GREAT kudos to DPReview guys to deliver these very-very helpful and instrumental pictures, at last. This is what I always expected and which may help all of us to judge the actual camera in real-life situation and if more similar samples are coming in the future then to compare them in low light conditions which is the primary viewpoint today for any camera.THANKS A LOT.About this camera: it seems maybe a bit better then other similar compacts but far less then impressive, showing clearly the huge difference between a "top quality" compact camera equipped with newly developed 1/1.7 BSI CMOS sensor, high performance processor, sophisticated smart firmware and great optics and any "average" DSLR (or similar mirrorless) camera with ~APS-C sized sensor in less then perfect lighting situation.The bad news is that I still have to carry my relatively heavy and bulky DSLR anywhere where I expect interesting themes :)) (I also have a Canon s100 for not so interesting places) :))
Continuing the previous thoughts...It would be very impressive also and would characterize the low light features if we could get a series of pictures about low light level target(s) with different parameters, e.g. exp. with 1/50 at iso 3200, 1/25 at iso 1600, 1/6 at iso 400 etc. by free hands and on tripod. This would not only give information about high-iso performance but also about lens and VR features in easily understandable mode. This is how most of us try to make usable pictures in bad illumination conditions with a new camera (and several times with our older well-known camera also).And one more idea which would be very interesting: same target with different light levels in lab environment, e.g. open iris, fix iso, e.g. iso=3200 with 1/100, 1/10, 1 sec, on tripod of course.
Yes, promising hi-iso performance, but:It would be reasonable to have much more high-iso samples from real-life environment, like night view of illuminated streets, buildings, also street portraits with low light levels. This desire is not just for this sample set but it is a general appeal. I am sure, most of the visitors of this site are most curious of the low-light capabilities of the cameras.My experience is that the low light behavior is much more understandable if we can compare real life photos about a certain well known or at least well imaginable target especially if the theme is commonly photoed by most of the photographers, like the above mentioned cases.Thanks.
rsf3127: I prefer my 35mm 1.8f prime. I use my legs to zoom.This superzooms produce the same IQ you can get with P&S cameras.
It is an awful great MISTAKE to think to a tele lens like just an extension of the possibilities of your legs. Tele range in most cases are serving very different function, not just bringing closer the target:- portrait is usually done in tele ranges not bec you can not go closer but because of different perspective and lower depth of field (much nicer differentiation of the target from the background).- you can take pictures with very different feeling by tele then with wide, it is IMPOSSIBLE to make it by your 35mm (normal range) lens. A crowded street from one end is a typical example but of course there are several similar cases.- And of course your legs can be great equipment but several times you need also wings to go closer, e.g. to flying birds, to scenery from the top of a tower/peek, etc. Accept my congratulation if you have also those facility.About this long zoom lens: 6.3 at 200mm is a real pity but let us wait for the tests and/or samples, maybe we will see miracle.