Hey DPR, thanks for the hands on! How well does this work with a 3rd party's 3rd party lens. For example, like EF Mount Sigma lens.
It's only natural that Nikon suddenly had a "break through" on buffering technology from D7100 to D7200 after Canon release their 7D Mark II. Or they just been handicapping the D7X00 up until now?
The sad thing is that a MISS FOCUSED shot from a decent P&S/phone still has MORE resolution than an IN FOCUS shot from a Lytro.
Mister Roboto: $600 + $100 EVF I am sold!
The VF cost $250 atleast.
Canon so scared this well cannibalize their Rebels that they rip the EVF right out of this poor thing.
KennyXL: Sigma is looking to kick in the teeth of Nikon and Canon. I'd be 0% shocked if this was at least as good as Nikon's 24mm f/1.4 at a significantly lower price.
pretty sure this Siggy will be better optically :D
Waste of time, it's not like you can fit a DSLR into your pocket even WITHOUT a lens.
Instead, they should do something like the "first DSLR kit lense that starts at 24mm equivalent".
No 1'' sensor, no a chance against competition...
JGoodard: Seriously, no viewfinder?
sure looks like it.
It's a crime.
Errr... EVF plz! If Canon forces us to buy the $300 add on EVF...
Eigenmeat: So i don't know which is the worst: the flareor...The fact that a critical precision module like the AF sensor can be misplaced to such degree that is visible to the naked eye... I thought we were taking about micron order of precision here on $2300 camera.
OK, I agree that if you AF tune your lens, this would be fine. Since DPR believe every lens should be AF tuned before usage, then what should lower end DSLR user do? Are you guys implying that entry level DSLR are simply un-usable outside of the slow zooms? If that is case, you should say so clearly on your entry level DSLR reviews.
The great majority of DSLR sales are entry level, and non of those bodies have AF fine tune. Even with the kit zoom, CDAF yield noticeably more consistent result than untuned PDAF based on my experience. The difference is easily as large as $100 lens compared to a $1000 lens.
You can argue that most casual consumer won't notice this. I think that is abit a like a scam, as a typical consumer think DSLR offer better quality. However, due to untuned PDAF, people can usually get much more consistent result with a good P&S than an entry DSLR.
So i don't know which is the worst: the flareor...The fact that a critical precision module like the AF sensor can be misplaced to such degree that is visible to the naked eye... I thought we were taking about micron order of precision here on $2300 camera.
Well is dpreviews talk about it, then it's pretty much confirmed!
majicmoments: Progress is important i know... but i dont need 40 million pixels per image clogging up my i pad... How about achieving 25 iso Olympus?... or graduated filters in camera?..say grey/blue/nd grads.. now that would be a blast!
and the ipad has a camera too!
Old Baldy: Nice camera! It hits a lot of my personal preferences.
But then, for pure IQ, it does not match a brand new old stock NEX-5T with a fantastically sharp Zeiss 32mm f/1.8 lens for similar price ($348+$720 = $1068) or the 5T + the three really strong Sigma primes 19mm, 30mm, 60mm $348+$199+$199+$209 = $955 - albeit with the zoom flexibility and slightly smaller size.
Pros of the LX vs the 5T+Zeiss - better video (if that's important to you.)- smaller, more pocketable. Perhaps its biggest advantage?- nicer build?- built-in VF (instead of optional add-on. Albeit fixed)- better controls/menu system?
Cons- Doesn't have the touchscreen (very useful to me)- Doesn't have the tilting screen (very useful to me)- Lower IQ- Lens not as bright- weaker high ISO performance- lack of lens flexibility (telephoto, macro etc)
Regardless, this seems to be an intelligently designed, very capable and desirable camera. Would love to put one thru its paces!
Switch lens sucks. I would easily pay $300 to merge two of my lense together =).
Martin87: Sony posting a firmware update for their cameras? That's quite unusual for them
onlooker, take a look at my thread here:http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/54173076
The FZ1000's lens is very good from 50mm onward, at wide angle though, it's not very good.
Now i need to go Tamul Waterfall!
derekmjenkins: I was starting to compare this camera to my GH1 with the 14-140 OIS 4.0-4.8 lens, and it is looking like this bridge camera beats it in every way:
Equivalent focal length: 25-400 vs. 28-200Max aperature: 2.8-4.0 vs. 4.0-5.8Max aperature equivalent: 7.6-10.8 vs. 8.0-11.6ISO range: 125-12800 vs. 100-3200 EVF (dots): 2,359,000 vs. 1,440,000LCD (dots): 921,000 vs. 460,000Shutter speeds: 1/16000-60 vs. 1/4000-60Flash GN (m): 13.5 vs. 10.5Drive Speed (fps): 12 vs. 3Focus points: 49 vs. 23Exposure Compensation -5 to +5 (1/3 steps) vs. -3 to +3 (1/3 steps)
Oh and with the FZ1000 you also get:- Panorama mode- HDR mode- Orientation sensor (try using a 20mm 1.7 on a GH1 vertically!)- 4k video up to 30 fps!- Timelaps video- 5-axis in body IS- SDXC support
The only things you do not get in the FZ1000 are dof preview and white-balance bracketing. I would miss the ability to use some higher quality primes and to get down to use my 9-18mm lens.
It's a good camera.
I disagree. The modern Sony 1'' sensor very good. Likely within 1/3 of the couple year old GH1 sensor. The lens on the FZ1000 is ~1 stop faster and has greater range on both end. The FZ1000 all also have better AF and EVF.