sapralot: Somehow I don't want to spend money on dated technology, although I know what the GR (II) is capable of...
Are there really no alternatives to the GR with regard to outstanding image quality in a very compact body?
All technology is dated. If not today, then a month from now. These are digital cameras. People actually say things like "the sensor is starting to look a little old." I say stuff like that about my ties--but the difference is, if I hold on to the ties long enough, they come back into style.
It's all about convenience. For (most) users, the smaller the better and they'll give up virtually everything for small and lightweight, ultimately even using a phone.
For the manufacturers, it's more "convenient" to make mirrorless cameras because there's less in them. And if the picture quality is the same, they can sell less for the same price. Canon and Nikon have too much invested in SLR to put a lot of money into competing with themselves so for now, they are going with what they know.
24-50 would have been a bit more versatile but this looks good to me.
Interesting to see their reference to Made in Japan. I happen to agree, but mostly because Chinese workers earn so much less, the savings should be passed along.
It's #1. Zoot Allures!
Rooru S: no mention of the QX100...it has a 3.5x zoom with a 1.0 Type Sensor too...! and a better bracket to mount it on several types of mobile phones... Perhaps because DPR doesn't want to hurt DxO?
DxO pays better and you don't want to work for the Japanese if you can avoid it.
While I dislike virtually everything about phones except the "airplane" mode, I think what's needed, if anything, is better picture quality from the phone itself. If the argument is that, with a phone & camera you have to carry 2 items instead of 1, this doesn't seem all that different. As photographers, we're used to carrying lenses, adapters, finders, etc. But a phone user probably wants to keep things small and simple.
magneto shot: image stability ricoh. the camera is so light, blurring is almost built in.
Image stabilization is coming. In everything. There's no compelling reason not to. The only argument against stabilization is that some super photographers don't need it with wide angles. But digital cameras already have lots of features nobody needs so that's no excuse.
justmeMN: Be it Canon or Sony, regardless of other features, the concept of cameras with a 1" sensor costing $1,000, or more, makes me cringe.
(sarcasm) That said, I give other people permission to buy those cameras. :-)
Imagine if they had included a viewfinder and the camera cost $1200.
howardfuhrman: After reading about 50 or so comments, dpreview contributors are definitely not Canon's target market for the G3X.
I think people should be able to buy what they like and it's not up to me to judge them for doing so.
So this is a 2-piece thing with a phone? I picture it in a museum in Palo Alto as a first attempt at whatever it is. Sounds sort of interesting so long as it doesn't have instructions translated from French.
No built-in finder but as I predicted (with no great insight) Canon is using the same EVF for G1X2, EOS M3 and this new one. At least you only have to buy it once. And since they gave it away free with the Japanese EOS M3 kits, its hard to complain about the price.
On the one hand, its an excellent, no frills wide angle camera. On the other, perhaps Ricoh took note of the fate of the Coolpix A (which expert Steve Huff said was a great buy at $1098.) and decided not to put a lot more into the GR.
rrccad: I'm starting to think that it's either dpreview or that photographers on the whole are turning into crotchety old geezers that bitch whine and moan about everything. heck half of them can't seem to carry anything over 1lb, and I'm sure soon that will be subbed with a cane the way some are going on.
all of which makes me scared :/
a cool tool - and now we'll be swamped with overdone simulated fog images ;)
(however I have to admit, I can think of a few photos i want to try adding haze to just to see how they look).
My sub for LR/PS is around 9.95 per month. LR is a rather useless for me (can't handle IR RAW's and can't handle Sigma), but 10/month for PS with continual upgrades? did you ever see the sticker price of PS before?
if you can't afford it, really, leave your sniffling somewhere else.
it's getting pretty nauseating.
I try to confine myself to one rant per month when my monthly payment is due. But you're right about all the negativity; people calling things a useless piece of crap seems a bit strong.
John Usa: I really do not understand your low 77% rating.You gave the T4i a 77% rating.You gave the T5i a 76% rating.This new model is better in all respects than the previous models and yet you still gave it a 77% rating.I am starting to lose respect in your ratings and perhaps it is time for you to update your rating system altogether and make it believable.
Almost everything gets gold/silver/bronze, probably for the reason Richard mentions above. They're all so good it's mostly a matter of personal taste and what lenses you own. More and more, the cutting edge features aren't that useful either, but they're what you get when there's not that much room to make major improvements. I don't mean DxO improvements; I mean real, practical, significant visual improvements.
Tape5: Sony is on a roll. You know the exponential rate of change is here when technology and innovation falls off a company at a pace that does not make common market sense. Long live the nerds and the accountants !
If you have a choice between selling cameras to professional photographers vs. selling to hobbyists who consider themselves professionals, you go with the hobbyists. None of this stuff would exist without hobbyists.
dark goob: Images are blown out, show significant chromatic aberration, and high compression. Canon could really do better. Seems like it's been downhill since the S95.
Looks fine. Not Ansel Adams, but perfectly ok for this purpose.
Not a very exciting camera for the money but as you point out, it's debatable that the less than state of the art features will matter to users. For one thing, they'd have to know what these things mean before they could miss them. All my SLRs have micro adjustment, no doubt an expensive feature to incorporate, and I've never used it, on any of them.
bovverwonder: I just sold my Canon FF the same day the Sony A7R II was announced. I was sold that quick! I also shoot with Oly EM5 mk2 and Fuji XT1 (which I both love!) so I'm familiar with mirrorless. I was a Canon fanboy (heavily invested) and so are millions of shooters but I saw the light and had to get out of my comfort zone. Going to sell the remaining of all my L lenses/speedlights to fund the A7RII and a few Sony lenses. Bye bye Canon, hello mirrorless - it's the future!
All digital cameras are great long term investments. I wish I had held on to my Sony. It wrote the files to 3-inch CDs. Imagine what it would be worth today!
mpgxsvcd: It seems like it has been almost ¼ of a year since the 5Ds was announced and it isn’t even available yet. I am not sure how many cameras you can sell if you don’t even ship them.
Oh the horror. Like taking a photo and having to wait more than a fraction of a second to see it. Well, LensRentals has them, so everybody else shouldn't be far behind.