f/2.8? yawn... should have made it 35/2 equivalent...
vodanh1982: "The cameras' wireless capabilities allow users to remotely capture and view images from iOS devices" No Android or PC?
androids are for amateurs, PCs for gamers - not Phase One's target markets... LOL
Mike99999: To me the Fuji X-series is a case of the emperors new clothes. They basically take a Nikon D3100 or a Canon t2i, put it inside a shinier body, and sell it as if it's the greatest new thing. It is a pretty standard APS-C camera.
First of all the images look mushy at ISO 200. It doesn't look nearly as good as a D7000 or OM-D.
Second are the lenses. Everyone is hyping these lenses, as good as Leica, etc... Why? These Fuji lenses are really overrated. The corner softness is so bad I often think these are re-branded Sigma lenses.
If compactness is an issue, Olympus is convincing me better. If compactness is not an issue, Nikon and Canon get you more for less money. It just doesn't look as shiny.
I had D7000 for a year, it has strong AA filter, need good lenses. OMD? LOL as long as the sensor is smaller, no way it's comparable to Fuji's X Trans. The problem with Fuji is just that there is no optimal RAW converter...making it a high end jpg camera.
the most expensive jpg-only camera...
reach0775: dpreview will remain my No.1 source for camera reviews, but I'll really stop taking their conclusions seriously.The 6D has similar or better IQ than the mighty Mk.III, some VERY serious USPs (GPS, weight...) and it costs a 1.000EUR less!Hey, that's an awful lot of money! It's a shame they even compare those 2 within the same sentence.But taking it down because Mr. dpreviewer would have had different ideas where to save money is really outrageous arbitrariness.
Problem is, most buyer only concern about spec when comparing 6D vs D600. As a user of both system, I did try the D600 but I didn't like the color - plus my collection of Canon lenses are growing due to more better new lenses. Add to those an excellent service from Canon where I am - that's why I got the 6D.
GeorgeZ: For most users the EM5 delivers more pleasing photos without pp.For RAW shooters it's a different story. In normal light I'm still happy with my old D50, but when the time comes to buy a new camera I will switch to M43 thanks to Olympus' jpeg magic and the nice lenses available. Nikon shows nothing here that would sway ME to stay with them.
Like I said, I did use quite an extensive system of m4/3, including EM5. Sorry, the details are not up to the FF cameras with good lenses. It's reality - esp the low light details. Horses for courses, sure. I'm not saying m4/3 is bad, but it's not as good as the best APS-C system, still. NEX might be weird looking, but the sensor is better than the best m4/3 sensor currently available. The Oly defenders need to have some reality check, somehow.
Agreed, marike6. I used to have both 4/3 and m4/3. Sold them because I still prefer the outputs from my Canon and Nikon. If one needs small mirrorless, NEX is a good start over m4/3.
gl2k: Today it's not about the sensor, it's all about the body that makes the difference. Dunno about DR but regarding noise the 5200 plays in the same league as the D800.
I agree with aftab - Nikon seems to put strong AA filter over the 24MP DX sensor. A shame... T4i is sharper, though noisier.
Noise performance is good, but I wished D5200 has the crispness of D5100/T4i. It might be the lens, though. Despite being a beginner DSLR, one will need pro glasses to fully utilize the high resolution sensor.
Isit13: These IQ tests are mostly for color rendition and quality in general and not for sharpness as ive understood? Because i will not buy the fact that my D3100 beats the Leica M9 in sharpness am i right? Sorry for the offtopic question, i thought it better than to start a thread about it.
M9 uses CCD which has no AA filter - a combo you'll want for sharpness and resolution at the cost of moire. I think D5200 should do the same, no AA filter as its 24MP sensor has very small pixel pitch already and make it easy on the lenses to achieve acceptable sharpness.
steven_k: I purchased 2 of them hoping the first one I got was a dud, but it wasn't.I shot the lens at F4 optimal setting for this lens at infinity focus for landscapes on my OMD and I can tell you hands down this is not a good lens for landscapes.No where near as good as the 12, 25, 45 or 75mm lenses. My opinion is that this lens is probably a good street shooter lens. Not what I has hoping for.I guess the problem is at the end of the day it is a 17mm lens, and to make a tack sharp 17mm lens for 500.00 is probably almost impossible.Though the Oly 12 which is by far not perfect, I feel does perform better over all yet again a 700.00 lens.
Why impossible? it's 17mm with much smaller image circle than FF lens - esp at more than $500. Oh wait, I forgot, $300 of the price went to cosmetic parts...
Sergey Borachev: What's the point of a shiny metal lens with fancy focus ring and high quality looks (and price) when its performance is just adequate? This lens should have been made cheap in plastic like the 45mm, if at all (since there is another olympus 17mm lens that does not impress already). And there is also a good Panasonic 20mm. So, why bother? Any wonder why this lens is such a disappointment to most? 35mm equiv is the most essential lens, the lens that most would pick is they can only have one single prime. Yet, with all the lenses already in its range, Olympus chose to release another somewhat better 17mm but expensive lens after the failure in the earlier version. You excited by this lens?
Why do you say that? This lens makes a good accessories hanging on your neck!! Who cares about muddy rendering?
I'm amazed at these slow f/5.8 or even f/6.7 lenses. What's the point using small sensor then? These things are mediocre at best, too.
I thought one of the benefits of smaller sensor is smaller image circle thus lenses can be made compact while maintaining similar f/stops. If there are so many f/4-5.6 FF lenses with similar focal length, why does Oly have to make it f/4.8-6.7?? It's not cheap, too.
Another battery sucker...perhaps Samsung engineers now know color better than before? I tried NX1000 and NX20, JPG ooc sucks. I also found many Samsung devices with AMOLED has yellowish color, far from accurate. I guess Samsung only knows how to combine so many features into a single device and that's it.
I don't know if Canon is in trouble or not, but at least there's proof that 6D exists... can't wait to try one
ulfie: Good maybe even very good IQ but not any better than my $140 Oly E-PL1 body with 20/1.7 Panny lens. Really!
yes for the price it's not that spectacular, but it still has a good 16MP APS Sony sensor... NO way your EPL1 could compete in any way. DR, noise, whatever... although the 20/1.7 panny is sharp...
gl2k: Perky price.Nikon DX 35mm f1.8 and FX 50mm f1.8 are about €170
It should be cheaper than $500, still.
KonstantinosK: For the existing K5 users, the new duo doesn't look much of a temptation for an upgrade, unless of course money is no object. For those that are new to the DSLR and want the best in the APS-C class, they are serious candidates among its peers. The 7D after all these years received only a good firmware upgrade recently and the D7000 until now remains practically the same as ever.
K5 series are excellent cameras - but with 7D and D7000, you have MANY excellent lenses to choose from...
Let's see if the QC improves with the new Global vision thing...