kimchiflower: imagine if Sigma released a m43 version. The APS-C one is uncomfortably large and heavy. The same size could be made in f/1.6 or f/1.5 for m43
ZD14-35/2 had to overcome the relatively long flange-back distance (about 76mm equiv., or far worse than 35mm format SLRs) and it had a high target to have very low vegnetting (which was really very good).
that's why ZD14-35/2 had to be so big and heavy, 900g compared to 600g of EF24-70/4LIS.
and why the SLR 4/3" mount is a rubbish and should be abandoned.
> same size could be made in f/1.6 or f/1.5 for m43
f/1.4 at least. smaller f-numbers should be possible for m4/3" is at least a better mount than APS-C SLR ones (which are almost as bad as SLR 4/3").
AW1 is more a hide-out for Nikon 1 to survive. I'd prefer a larger one, like E-M1 for easy handling in water or snow.
battery life is fatal, better no battery change for whole day (that battery, media, and lens change should be in hotel room as much as possible).
photo nuts: "However, while I can’t imagine buying the Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 DC HSM (mainly because I can’t imagine owning a DSLR again)..."
This explains why DPReview is pushing mirrorless cameras so hard. It's not just Richard Butler, but almost everyone in and everything published by DPReview seem to be strongly biased towards mirrorless offerings. Nothing wrong with that, just saying. ;)
it's obvious that many in the team have no background in photography or natural science (and for those who have the knowledge/expericnce, they currently don't have enough influence).
but give them ten years.
Chris2210: I'm loving my EM1, but I'm with you - the only thing bad I can think about this lens is that Sigma are not making an equivalent for m4/3 [which arguably needs it even more for fine DoF control].
I've left APSc behind [although I'm still hanging on to my 5DII], but this lens is a god-send to any serious shooter still into the format. I don't think APSc offers enough of an advantage over m4/3 to justify its size/weight, but large as this lens is, it does help to alter that matrix somewhat.
M4/3 is still the better choice for me, but if you APSc people ask me where the equivalent of this lens is for the smaller system [and of course it would have to be both wider and faster] there is no answer...
> minimal DOF really is needed
I'd rather have deeper DOF but deeper DOF always comes with lower image quality, more noise in low light, which is a physical barrier with no work around (physically impossible).
from optics point of view, DOF translates directly into light gathering capability regardless of sensor size or f-number.
even for those who have no knowledge of physics, it should be easily seen, from all the cameras on the market from medium format to mobile phones and all the lenses on them, that deep DOF means low image quality in low light.
Anastigmat: I am glad Canon uses the APS-C format for its mirrorless cameras. Pentax and Nikon are making huge mistakes using sensors smaller even than M4/3. Moving in the other direction is Sony, with its full frame mirrorless camera. In a few years, you will find that the only M4/3, and the Nikon and Pentax mirrorless cameras for sale are found inside glass cases in your local pawnshop.
we should be able to mirror f/0.7 lenses for mirrorless, about f/1.1 equiv. for APS-C and f/1.4 equiv. for 4/3" sensors.
so 4/3" isn't too small a sensor format. the low quality of 4/3" mostly comes from the small lenses.
I'm not a fan of any format but currently there is no option other than Canon or Nikon 35mm format systems if the quality is what one wants (though some medium format does have some advantages).
Polytropia: Leica D Summilux 25mm 1,4 on the E-M1... you'll forget about anything else...
25/0.7 sounds good as a standard prime for up to 500 US.
Trollshavethebestcandy: Slap this on the Oly EM1 via adapter and you have something interesting.
ZD14-35/2 is a slow zoom, not too slow though.
let's hope Sigma make a 12-35/1.4 for m3/4".
Debankur Mukherjee: When will Nikon come out with such a camera.......??
> what about the 1 cameras?
when Nikon designed their CX mount, they had two considerations to out-gun 4/3" in f-number cheating and to scale/share the same lens design for CX and FX cameras.
high quality mirrorless was not an issue of high priority which they should have regretted (CX is not as good as m4/3" which itself is not a good design compared with Sony, Fuji, Canon mirrorless mounts).
hope Nikon will correct it with a new mount.
> great mirrorless systems
they are great because they cannot compete, and Canon and Nikon are not determined to chase them out of the hide-out.
PGen: Can I have some advice/feedback on the quality/usefulness of electronic viewfinders? My reference is the optical viewfinder in a pre-digital SLR, which I liked very much.
EVFs are not so good but usable, especically if the user is willing to accept it.
the most unpleasant may be the color balance, and may be that's why many people close their left eye when peeping into an EVF.
alendrake: A question to DPReview team:
I was comparing the lowlight and daylight charts of Olympus E-M1 and Panasonic G6 and I noticed that G6 output is much softer in daylight test than in lowlight. Unfortunately I can't attach screenshots in the comment, but you will easily notice this issue, for example at ISO 200 when comparing the resolution test circles with radial lines. Most probably there was some difference in G6 settings in daylight and lowlight tests. I just wonder what could be the cause of that? Thanks
> much softer in daylight test than in lowlight.
it's the noise that makes images look "sharper"why people prefer D800E over D800.
ISO really means readout and process than exposure and even for exposure/metering ISO doesn't tell it right when you go to check a small portion of the image.
seri_art: It's the same size as my XSi and 10% heavier. What did it do with the should-have size advantage of the 4/3 sensor and lack of a mirror?
the operation is better for E-M1 and I hope Canon and Nikon entry-level SLRs could catch up.
Ian SS: I owned the EOS-M before but was very disappointed and sold it. Even with faster focus, I think this comes a little too late! With so many mirrorless on the market, Canon is way behind, if Canon thinks that they can protect their DSLR market by making an inferior product, think twice!
if anyone choose Canon, it should be for the lenses.
EF-M 22/2 is about 0.5 stops slower than Sony 24/1.8 but otherwise on par or better performance in a much more compact body. EF-M 11-22 is a bit slower than the very good EF-S 10-22 but it looks better to my eyes. EF-M 18-55 is the best kit zoom that I have ever seen, only equaled by the EF-S version.
same can be said for 5D3, which is not so good compared with D800/D600 but a great many of people choose 5D3 for they want to use superior Canon lenses (though some new Nikon ones are also quite good).
joe6pack: 2.3x faster AF refers to the original or latest firmware of EOS-M?
2.3 square from the original one.
Shane Zeppelin: I do graphic design, take photos for our brochures, and edit them and I can say this little camera takes great photos. I mainly bought it because I got tired of hauling my T2i and its lenses around in a 12 lb. camera backpack. I wanted something lightweight I could take with me anywhere, and remain in the Canon ecosystem.
In a small 4.5”x5.5”x8.5” bag I can take this camera, 2 lenses, a Perfect Hood Eye viewfinder, a compact Manfrotto Pixi Mini tripod, a lens hood, 2 extra batteries, battery charger, additional SD cards, lens wipe, strap, and rain cover and it weighs less than 2 lbs.
For the street price I don’t think there is a better camera out there that takes better photos with the same versatility.
I think the M2 updates are notable, but I can agree that there is room for an M-Pro with built-in flash, view finder, and updated sensor.
I would want one of similar size and design of G5 and E-M1 with a bit better operation. I'm no fan of SLR form but that happens to be the most efficient that I know.
such an APS-C mirrorless with a compact 35-135/1.8-2.8 will be an ideal "system point-n-shoot."
skogredd: A non-issue. Who gets the Nikon Df and puts Sigma lenses on it??
it is an issue that Sigma should not make noise like this. I think it's should be more reasonable not releasing such notices until the affected users exceeds, say, 1%.
there is not an eletronic view finder!i can't understand canon
it will be like EOS M1
it has an electronic viewfinder about the size of viewfinders we used to have on medium format cameras.
found a video for Mamiya, others are basically the same. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFdjKwuZv88
reginalddwight: I think Canon made a huge mistake with the EOS M2 by forgoing a killer pink version.
would like to see a Canon made Cosina brand lens at twice the price of Zeiss ones.
Juck: Wow,, underwhelming. As someone who briefly owned the original M,, it's gonna take more than quicker AF to get me to jump back in.
The blurb from DP mentions that the AF is gonna be 2.3x quicker,,, does that mean 2.3x quicker than the M1 at launch? or 2.3x quicker than the M1 after their big firmware release?
I really wanted to like this camera,, the M1 felt great in the hand,, but I just couldn't get my head around not having a viewfinder,,, and the AI Servo mode was comical ,,, and the images were a bit flat,,, and etc. Stick with my NEX I guess.
up to 2.3 x 2.3 = 5.3 times faster according to Canon.
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review