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.
ozturert: If only these lower level cameras had AF microadjustment... Pentax K500 has it. Even 60D did not have it (and 50D had had).
Yes, Canon has used the same sensor in 7D, 550D, 600D, 650D, 700D, 100D and EOSM, but so have the others:
16MP APSC: Nikon D7000, Nikon D5100, Pentax K5, Pentax K5II, Pentax K5IIs, Pentax K-01, Pentax K30, Pentax K500, Pentax K50, Sony NEX5n, Sony NEX3n, Sony NEXF3, Sony NEX5r, Sony NEX5t, Sony NEX6, Sony A35, Sony A55, Ricoh GR, Nikon Coolpix A, Some Leicas etc.. (Missed any?)
24MP APSC: Nikon D3200, Nikon D3300, Nikon D5200, Nikon D5300, Nikon D5500, Sony NEX7, Sony A5100, Sony A6000, Sony A65, Sony A77, Sony A77II, Pentax K3.Some removed AA filter, some added phase-detection pixels, some tweaked it but these are basically the same sensors.
Well, on the other hand, it's not needed if you use them like they had no mirror (such as a D70 - since it has the dual-pixels / phase sensors on the image sensor).
I wonder if Canon's manufacturing became good enough that they felt the adjustment caused more harm than good.They really ought to go ahead and steal my idea of adjusting automatically.
TrapperJohn: This may answer the question as to whether entry level DSLR's are still viable. They were in the 2000's, when the DSLR was the 'tech toy du jour', but most of those buyers have moved on to smartphones, with their portability and rapid share ability. The finer aspects of photography didn't matter to the tech set then, doesn't really matter now. That market is gone, and won't be back.
Still... Canon or Nikon or both need to get on the ball, because the game is changing with or without them. Most of the exciting, new innovations are coming from elsewhere.
If the next iPhone has a zoom lens, the P&S market will fall even more.Profit-wise, the number of people buying lenses is probably the biggest driver. But why would a person who is shooting 95% of their images with their phone buy a new SLR lens? Hard to justify.On the bright side, if fewer people buy SLRs, there will be more jobs for pro's.
CNY_AP: Worrisome that a pro (the author) would think 18MP is "middle ground" when 24MP came out not very long ago and is way more than 99.9% of us need. The D70 is "only" 20MP yet costs more, so he must really dislike that camera. Only newbies buy cameras based solely or mostly on resolution, but there are a lot of those buyers, so in that regard, it was a wise and necessary move.
I agree that later in the article he tones it down, but that first paragraph clearly said 18MP is middle of the road in HIS opinion (which numerically is true). He next said that others don't care about the number of pixels, as per your msg.
"pixel-count and processing power will have a very positive effect on the desirability of this class of EOS DSLR. I’ve long thought Canon’s 18-million-pixel sensors something of half-way house - neither high nor low in resolution - and that they sit in a peculiar position in the market."
Worrisome that a pro (the author) would think 18MP is "middle ground" when 24MP came out not very long ago and is way more than 99.9% of us need. The D70 is "only" 20MP yet costs more, so he must really dislike that camera. Only newbies buy cameras based solely or mostly on resolution, but there are a lot of those buyers, so in that regard, it was a wise and necessary move.
Howard: Let's put the senor in 80D and 7D III (or 8D) please.
just shows that many people only look at the resolution...I think canon went with 24MP because the MP race is important to beginners.
Boky: Buying canon dSLR without focus micro-adjust is ludicrous. Been there, done that - never again!
They ought to auto-calibrate (PDAF via CDAF) w/o the user even realizing it...or have a calibration mode which quickly runs the lens to each focal length and check the focus. I had this idea quite awhile ago.
ThePhilips: Oh. The top LCD.
Another thing I stopped craving, after I went with a mirrorless.
I agree...it's not a film camera - we have large high res LCDs that can display a lot of info. Seems very odd to me to add that top LCD at this point in time.
Prognathous: Ricoh did this 15 years ago. Quote:
"One of the RDC-7's most interesting features is its "PRO" high-resolution exposure function. There are actually three different PRO modes, two of them making use of the same basic innovation: The camera has the ability to take two full-resolution shots in very rapid succession, displacing the CCD sensor a half the width of a pixel between each shot.(For the real technoids out there, we're told this is accomplished with a mounting arrangement involving a piezoelectric actuator that minutely shifts the CCD during the second exposure of the series.) The camera then takes the two slightly offset 3.3 megapixel images and combines them together into nearly 7 megapixels of raw image data."
I wish my camera had a digital level - hate when I get home and realize my pictures are not level.
Tilted Plane: The question does linger--is a $900 camera, without a lens, entry level? The Rebel line seems to beg for a true entry level--in terms of price--without having to buy a 2 or 3 year old model. No?
The Ti5 held its price pretty darn well...even refurbished it is pricey except when on a 25% off sale (they sell out VERY quickly when on sale refurbished however).