Sad Joe: OK - I know this is an old review for a much disliked camera (almost always by people who have never tried one) - just reviewing images taken at a wedding during the week with an EOS-M and an Olympus pen 5 - NO CONTEST - the CANON images just POP with colour and life - yes the Pen has fast AF (much faster) but the final images from the little M are brilliant. Come on Canon get serious and support the M series as you know you should.
PS - met with a guy from Panasonic earlier today about the GH4 (most interesting) - he quoted that Canon have over 20 % and are increasing market share - Pan have 17 % and Nikon also have 17 % of the total DSLR/Mirrorless market at the £700 price point (UK) trouble ahead for Nikon me thinks….
Let's look at these numbers, Panasonic has 17% market share of whole system camera market, on par with Nikon and canon? That's totally impossible. And canon with at least 40-50% market share of dslr, only managed get 20% of total share? That means mirrorless has same share with dslr, even in Japan it is struggling to get half the market, let alone Europe, the most consertive market in world.
Mike FL: An articulated LCD is much better than Olympus is trying to reinventing the wheel as seen in this PL7.
An articulated LCD may help Oly to increase the sales as well.
Personally, I don't like flip-side LCD, because it limits LCD size, more difficult to move between "normal mode" to waist-level mode, and you are not on the lens-axis when use waist-level mode.
Of course, other people may prefer: more shooting angles, especially waist-level portrait mode, LCD protection mode when use VF (if it has).
Sony A77's LCD structure has all benefit of above, however I guess it cost much more than other structure and increase size and weight of a camera.
"Why does the screen flip down instead of up? Olympus says it's to keep your hand from getting in the way of the lens or flash."
I don't think it regards your hands position, instead, because e-pl7 has to use an external flash, there is no room for flip up when bundled flash is attached.
flip-up, no external flash, no central positioned EVFflip-down, no tripod for traditional selfie.
Ozyxy: I like the Sv and TAv modes, why can't Canon, Nikon and Sony have these modes as well?K-S1 is so flashy it will be difficult to use it for street photography where we take pictures of people without their consent... at night they'll see the LEDs. However, I find it difficult to use a DSLR at night as I can't see the buttons, so these LEDs might help...
TAv is just auto ISO on M mode, I think nikon has it at least as early as D3, before pentax put TAv mode.
"Additionally, with the power of the BIONZ X processor, the camera is able to read, process and output data from all of the sensor’s pixels during video recording, ensuring that it produces the highest quality video possible by eliminating aliasing, moiré and false color artifacts."
I was positive I read this paragraph on this page. Now the paragraph is removed.
However, this paragraph is still on sony's official website http://blog.sony.com/press/sony-debuts-ultra-compact-%CE%B15100-interchangeable-lens-camera-with-impressive-autofocus/
what's going on?
Very smart move.
Imagine a lady who has dozens of dresses or suits, she need dozens of difference color of her camera to match her dress, then the sales of pentax Q will be tenfold.
Canon India already revealed the puzzle
https://www.facebook.com/canonindia/photos/p.798948450135433/798948450135433/?type=1&theaterthey reply this on their own something BIG teaser
So, this is something BIG from canon
"Canon Announces New imagePROGRAF Large Format Printers"http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/07/canon-announces-new-imageprograf-large-format-printers/
Who still remember Fujifilm france teaser of "Announcement of the launch of a vast operation never heard-of in the photography world" back to June 2014?
I notice some photos are deliberated dial down exposure for 1.xx stop, then pushed up in acr by 1.xx stop, why?
404 page not found if I clicked the link
Lucas_: It's yet an interesting camera, but I guess it'll need further development to cope with the competition later generation technology, mainly in IQ ( Nikon should just buy the Sony 1" sensor ). Price is definitely another big issue.
@Sonyshine, but aptina sensors itself don't have OSPDAFhttps://www.aptina.com/products/image_sensors/ar1411hs/https://www.aptina.com/products/dslr/ar1011hs/That means PDAF pixel could be customized.
Another example, EM-1 use a sensor based on panasonic MN34230, which has OSPDAF as revealed by chipworks,however, MN34230 itself don't have any PDAF pixelshttp://www.semicon.panasonic.co.jp/ds4/MN34230PL_E.pdf
Nor does aptina version has pdaf as shown on its website.I believe ospdaf can be customized on sensors.
The big different of sony sensor aptina sensor is readout speed, although Sony sensor is capable to out put whole sensor area at 20fps, however, high speed af may need higher fps for certain area. Previous aptina sensor has 700M bps output ability for single lane, while Sony one has only 576M. That could make difference on af speed.
Let's see how fast fz1000 can focus.
thomasw333: Nice looking camera, but the V series should have the EVF built in. And that chart that they show in the beginning of the review just makes the Sony A6000 seem like the best to me. But if you like Nikon, I thought the J3 had good IQ so this V3 should be better and a decent camera.
Native nex lense is so so, however, if the critics is coming from nikon 1 camp, hmm...
standard zoom, check3x 70-200 range zoom check7x 28-300 range zoom checkwide angle zoom, nex has 15-27mm, 1 got only 18-35nex has standard zoom start at 24mm, 1 got only 27mm
for fixed focal lensesony has 24, 35, 40, 45, 50, 75, 85 while 1 only have 28, 50, 85further more, nex has much larger equivalent aperture, with only exception is 32/1.2, which has F3.2 EA, the counter part 55/1.8, which is F2.7 EA.
The only lense that sony lack of native support is 70-300mm, but consider the size/weight/price, sony 70-300G for full frame has same size/weight/price, although it is not E native.
page 11, no primary camera is selected in studio comparison tools.And the reason is v3 is not in drop down list
The interesting part is this camera's brand name.
Ricoh has dropped pentax brand on its fixed-lense digicam line, updates of old pentax wg line all bear ricoh name now.
Now this one use pentax brand again.
Erick L: Total light on sensor affecting noise doesn't make sense to me. Don't smaller sensors appear more noisy simply because the image needs to be enlarged more, noise included?
Seems to me that saying a FF sensor has less noise because it gathers more light is akin to saying a telephoto lens "compresses perspective".
Well, you need to "enlarge" value of a single pixel on small DC is "equivalent" with you can "concentrate" value of a single pixel of a full frame sensor, because you get more light on a single pixel on FF than small DC. Same theory, different approach to tell it. However, by "total light" way, you can unify all means of equivalent by a single formula - equivalent focus length to determine field of view, equivalent aperture for depth of view and noise performance (with sqrt())
Louschro: What is the advantage of using a camera with a larger sensor? You can take any (!) equivalent picture, that a camera with a smaller sensor can take. But additionally there is the potential to take (non equivalent) pictures with less DOF and less noise, which cameras with smaller sensor can't take. You have decide: Is this potential so important for you, that you would accept the burden to always carry the larger and heavier system?
Very often larger sensors have more resolution. How does it affect equivalence? In this case the equivalence of noise is not given. Instead the pictures will have more noise due to the smaller pixels.
You can use canon 5D and 50/1.2 lense for extreme low light or very shallow DOF. To achieve similar effect on m43, you need 100/0.6 lense, last time I check, m43 doesn't offer that option and certainly won't be cheap either if they do. That's the advantage of larger format.
DrummerCT: What are the theoretical limits as to how "good" digital cameras can become? For the sake of discussion, assume sensor sizes as referred to in the article, nothing larger than FF. What I'm getting at is, in the next 20-25 years, will we have sensors/lenses/ISO/electronics etc. that can produce images beyond our ability to see noise and other aberrations in non-cropped forms. Same question, I suppose, would apply to display and print technologies.
In the world of audio recording, we're pretty close to having reached such prowess in the recording process, i.e., noise is hard to perceive in non-compressed, high sampling rate recordings (not there yet with playback).
Yes, you can see noise from your naked eyes if you are really want to find them.
I did this experiment before, in a very dark room, with very little available light, and when your eyes are accustomed to the darkness, try to look at darker area in the darkness, you will see the noise from your naked eyes. Normally if there is something interesting in the scene, our brain will focus on the interesting part, you won't notice the noise. You can see the noise only when you are looking for it.
Interestingly, the noise I saw is more like electronic noise from a CCD or CMOS, they are colored as red,blue, green. I believe that's because our eyes has 3 types of cells to detect each type of light
Reality Check: As interesting as this sounds (especially to those of the recent digital age, and some Sony engineers apparently) this is just OLD technology/concept revisited...We tried this back in the film days (in concept) for the very same reasons - smaller/simpler/cheaper lenses with better performance across the image frame, etc..What was determined back then (as is being 'discovered' today) is the very limited beneficial uses provided. Wide angle lenses, due the intrinsic field curvature of the elements used in their design, are almost the only area of benefit. Just about anything longer than ~50mm would itself have to be -redesigned- in order to project effectively, which would of course exponentially consume any cost savings of simpler/cheaper wide angle lenses.Sony has provided theoretical information to suggest greater sensor performance, noting signal noise reduction etc, but nothing that could not be accomplished by putting R&D towards 'fewer' 'larger' and 'better' photosites..
You can trace the idea of airplane way back to Greek Mythology, that's doesn't mean Wright Bro or modern jet flights are just OLD concept revisited.
Some innovation are easily to formulate from mind, but it is very hard to turn it to reality given technology limits.
Unlike film, solid cmos/ccd sensors are very hard to bend, so it takes great courage and money to invest that direction.