you plan to leave the business... That's a write off I'm sure!
@Jonathan Brady: I think that rumour has been debunked. [Samsung says it is not exiting the camera business](http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2015/09/23/rumor-busted-samsung-is-not-exiting-the-camera-business-at-least-not-the-on).