RichRMA: The issue is being taken seriously by the mfg? And here I thought a chronic 60% defect rate would be taken lightly.
Something like that makes sense. I can understand QA not noticing this if they ramped up production speed too quickly instead of having QA and the systems/electrical engineers closely examining a few low rate runs.
There are so darn many "dots" though! Maybe the "dust" (or "debris") got into the adhesive before being applied to the sensor and filter. One would hope/think they would check a high percentage of these cameras during the first few weeks...I suppose this could be missed though by a QA person doing quick checks. They would need to take a smaller number for closer inspection, and as per Murphy's Law, those would be OK. :-).
SteB: As I've tried to explain on the forum, this is very uniform distribution, which is the opposite of random distribution.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomness
If this was just random dust it would not be distributed like this. It could be dust trapped in the sandwich covering the sensor, but there would have to be something in the manufacturing process causing it to be evenly distributed. This is why I'm guessing a fault in the manufacturing process, for it to cause this uniform distribution.
Anyone who has studied distribution, randomness, statistics and probability in depth, will be aware that it is very unlikely that such a uniform distribution like this would be caused by a random fault like dust falling onto something. It could be dust again, but it would be dust formed by part of a process.
I'm fairly certain this will be fixed, once they discover what part of the manufacturing process is causing it.
Seems that if it were air bubbles (my initial "guess"), some bumbles would be randomly larger than others (perhaps due to two bubbles being close enough to combine randomly). I think these spots are way too large to literally be dust though.
The distribution looks random/natural to me, so I doubt two sensors have the same "pattern" of dots.
It's not uniform at all, look closer.
CameraLabTester: 60% Fail Rate is totally off the scale for a precision instrument.
Quality Control total fail.
10 copies of EACH MODEL (there are two models) would be 20 total.
I read 6 out of 20 too. It's amazing how stuff gets misquoted, Saw this in my local media recently, totally changed a story.
Looks like air bubbles that got into the glue or glass.
Saw it on ebay (I think from Japan), so we could buy one, but not sure if it's NTCS and 30FPS or 25FPS. M2 is on ebay too, of course.
Much faster electronic shutter and faster video rates would be awesome.
Kameo: Can someone elaborate on this line (in the above review):"...lack of on-sensor phase detection means it's less well suited for use with existing Four Thirds lenses..."Is this similar to DSLRs' built-in focus motor?
You probably will not be buy the old lenses anyhow.
0mega: I just don't see how this can compete with Sony mirror-less.
And how can Sony APS-C compete with full frame? And how can full frame compete with medium format? That's how...
CNY_AP: Any shutter shock?
True. I hate that the mechanical shutter is so slow...seems almost worthless. The flash sync speed is the true shutter speed. To get 1/500s shutter, the shutter is only open 1/5th (or 1/10th?) of the way and moves across the sensor at the flash sync seed is my understanding (1/100s or 1/50s?).
Electronic shutter is also misleading. 1/1600 (or whatever the max speed is) is only for each row, not the whole image. These cameras have no ability to freeze action. I think the Oly PM2 has a 1/250 flash sync speed - I suppose that would suffice (I'll be using it on moving vehicles - my R/C planes and helos/quads).
Never noticed slow shutter issues with my Fuji F20 (on my airplanes), so maybe it uses a leaf shutter or some other factor. Shutter speeds are 1/250-1/800 typically.
JeanPierre Thibaudeau: This camera seems to produce some of the most beautiful colours I've ever seen. But strangely, at ISO 12800, they also seem to loose a lot of saturation. Nonetheless, I just might buy one for me and keep the ISO at a reasonnable level. Very nice!
Reducing saturation is what all cameras do at high ISO to reduce noise.
Marty4650: This entire photo set could be used as a primer on "why shooting raw is a good idea." The jpegs look pretty good. The edited raw files look better.
This is really a very capable compact camera, especially for the price.
It's hard to decide I think when editing whether to make an image look like what a camera would take versus what the eye can see, which is a lot more DR than what cameras could capture until recently.
Any shutter shock?
AngryCorgi: Can't compete with Nikon and Pentax's entry-level IQ? No problem, we'll throw an LCD panel on it! That'll do the trick. :-P
Noise is one sensor parameter, as I said. I can easily create a sensor with NO noise at all! I'd simply average the image 10 times so it's a blurry blob. Canon retains quite a bit of detail, so I think the sensors are not as bad as people, think they are based on dxomark and dark noise w/o considering resolution/sharpness. Their sensors clearly have not improved much (in terms of IQ) though since the 18mp sensor was released. I've been waiting to upgrade all that time!
WE MFT USERS WHO SHOOT SPORTS AND WILDLIFE ARE WAITING AND WAITING FOR A GOOD LONG FAST ZOOM! WAKE TF up Panasonic.
I thought someone made a newer 300mm lens??? Not good?Not out yet?
Sabatia: "The 100 macro is [ONE OF] the main thing[S] missing....", said a commentor below. Ha Ha! Another!, being a f4 prime somewhere in the 200-400mm range. As a life-long bird and wildlife shooter, all I can say is Thank God! that Oly is headed in that direction. I have and use and enjoy the 100-300, but it just doesn't compare to the sharpness and richness of lenses like the Canon 300 f4 or even the 400 f5.6. Those two and the system would be approaching completion. Meanwhile, Oly is getting there and after owning five Panasonic ILCs--G3, G5, GM1, GM5, GX7--and the lovely 12-35 and 35-100 2.8s, the 45 macro , I have now gotten the Oly 12-40, 60 macro, and now I have ordered my first Oly body, the new OM5 MKii. Pana, ya had me but you're rapidly losing me.
Though not completely! I love my GM5, which I've had since Nov. and which is with me everyday skiing, snowshoeing, winter mountaineer and salooning. Love the tiny 12-32 too. Also fun with the 14 2.7 and the 20.
I see people on ebay paying $250-$300 and higher for just the GM1 body used! The 12-32 lens is too good not to own if a person buys the GM1 or GM5.
RedDog Steve: Note that Panny is still using the 2 different stabilizing systems: Mega OIS on the macro and Power OIS on the portrait lens.Curious, since these are both primes and not all that far apart in FL.
Too funny, I never realized they were different...I hate both terms - they are so goofy sounding!
Most people would struggle to pick out the best image between Canon and others. also, the dual pixel tech is a pretty big breakthrough that must have taken a lot of effort....there's more to a camera or even a sensor than noise/DR.
I think a lot of people judge Canon by Dxomark, which is not the end-all since it does not seem to factor in sharpness and therefore can be fooled by smoothing.