Gerard Hoffnung: I like the "freeze proof to -10C". Around my part of the world that's an average winter day and both my G16 and Ti3 function perfectly well at that temperature.
Notice how there is no claim for this camera's ability to handle hot temperatures.
Leandros S: For anybody else wondering: the cat photo is ISO 800, the building fronts are ISO 100 (in the RAW vs JPEG comparison).
ACR conversion of the ISO 800 cat photo is horrendous, no matter what the review says about Raw workflow improving results.
Mammolo02: I have been using it for a month now. If you limit your prints to A4 size the image quality is acceptable. I would not use it for A3 prints. If you never print anything ... then it's very good :-)
The article keeps going back to the issue of using a RAW editor, but does not mention any. I use RawTherapee, but TG-4 RAW support on major software packages is still lacking.
The key might be a noise reduction plug-in such as Neat Image or Topaz Denoise. I'll try the ISO 800 cat and post to Oly forum.
Although new to RawTherapee, I was able to match or exceed JPEG results at base ISO, without undue effort. It became increasingly difficult or impossible at higher ISO. Is the same true of Lightroom? Certainly seems so from the studio shots, and ISO 800 cat.
CAcreeks: After using even a typical smartphone, the 3" LCD on most cameras seems totally pathetic.
If I don't like viewfinders, why would I buy a DSLR? The viewfinder I have is on a Fuji S200EXR. I also had an optical viewfinder in a Canon, which I gave to a homeless person because I hated it so much.
Nikonandmore: Huh????? This camera is news a year ago.. ridiculous..
You are correct, the Samsung Galaxy Camera 2 press release is dated January 2nd 2014. No wonder it doesn't run Lollipop! I would like to see a Camera 3 with 1" sensor and less zoom range (lower X).
Where did I mention the word compact? Usually even a huge DSLR has a pathetic 3" LCD. Some of us hate viewfinders! The Galaxy Camera 2 has a 4.8" LCD.
After using even a typical smartphone, the 3" LCD on most cameras seems totally pathetic.
Ashuaria Lee: Many parts of the Studio Scenes are impressive.1. Wedge chart...On Low-ISO NX-mini goes until 34~35, while the others remain 30~322. Random dot chart...Looking on whatever ISO, mini is the clear winner.3. Weeds,Grass...Low-ISO, mini has better details.4. Sketch under the wedge...Looking at the ceeks and forehead, mini has more details on whatever ISO.-> I cannot agree the phrase "In the default Jpeg mode at their respecive native ISOs, the cameras reproduce a very similar amount of detail"
Beyond the IQ the battery is almost twice longer than competatives. And with 9mm lens it grows even more. 630 shots CIPA AFAIK.
They mentioned about the poor corners(bragging nikon ;-)..thats the LENS not the camera. perhaps they should have used 9mm fix-focal lens for the test.
I AM a big fan or canon, nikon also, but I remember not being fair for sony few years ago, and I'm getting some similar feeling here again.Am I imagining?
I don't think the 9mm lens is as good as the 17/1.8 they used. If you want 9mm, goto the imaging-resource.com samples. Geometric distortion in corners bothers me, but otherwise it's a fine lens.
Dohmnuill: Another slim camera..without a viewfinder. No thanks.
It seems very nice to hold at waist level with the LCD tilted up, and my thumb on the shutter.
Gesture: That's a Silver Award winner. But Samsung NX owners enjoy great value.
Thanks, I feel with faster menus and higher screen resolution it would be a sure Silver.
Enginel: I see this camera more like a 2X teleconverter for NX lenses...Its native lenses are anyway little too large to be truly pocketable (9-27 is about the size of Sony's APS-C 16-50 collapsible zoom)
These lenses are about the same length, but the 9-27 about half the diameter and less than half the weight.http://camerasize.com/compact/#545.413,535.360,ha,t
vladimir vanek: OMG, now everyone's going to produce "selfie" cameras to support that ill idea to shoot oneselves. Human vanity must have gone a long way to reach today's levels.
On Facebook few people look at posts that don't have a face in them.There's nothing wrong with the selfie for this purpose.
I don't see the Silver award now. Did they remove it.
mosc: Why does the lens have to be so slow? I don't get it. The camer's huge relative to it's sensor. Why is the lens such a piece of crap?
I think you mean WG-4 GPS, which replaced the 3, and has sensor-shift optical stabilization. Ricoh is not far from leading the field with a hypothetical WG-5, but instead we get this.
Does it solve shortcomings of the WG-4? Based on specs, 2 of 5 yes: longer battery life, available WiFi. One probably not, the LCD still looks like stupid 16:9 and is only 2.7". Underwater metering and chromatic aberration, we can't tell from specs.
Oh! It does not have GPS and the WG-4 has 3" LCD, so this one is less competitive with segment leaders.
mcshan: I can't tell from just these samples but I curious if image quality will be that much better than the original G1X? Slightly worse?
I have the original and was always pleased with it as a simple carry around travel camera with some zoom. It will be fun to learn what Canon has changed.
Same, based on the I-R.com comparometer.
iae aa eia: In my opinion no brand beats Canon when it comes to natural color. They only need a Foveon-like sensor to complete the perfectness.
Disagree. Canon ranks at best #3 for pleasing colors behind Fuji and Olympus. Canon might have industry worst highlight treatment. If you are using "natural" to avoid the word pleasing, you should look at the Imatest chart - the G1x is far from accurate.
The lens is wider and faster than before. I wonder if corners are less soft at wide angle? Could not find any sample images on the web.
Do any other enthusiast compacts have 3.5" screen with touch to focus? DPR feature search has only the > 3" constraint. Google search found the Fuji Z800 and Canon SD3500.