SteveY80: The lack of exposure compensation in Manual+Auto ISO is really frustrating. That's the mode where the dedicated EC dial would be most useful - in PAS modes the spare dial can be used to set compensation instead.
In a lot of lighting conditions EC is a necessity, e.g. shooting an air show with backlit planes you can end up with no shadow detail without +EC, while in other circumstances burned out highlights ruin the shot without -EC.
For me the complete lack of Auto-ISO in manual was the most crippling limitation of the GX7. It's the mode I use 75%+ of the time on my Sony, especially for wildlife, sport, and action photography. Having to manually control exposure can lead to missed shots in fast moving events with variable lighting. Panasonic lost a sale to me when they only half fixed it in the GX8.
They could sort this out with a simple firmware fix, but that would be unusual for Panasonic. Hopefully they'll finally have this working in a sensible way on the GX9.
Auto ISO is the first part of the feature. But the meter can be fooled by tricky lighting, so they want control over auto aspect.
The second part is to tell to add or take off a stop when using the metered reading, like exposure compensation does in the auto modes.
Imagine a dancer continuously moving across a stage at a varying pace and with varying lighting throughout the scene.
You have one hand supporting the camera/lens, possibly using it to zoom/focus. With the other hand you grip the camera, using your index finger and thumb for controls. 2 fingers, 2 control points.
In many shooting situations you may have the time and opportunity to exercise full control over every aspect of exposure.
Sometimes you can even supply and control your own lighting, like on a model shoot, but the above event is not one of those. Many aspects of the above event are beyond your control so you have to adapt and react.
The cameras metering system works at light-speed and can assist you in adapting and reacting quickly.
You are perfectly at liberty to choose not take advantage of the feature. But others will and do want to.
Also, they want to exercise some control over the meter, hence the need for this feature and why the lack of it is a negative.
caver3d: Have you noticed how all these mirrorless cameras - which are exceptional by the way - are now receiving silver awards instead of gold, even though they are more than equivalent to - actually superior to - the earlier versions which received gold awards. What's up with that, DPR? Care to explain?
The name Usain Bolt is known because he breaks records, not because he equals them or gets near to them.
Who remembers the 8th man on the moon? I mean remember, not able to use google to find out.
There are a few of reasons the GX8 doesn't deserve a gold award in my eyes, these are the reasons I won't be buying it, even though I am looking to buy a new camera and have a great collection of M43 lenses.
Yes, that and the shutter shock problem left me shaking my head a bit. They make a whole new body and still can't fix this?
Shame, it's nearly quite a compelling camera, but really wouldn't want to be chimping for shock/rolling shutter when I should be shooting.
Looks like Ricoh were really feeling out. While the D5 looks like it was clean sliced with a laser or even moulded in halves, the K1 looks like someone just grabbed the nearest hacksaw and set to work on it.
I can hear the conversations in the booth at pack-up time, hey yoshi, you seen my K1 anywhere? Yes boss, it's over there and over there.
rsf3127: ZS-100 is the DL killer.
LOL. Nice one.
10x zooms in this size are massively dependent on software correction which will eat into the resolution.
While at the long end, F5.9 on a 1" sensor will be already starting to suffer from diffraction, further limiting resolution, as may the multi-aspect modes.
This will be a 20mp camera in name only.
I'm not dissing the camera, the move to 1" is welcome, and at some focal lengths / aperture combinations will give nice images.
But wile it may compete for the same shelf space as the two compact DLs, they are targeted at different consumers.
BRWAT: Sigma going it alone is just a bad idea.
I think that Sigma should make sensors to sell to other manufacturers. I don't think their camera line will succeed, because they're seen by the public as nothing more than a 3rd party lens vendor.
If this sensor technology was adopted by any of the large camera I'd succeed.
ISO is itself a strange beast on digital cameras, the purpose of which seems to be to simulate film sensitivity to enable the expected functioning of the auto exposure modes.
For JPEG shooters the results need to appear in-camera as well exposed JPEGs of suitable quality.
To sell their cameras, manufactures obviously have to meet these needs and that seems to put the Foveon at a disadvantage.
Some sensors (e.g. Sony) are now being referred to as ISO-invariant, and Fujifilm perform some tricks with their ISO settings.
But this topic is of more interest to raw shooters who process their own files.
From what limited discussion I've seen, an ISO 400 Foveon image could be underexposed by 2 stops to preserve highlights and then pushed in raw to create a 'good' exposure and have less noise than if shot at 'iso' 1600.
So their may be some hope for Foveon, but it needs better support from the raw community and a rethink of in-camera processing, like Fujifilm, did but different too.
art99: Does the world need another aps size sensor ?Cannot Foveon make a real FF sensor with exceptional low light performance ? Like a sd quattro FF.
@deep7 - "What's the obsession with an arbitrary, film-based sensor size?"
The obsession is photography, that's why we're all here.
The specific size is not an obsession. For me, when all the convoluted arguments, opinions and myths are normalised, it all boils down to this.
It's all about capturing light.
Bigger sensors capture more light - It's an advantage.Larger aperture lenses transmit more light - It's an advantage.Better sensor technology captures light more accurately/efficiently - It's an advantage.
The holy trinity forms a mythical camera that has the biggest sensor, best light transmission and best technology for capturing it.
What we really do here in this forum is discuss the holy trinity of trade-offs. Between the mythical camera and; the ones that actually exist, the ones we are willing to carry (size/cost/ergonomics/etc), and the ones we would like to see come into existence.
And in that simple pursuit, we get to have all these lovely discussions.
Cameracist: Want the 18-50. But I am not sure if it outweights my lust for Ricoh GR...
I put together my own ranking of my m43 lenses a few years back based on my own shooting experience with them and the results (IQ) achieved.
When DXO mark introduced their Perceptual Mega Pixel, the ranking of those lenses based on DXOs PMP was a very accurate match to my own.
For primes that perform well across the frame at all apertures to the diffraction limits, the result are visibly obvious and almost indisputable.
For zooms and any lens where the performance varies significantly at different apertures and/or focal lengths, a single score can not define the whole lens and you must examine the results to see the true story for the lens.
Lenses that don't get a high score are not simply 'bad' lenses, they just didn't score high in a test, but learning its characteristics can help get the best from it.
Rather than criticising the attempt to give a score, I am just very grateful of the effort put in to test the lenses and publish the results. Same goes for the DPR lens tests.
Turning 180° from my previous post, I try to imagine the SA Mount choice from the point of view that it makes perfect sense. Maybe the view from here will shed some light.
Aren't the competitions native lens ranges nearly complete now? For both hobby and pro?
Has Sigma's reign as King of the gap-fillers come to an end? Or more accurately, what gaps remain?
And is it just coincidence, or impeccable timing, this synchronicity with the transformation from low budget alternative to better value choice?
Could it actually be there is someone smart inside Sigma, who saw the writing on the wall and set forth an audacious new Global Vision?
Was sending in those 30/1.4 doppelgängers to the enemy camps really a cunning ploy to plunder their frenemies revenue, induce complacency and steal their souls? Could the mount exchange program be the repatriation?
And of Foveon, the most prized of assets. Could this be the sneaky black hole that relentlessly rips into the GAS giants?
Nah. Surely not.
Najinsky: DPR please put one of your Have Your Say Polls together, along the lines of:
Would you buy the Sigma sd Quatro/H if you could mount your existing lenses on it?
With choices for:
Yes, my Canon EF/EF-SYes, my Nikkor FX/DXYes, my Sony A/FE/EYes, my Sigma SAetc.
I've owned virtually all common SLR/ILC brands, so have spent time in each brand forum and believe the respect for the Foveon sensor technology at low ISO is near universal across all brand shooters.
And most would love to give Foveon a try.
In general, photographers are much more concerned about their lens investments that the current body they happen to be using.
Ask someone who already bought the 18-35 F/1.8 DC Art for their Canikon to buy the exact same lens again in addition to the Foveon body, and the chances are slim. But sell them a Foven body they can use that lens on and many would have your arm off.
I'm thinking a generic high precision mount, and specific high precision locking adapters for different mounts.
I don't have a problem to solve, Just curious to know how many bodies Sigma could sell based on the the mount choice.
Re: legacy lenses, if the 18-35 F/1.8 DC for Canon, has different optical IQ to the 18-35 F/1.8 DC for Sigma, then the offered mount change isn't going change that, so claims are either BS or a different issue.
I didn't say universal mount, but a generic (or half) mount. The part built into the camera consists of control wires and a socket.
The back of the adapter plugs into that socket, connects to the control wires and allows a Canikon or Sony Lens to mount on the front with correct pin alignment.
Those who think an adapted mount can not give perfect alignment between the focal plane and sensor have their thinking stuck in the naughties. The technology to achieve that has been around since 2012, just no-one has a reason to make it a feature yet. But Sigma sell lots of lenses in different mounts, so they have a reason to exploit it and make Foveon widely adopted.
DPR please put one of your Have Your Say Polls together, along the lines of:
Light Adrenaline: Agree with many here as well, I'd LOVE for these to be contenders! Heavy lenses (SA) for a mirrorless (losing some advantages?) and the design (though trending oddness with Sigma Q bodies) has me wondering if I'd be able to set it down without it tipping over. I'd expect color and detail to be excellent, just curious about RAW compatibility with non-proprietary software, ISO performance over 400 and user speed. I look forward to seeing how these pan out!
all good points, especially about the ISO performance and raw. The problem of fitting Foveon into a raw workflow needs to be treated as part of the launch of this product. Sigma really need to work with the raw software companies.
Ah, I still remember the excitement of the SD1 announcement, and then the actual performance of the SD1 camera.
Sigma always did great announcements. And recently, great lenses too.
kty: Come on Sigma, join the Micro 4/3 system and make these cameras with active MFT mount. They would be a totally unique offering to tons of people and undoubtedly very good sellers.
The M43 system has a great selection of lightweight and high quality lenses, and combining them with a Foveon makes a lot of sense for photographers wanting better IQ in a small package, but unfortunately very little sense for Sigmas lens business.
As we say in England, it's like the busses.
We wait and wait and wait, then three come along and we are spoiled for choice.
Still, good to have option.
I fear for my PIN numbers
Mark Banas: Am I the only one who reads "204 degree lens" and thinks this action cam can see behind itself?
Ah, maybe that's what they mean by more than an action cam, it's an action-reaction cam so you can see the crowd cheering behind you as you pass the finish line.
Nice design, decent specs and the vibrate on start-stop is a good feature.
But what is it with these marketing guys "More than an action cam", LOL. Does it have a jet drive to propel you underwater? A built in hair dryer for well groomed after-swim shots? Please elaborate, the world is turning blue and wants to breath again.
Well, at least they got the announcement out before next month's total eclipse, if not the product.