The processed RAWs have so much noise for ISO 100. The jpegs are so incredibly soft. Canon really needs to work on sensor design. I normally leave positive comments, but I am disappointed with what I see.
I have no issue with the size. It is just thick enough for a comfortable grip. With a set of pancake lenses, it is still pretty small and I can pop on my 300mm lens without having to buy some rip off $250 adapter.
The problem for me is the price. $900 is too much. $600 makes more sense.
Amazing resolution for the price. Gives up little to the 645D in terms of resolution. Only in the smallest print and detail does the 645D show the edge.
At high ISO, it simply can't match the 645D in noise performance, but that's expected. For 1/3rd the price you get a pretty good camera.
Impressive image quality. I was wondering about the 4/3rd format sensor with higher MP counts, but my concerns are at ease.
jj74e: I don't see what advantage flexible screens will provide for camera designs. A curved screen would skew what an image would look like on any other flat screen (unless for some reason people start wanting curved screens on their laptops, TVs, etc.), so flat screens would still be the practical choice even if flexible screens mean different body shapes? But maybe I'm missing something
Also, is this article saying that AMOLED screens only save energy when there are black parts present (because then they can simply turn off)? I thought AMOLED technology was inherently more efficient than LCDs regardless of what the image is presenting.
Flexible means the screen won't be cracked if the device is dropped. Probably the biggest problem with cell phones. This can mean more durable cameras can be engineered at a lower cost.
Its as big as the K5! No it's not.No swivel LCD! Big deal.No GPS1. Who cares. Buy something else.Its too thick. Good. Better to grip.CRY BABIES!!
Hey, it has a food and pet mode. I'm there!
YoHahnMD: I've always thought that the camera company that made their mirrorless cameras use their DSLR lenses without an adapter would be the big winner!
Interesting that Pentax is the first to do that . . .
Now, if only we can get Pentax cameras back into the stores (USA) where the buyers can see them before they buy!
Then they might be a big hit!
ARE YOU LISTENING, PENTAX???
As for it's appearance, it has a kind of 1980's boxy-retro-toy-robot look to it!
Not too sure how I like that . . .
I think retaining the K mount is smart even if the camera is thicker. A thicker camera is more comfortable to hold anyway.
I have a feeling Canon might try a mirrorless EOS mount camera that is a bit smaller than the Rebel line. We'll see...
The thicker design is actually better grippable and more comfortable to me. I'm not sure about the thin camera craze anyway. It has the big APS-C sensor with great IQ.
I love how they kept the K mount. No new lensmount and I can mount all my old lenses with out some overpriced adapter! With Pentax's pancake lenses, it won't be that much larger than other mirrorless ILCs.
As a small business owner (not photography), I feel for the photographers and other small business owners. I put out a lot of quotes and get few bites. I know people get "sticker shock" when they want something custom produced. Photography is like that. Owning a business is not easy, nor is it cheap.
I'm not complaining though. It can also be fun and rewarding. After years of struggling, I'm doing much better.
At least put in a BSI 12MP sensor. These 16mp sensors produce horrible images from the samples I've seen. Keep on stuffin', I won't be buyin'.
I was wondering if anyone was ever going to put a sensor in a manual style SLR body. Sounds interesting if not a niche product.
I'm impressed! Fringing is well controlled and images look like they are from an APS SLR. There is a bit of sharpness loss at wide angle in the corners, but that is given. When camera is off, lens stows nicely in the body. Not a pocket camera by any means, but pretty compact for the sensor size. Canon made a winner!
The styling looks to be from 10 years ago. A shame they are all going to the 16mp sensor. I've not seen a camera with one that made usable images. Of course this is a budget cam.
grafli: wonderful lens, but not so good sensor.there is some noise at ISO 80 like a new DSLR has it at ISO 800And ISO 3200 is not as good as a Canon S95, my opinion.
Having had the S95, I think this camera is better. Instead of smearing the noise away along with detail, they let some noise show and retain the shadow detail. Canon: take a hint. A bit of luminance noise is not so bad.
One reason I like primes. Zooms are obviously more complex with the extra movements and elements that are necessary to make them work. This, coupled with plastic parts that seem to require wider tolerances, make for a better chance to get a dog. And that I have.
I love the silky smooth focus rings of the old metal lenses and the no wiggle when you shake it rigid body. I must say that after collecting numerous types of these lenses, sometimes two or three copies of the same lens, I never had one that was soft on one side or had some other quality issue.
I used to be an IT manager for an engineering company. This is the way nearly ALL the software was licensed: It required some sort of USB dongle or a license server or still needed to be authorized like Windows OS or MS Office did (or does?). With most of the engineering software, you paid to use it for a year. If that expired, you paid to renew or lose use of the software and are charged full price of the software if you wanted to use it again.
Depending on the software, we figured it cost us $15,000 for a workstation, but that is still small compared to the cost of the human running it.
The studio comparison tool here on DPR shows just how amazing this camera is. Compare it to any FF SLR. It is just not the megapixel count, it is also the sharpness and clarity of the images at full view.
Unfortunately it comes at a price. The cost and weight of the camera and lenses.
I agree with DPR's assessment. Shoot this thing RAW to get the 24mp resolution expected.
Noise at higher ISOs is a disappointment. Low noise at high ISO is part of the attraction of larger sensors. Compared the other cameras RAW noise is two stops worse and nearly 3 stops vs. the K5. The Sony 16mp sensor seems to be the current APS-C champ. This camera is a victim of the megapixel race. RIP
I'm impressed! First, it has a good lens that stays reasonably sharp into the very corners. Full res shots are not as soft as I was expecting from this type of sensor. Noise is not too bad at higher ISOs even in high res mode.
I like the X10's handling of noise. A little is allowed to show rather than attempting to smear it with strong NR. Low contrast detail in darker area shows.
I had the S95 and while it is a fine camera, I was never "at home" with its jpeg rendering. To me, the X10 is the camera to move on to.
"The T300 combines the P7100's 10MP CMOS sensor with 'luxury' styling and a small form-factor."
Can someone clear up the confusion here? Either the T300 is some new model or this is a P300 and the sensor is not the same as the P7100 nor is it CCD.