To Richard Butler:Your comparisons to the 70-200 f/2.8 lenses on APS-C cameras make no sense to me.
While the mirrorless offerings have an equivalent focal length of ~ 70-200 on FF, mounting the 70-200 f/2.8 lenses on APS-C cameras result in ~ 105-300 on FF.
That is not a fair comparison.
Why not compare the various ~ 50-150 f/2.8 lenses on crop cameras to 70-200 f/2.8 or f/4 on FF. While the f/4 version on FF is slower by a stop, the DOF are comparable.
IMO, I'll take 70-200 f/4 on FF any day over 50-150 f/2.8 on APS-C. The only exception is the Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8 for m43. Why Olympus chooses to go down the 40-150 f/2.8 route beats me.
Was all excited about the LX100 until I read this little blip:
"The original version of this article stated that the LX100 has a touchscreen, which is not the case. We are very sorry for any confusion caused." - http://www.dpreview.com/previews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-lx100
So, out of the 3 competing cameras, Sony RX100 III vs Panasonic LX100 vs Canon G7X, only the G7X has a touchscreen which is very important for changing AF in a small format camera.
Same old same old 11+ stops of dynamic range at base ISO?
Sigh Sigh Sigh
Can't wait to see how the BSI APS-C sensor holds up. :)
photo nuts: Probably appeals to many, but with bulbous front element and weight of 1.1 kg, I don't care very much for it.
@Plastek: quality... you mean you already know this is going to be a quality lens even though it's under development? Wow! Simply wow! Can I have some of whatever you are smoking?
phoenix15: as ex nikonian, I don't understand why Nikon puts too many FF body in the market.
"...we’re seeing the industry shifting to higher priced products as volume declines."
Wow... 109 comments within a short space of time...
I am seriously impressed with the D750 specs. Great release.
Probably appeals to many, but with bulbous front element and weight of 1.1 kg, I don't care very much for it.
Clint Dunn: I love all the Fuji haters out in force. I tell ya one thing...I have been far more impressed with the quality of the 23/35/18-55 Fuji lenses I have compared to most of the Canon lenses I've owned....
Don't know about others but I don't hate Fujifilm. I love their sensors. But you have to face it: the weight and price of this lens are somewhat ridiculous when compared to its peers. It's designed for APS-C mirrorless mount!
photo nuts: Canon EF 70-200 f/4 IS weighs 760 g. Price is US$1299.
Sony FE 70-200 f/4 OSS weighs 840 g. Price is US$1498.
Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8 OIS (equiv. to 70-200 f/5.6) weighs 360 g!!! Price is US$1498.
Fujifilm XF 50-140 f/2.8 (equiv. to 76-213 mm f/4.2) weighs 995 g. No stabilisation. Price is US$1599.
Wow. Just wow.
Fujifilm and Sony lenses provide ZERO weight advantage for their mirrorless mounts.
@kangoo1707: DXO takes sensor performance into account when they rate their lenses. Stupid, I know, but that's how it's done at DXO.
@Clint: So, Fuji version is stabilized. But compare its weight to Panasonic f/2.8 version... if, as you say, not everything is about DOF. :D
LiOm Photography: so its bigger than a canon 70-200 f4 and has a bigger filter thread AND its more expensive??I remember how critical people were of the pana 35-100...theyre gonna have a field day with this one
brendon1000: It is f/2.8 for light gathering ability but is f/4.2 for equivalent DOF on FF. May as well compare to Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8 which weighs 360g.
Canon EF 70-200 f/4 IS weighs 760 g. Price is US$1299.
Hoping they'll release a 150 mm macro lens
RStyga: I'd like to see the D810 OF version (Oil-Free).
You got confused with the D600 sensor debris issue...
For the D800, it is the left side miscalibrated problem... Now, hopefully, that got fixed... just like D600 -> oil-free D610. :D
benbammens: I like this article :) Makes it easier to understand what Nikon changed in the camera :)
Does DPReview do that for other cameras? Hmmm
The best compact camera now. As long as there is no long term reliability issue, it's hard to beat the RX100 MkIII.
BPD7: Longtime Canon SLR user here. Also used their pocket cameras, which I never liked. Recently been using Fujifilm x100s, Sony RX100 and Fujifilm X-A1. The Canons are lacking. I won't ever go back to a point and shoot Canon. The Rx100 is so pocketable it's amazing. Why would I go to this camera when it's not as pocketable and I can get better results on the Sony?
Canon will continue to lose market share IMO.
"Canon will continue to lose market share IMO."
Everything you said is true, except for the above statement. Canon's market share for compact cameras is on the rise again, at the expense of poor Nikon... which is losing their market share in this department so quickly it almost appears as though they are pulling out of the market altogether.
I have never read such a negative review from Jeff Keller back in the DC Resource days. Was there a financial reason in the past? ;)
Anyway, I am glad to see such negative views on Canon sensors, particularly in the area of shadow recovery. They totally deserve this.
perry rhodan: DPR does a very good job on the reports of the show! Really like what is presented here! Thank you DPR!
Some of the minor quibbles:G1 X Mark II, "It sports a near-SLR-sized sensor" is a hyperbolic statement. Read this first: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0528662139/canon-powershot-g1-x-mark-ii-a-quick-summary
It's essentially a four-third sensor which is not too different from the typical APS-C ones.
halc: Considering that smartphones have already killed Canon's pocket camera sales, they should perhaps view their business differently.
I can't understand how slow and tired Canon has become.
It's DSLR line is pretty much only alive because of inertia, old legacy lens selection and 5DmkIII. Everything else they ship is old, tired, worse than competition in features and performance.
Inertia. Old Canon users.
They will grow less and less every year.
Unless Canon really does something new, innovative and something that makes them competitive again.
The market shares they command today will refute everything you said