Jon Stern: Strange how the press release text doesn't mention Micro Four Thirds. While followers of Olympus digital cameras and the digital Pens, in particular, would know this, it's almost as if they are trying to avoid talking about the sensor size.
pocoloco, that would be nice, yes. But given how difficult it is to define IQ (I know, I work for an image sensor company) so proxy for performance is needed. While the industry has long tried to push megapixels for that, it's really sensor size which is the biggest factor. The laws of physics mean that will always be the case.
When sensors had low quantum efficiency, low dynamic range, and high read noise, you could look to improvements to the sensor to deliver ever better IQ. But now sensors have reach maturity and only small incremental improvements are available. As a result, sensor size makes the most difference.
And then there's the bokeh factor on top of that.
pocoloco, I totally agree that for typical (low information) consumers specs don't matter. When it comes to making consumer sales, industrial design matters more than specs, as that is where the emotional connection is made.
I also agree that m43 is good enough for most photographers, and would be suitable for the remaining photographers for most of the photos they take.
However, at $1100, this camera is not exactly targeted at the casual user. If they're going to sell on IQ, without totally relying on people looking at the sample photos, then sensor size is key. They talk about OIS and the benefit that provides in low light, but compared to a typical point and shoot (or smartphone) the number one factor is sensor size.
Perhaps they're not trying to position against point and shoot and smartphone users looking for better IQ, and instead are targeting the DSLR owner who is looking for a more-compact system. In that case, they might want to bury that this isn't an APS-C camera.
Strange how the press release text doesn't mention Micro Four Thirds. While followers of Olympus digital cameras and the digital Pens, in particular, would know this, it's almost as if they are trying to avoid talking about the sensor size.
This is very similar to CorePhotonic's dual-camera zoom:
Nukunukoo: would have been even better if they included even just a 10-bit option...
Mark, I hadn't seen JPEG-HDR before. That's a nice extension.
Thank you for sharing that info.
That's not possible. Sadly, JPEG is limited to 8-bits per color plane.
EskeRahn: @all the comments complaining about the quality:
It is shot with a PROTOTYPE and thus far from a finalized and optimised product!
How good do you think the output from the first prototypes of the current types of sensors looked?
Look at the potential, not the imperfections.
After spending tens of millions of dollars and after nine years, expectations should be high.
I'm only interested if I have to put the print under my armpit to develop it! ;-)
Same overall specs, but better flare control please.
micksh6: DPR article incorrectly refers to sensor thickness instead of total camera module thickness, which includes lens.In the source article, it's clearly stated that these numbers belong to whole sensor/lens module thickness:
"Samsung’s new 16Mp image sensor reduces the module’s overall height by 20 percent""Enabling a module z-height that is less than 5mm"
No wonder some readers got confused.
The thickness is referring to the total module height (from the back of the substrate to the top of the lens). The silicon will be 0.2mm or 0.15mm thick.
The thinner module is in comparison to a 16MP sensor with larger pixels, which has a optical format >1/3.2-inch, so requires lenses with a larger focal length (and therefore TTL).
[Full disclosure: I work on mobile phone camera modules for ON Semiconductor (formerly Aptina), a rival manufacturer of image sensors.]
For $6200 you could hire a "friend" to travel with you and take photos.
maxnimo: Why do they call it a 1" sensor when not even the diagonal is even close to 1" in length?
Optical formats are based on the outer diameter of old vidicon tube. It's a old, and rather obsolete system that imaging uses.
Jon Stern: For those of us that prefer to read, what's the conclusion?
For those of us that prefer to read, what's the conclusion?
adengappasami: Good to see a video review. I wish you can get rid of all the scores and recommendation and simply do a video review of products on real use.
I vote for the direct opposite of this!
I don't want to watch a 10 minute video review for a product (among myriads) that might not even be worth considering. I'd rather skim a review. See if it's got a good score, and then go back and read the full review if it's of interest.
"There is also a 3.7MP front camera with a fast F1.9 maximum aperture"
Mobile phone cameras have a fixed aperture, so F/1.9 is the maximum and minimum aperture!
My grandma didn't have glass balls. Not sure about my grandpa though.
Brooke Meyer: Peter Gowland is rolling over in his grave from laughter.
A good friend of mine used to be an assistant to Peter Gowland. I'll have to ask him what he thinks.
bgbs: Nikon 1 failure. It's simple, if you cannot sell it in the USA you've failed.
That's not really true anymore. Basically, the market is currently divided in to thirds: Asia, Europe, and the Americas (the smallest market of the big three).
The Americas accounted for 30% of the world camera market for CIPA member companies in 2012. The European market was slightly larger at 33%. Asia (inc. Japan) was also 33% of the market.
By 2020 Asia, without even including Japan, is likely to become the biggest market. Of course, most of that is down to the growth in China.
As someone who's sitting in a hotel in China writing this comment right now, I can tell you that even in the three years I've been coming here, the growth in consumer spending is astonishing.
Of course the US remains a vitally important market. No one would want to walk away from a quarter (I'm guessing the US accounts for 25% on it's own) of the market, but the late 20th century view that if you fail in the US you have failed period, is no longer true and is moving further from the truth ever year.
He may be claiming to take responsibility, but he's not fully.
Narciso Contreras: "...this is a single case that happened probably at one very stressed moment, at one very difficult situation, but yeah, it happened to me..."
"It happened to me" is the language of being a victim to external factors. If he said, "I did it" he would be owning it and admitting it was his choice alone.