justmeMN: Whatever. Samsung is just another miniscule-market-share player scrambling for leftovers in a shrinking market.
Samsung is probably better vertically integrated than any other camera vendor, since they not only manufacture sensors and batteries (like a Sony or Panasonic) but also a wide array of SoC and other electronics that others might source elsewhere... And they clearly have a big marketing muscle, they're definitely a dark horse that's not going anywhere.
coldcut: I like the bold tone from Samsung. No overconfidence, just self assurance leaning towards innovation and a firm belief that there is a lot of technical improvements left to implement. Others just rest on their laurels, waiting to see what the next big thing will be, hoping somone else will do the heavy lifting.I really hope Samsung will drive this home.
There's no probably about it, the average US consumer doesn't have a clue what mirrorless is, like at all... It's not "a thing" and nobody has marketed it well enough to make it one. Samsung probably has the biggest marketing muscle of all three mirrorless players tho (AND they're about as vertically integrated as a Panasonic or Sony), would love to see them flex it and put mirrorless on the map... Ask the other players would ultimately benefit.
mpgxsvcd: Samsung has the exact opposite strategy as Canon. Samsung knows that if they build a quality product with lots of features their customers will still be willing to spend the same amount of money and not ask for rock bottom prices.
They also know that if they are not leading the industry then there will be no catching up. It is lead or simply get out of the way and die by the roadside.
Canon on the other hand believes that its customers are for life. They believe that as long as they don’t change things too much their customers won’t want to change too much. Canon’s market share will be drastically reduced by the end of this year thanks to innovations by Sony, Olympus, Samsung, Panasonic, and even Nikon.
Love me some mirrorless, but frankly I don't buy that for a minute, nor do I buy Samsung's prediction or some of their statements (there's a few things DSLR still do better, specially at the very high end, no point in denying it). I do love their apparent commitment tho, and aggressiveness.
Sony has had a few years to push mirrorless into the limelight and they haven't gained much more mass market recognition than even smaller players like Oly and Fuji... If there's one company that could really grab some mindshare for mirrorless as a whole right now it's Samsung.
I say that even tho I'm not the brand's biggest fan, couldn't care less for their phones... I do have a Samsung TV, mostly because it was the last great plasma available when I bought it, shame they're all EOL now.
Kurt_K: Overpriced, I would say, given the lack of stabilization.
Yeah, that seems like an odd choice... Doesn't the XF f/4 UWA have IS even? Do Samsung's f/2.8 zooms for their mirrorless mount feature IS? I know Oly/Panasonic's do, but Canon (and Nikon's?) EF/APS-C f/2.8 standard zoom doesn't... I'm curious how much of a deal breaker people view it to be, particularly in light of Fuji's excellent kit zoom.
photogeek: Video mode still sucks. Better luck next time.
I'm only half kidding btw, this was quite an impressive firmware update by any measure. Way beyond fixing stuff and tweaking stuff due to user demand (which they also did), I'd be ecstatic if I owned Fuji and I'm indeed a little jealous.
99% of Fuji customers anyway, the rest bought Panasonic/Sony. :P
Pretty nicely produced segment... Kinda surprised a pro found the Wi-Fi feature that appealing, tho it's something I really dig too, possibly took to it more cause she's younger? My biggest takeaway as far as in studio shooting was how personable she was, which I'm sure helps immensely in connecting with the subject... No amount of tech helps there!
kirbysdl: Great list! A few nit picks:
Re: protection filters, your recipient probably already falls into one of two camps: they like them and use them religiously, or they think that they're going to mess with the image quality and wouldn't touch one with a ten foot pole. I doubt there are many who will spend a grand on a lens and sit around pining for the $80 filter that will go on it.
My bigger concern is with the flashlight sporting a crenelated strike bezel. Anything intended to maim an attacker is also going to wreak havoc on things like lens barrels and the soft insides of a camera bag. Instead, I recommend anything from foursevens, a flashlight company with enthusiast gear at big box store prices ... and no tacticool pretensions.
Spark, Zebralight, and plenty of other companies are well-respected among flashlight enthusiasts. On the other hand I've never heard of Ansmann, and the linked product has zero reviews on Amazon. =)
Heh, agreed, your comment must've gone up as I was writing mine. It's pretty amazing the kind of output a decent flashlight from the like of Foursevens or Olight can have compared to the typical stuff at Wal-Mart, the checkout isle or Home Dpt... Even the old Maglites pale in comparison.
A little i3S is probably great for actually keeping IN a smaller bag since the knurling is very slight (it's not even knurling, more like beveled grip slits) and the thing is positively tiny can still put out near 100 lumens.
The Xeno E03 (if I'm remembering the model right) is another good budget light, a little bigger as it's an AA rather than AAA but has longer run time and a dead simple interface plus a glow in dark tail button and ring around the projector. I think the run about $25, I bought a few of those for my parents last year.
The novelty of the S15's sheer output and the utility of the tail cap magnet plus the versatility to run it as a 1xAA or 2xAA make it a pretty interesting gift tho. OTOH Foursevens' tail cap switches or twist interface (like the i3S or Xeno)might be safer from accidental presses in a bag.
You can always loosen the tail cap on the S15 to prevent that but the non-enthusiast isn't likely to do that.
Does that flashlight have any particular photographic function? Cause otherwise there's much better torches for the money that can go way brighter but still have multiple modes etc. I'd look at Foursevens, Olight, Sunwayman, or EagleTec's lineup (or ZebraLight if you wanna splurge). My pick at $30-ish would be the Olight s15 ($36 on EBay with free extender tube, pricier on Amazon), up to 280 real lumens. The i3s is a great stocking stuffer too..
/flashlight nerd puts his pocket protector away now
Zeisschen: Endless click producing roundups. Seriously, who cares? These lists simply made Dpreview less credible to me...
The effort is appreciated, I can make up my own mind after reading your reviews and others but these kinda guides are very useful to share with others. I'm sure some criticism is made merely for the sake of it or brand loyalty, but rest assured that some is made because we do appreciate the work and only wanna help improve it.
Impulses: Uhh, no MFT cameras? I'm guessing they were left out because no new entry level bodies were released this year... Could've swore I remember MFT (GF6 or a PEN) being included in a similar roundup last year. At the same time tho, the A3000 and others here were also 2013 releases, and you can get a mid to high end GX7 or E-M10 for the price of the X-M1...
Hey thanks for replying, I think the fact that you're listening to feedback and working on the method to the madness speaks louder than anything else. I wouldn't really think much of the omission after a few days (unless it was a recurring thing) but knowing that reader feedback is weighed does definitely stick in my mind, thanks again. Looking forward to a more flexible system in the future.
G-D: DPR, I think you should add some comment about why you left out so many other equally good and comparable camera's, like all those mentioned by many here in earlier comments. What a weird lineup!
I think there's a case to be made for your own rules not really serving the reader best... A lot of buyers are likely to read only one roundup they seem to think fits them better, so pointing at different categories or even last year's roundup is useless to them. What would be so wrong with having certain models in multiple categories if they fit? Just a thought... Maybe your internal page hit stats tell a different story.
I think it'd make a lot of sense, not just because it'd be good to have MFT represented but because Panasonic seems to be positioning the GM1 as their entry level option now, kind of bizarre given the original MSRP and the GM5's price but tough to ignore.
I get why you'd ignore the A5000 since it's clearly an outgoing model, and the A5100 was already in the other roundup... But why restrict yourself so much? What's wrong with double dipping?
If these articles are to have any lasting use I think it'd make all the sense in the world for you to be able to include certain models in multiple categories if they fit. Would save yourself a lot of grief and make the guides more useful.
I imagine most non enthusiast shoppers will look at ONE the guide/roundups and be done with it, so saying you didn't include a similarly priced model because it's in this other roundup is useless to that sorta reader.
Just my 2c, this roundup seemed far more constrained by your own rules than any other this year... Dunno if maybe it's your least read or what but it could be better.
Treeshade: These roundups are not very useful other than listing camera released in the year. In a buyer's view, many last-year models (e.g. a5000, GH3) are still current model and are attractive choices (lower price, different weight/shape).
It isn't even a listing of current year releases, as I first thought too, neither the A3000 nor the X-M1 were released this year. There's no logical selection criteria here...
tinternaut: Well, you only manage to miss out three manufacturers, and an entire mount.
The GM1 is now actually as cheap as the GF6 was shortly after release last year tho, it might as well be their current entry level option (with the build quality of a mid range!). It and some of the supposedly mid range Sony A5xxx bodies are actually cheaper than some of the bodies on this roundup, and the A5100 is even a more recent release than many. Doesn't make any sense whatsoever... I've generally found some logic with most DPR roundups but this one defies all logic.
Shoot even the GM1 is cheaper than the X-M1 at this point... And it makes as good an entry level choice as anything here, specially in light of larger bodies with smaller 1" sensors bodies being included. Even if you assume the list was compiled off MSRPs it still doesn't make any sense (other Alpha bodies are still cheaper than the X-M1).
How are they now pricey? They're often cheaper than the XM-1, as are the Sony A5000/5100 (significantly cheaper if you shop around). If they were just picking the lower tier models in each lineup why pick two Fuji bodies (one being decidedly not priced as an entry level option) and no MFT models? Two out of their top three picks were 2013 releases anyway, as were the GF6 and some PENs.
Hell, why aren't the Sony A5100/5000 in this roundup either? They're ALSO cheaper than the X-M1 and relatively recent releases... Quite a confusing selection.
Uhh, no MFT cameras? I'm guessing they were left out because no new entry level bodies were released this year... Could've swore I remember MFT (GF6 or a PEN) being included in a similar roundup last year. At the same time tho, the A3000 and others here were also 2013 releases, and you can get a mid to high end GX7 or E-M10 for the price of the X-M1...
CameraLabTester: What Sony should really IMPROVE is the public awareness of their MOUNT SYSTEM.
Walk in NEW customers wouldn't know their A's from their E's.
Average customer walking into anywhere isn't even aware mirrorless is "a thing"... Sony's always done better (than Oly/Fuji/Samsung/Panasonic) in securing retail space and trying to get the word out but they still fall short.