keeponkeepingon: Canon makes a camera about the same size as an older rebel or nikon.
Gear of the year!
" 1cm here, half cm there, and in the end you save quite a lot of volume." The D40 and XS are both thinner, and no dimension difference is as big as a centimeter, the D40 is (9.2 wider, 3.3 taller but 5.4mm thinner). I wager if the volume was actually calculated (say by water displacement) the difference would be less than 10%.
Canon makes a camera about the same size as an older rebel or nikon.
FinDERP: If you want a GOOD and compact DSLR that doesn't skimp on features and has an excellent range of similarly compact lenses to go with it; buy a Pentax instead
Latest pentaxes have those features? Need to put the canon fanboi pipe down and smell the pancakes....
Wow. Y'all need to fire your "fact checker".
The LF1 has a Q.menu
c labs noted:
"Q.Menu system which allows you to adjust exposure compensation, Step Zoom, aspect ratio, resolution, sensitivity, white balance, AF mode, movie quality and monitor brightness using either the front or rear dials. "
And your own picture shows the Q.menu button on the lower right:http://www.dpreview.com/files/news/9157282048/LF1_F3-7001.jpeg
It makes me wonder if you actually spent much time with the LF1?
So your major gripe then would be a lack of exposure flash compensation? For a point and shoot (to me) that's not really a big deal.
John Koch: Casio, very wisely, backed out of cameras as the P&S market collapsed. Times remain challenging for consumer electronics, but the company has managed to post profits in recent quarters, unlike some competing conglomerates. Interesting to see that the company still makes cameras. Casio virtually pioneered high speed video in consumer models.
RU Serious? They may have backed out of the US market, but they list 18. Yes 18 current models on their japanese web site:
Loved my P505, EX-Z750, EX-Z850 but every casio I tried after those were total POS (I've owned or purchased/returned like 4).
Having kids, I really really miss features such as the "pre-recorded video mode" where it starts the movie 5 seconds before you push the shutter. Genius on a kid or pet camera. I see this model now has that feature with pictures. Awesome.
The good casios have always been crazy fast compared to the competition. If this has a decent build and not horrible IQ I really hope they bring this to the US or European market.
DANG. $640 USD according to the casio site:
Too rich for my blood. If it's like the P505 ($499 MSRP) we'll be able to pick it up for $150 in a year or two. If it's like the TRYX, the price will go up and up and up (resellers are asking $899 for some models at amazon these days http://www.amazon.com/dp/B009ZJS5HW/ )
I would just love to see this same test with the 3X RX100.
I've got the S100 and Pureview 808. Yeah the S100 is better at full zoom but gosh it's nice to be able shoot at 28mm (equiv) and to "zoom in post". When you get it right there is just so much content in the pureview images, but there is the rub. It takes a lot of light and (for me) a lot of luck to get it just right. If the light is not perfect, or you are not getting a good shutter speed forgetaboutit.
The S100 is no lowlight monster either. You really should point that out, zoomed into 5X the thing is like F6 or something crazy while the 808 is still shooting at F2.4 It may still be better than the 808 but if things get dim I reach for my DSLR or ILC.
Wow. Is there no fact checking at dpreveiw? I actually read this thinking it would be neat to try on my 808, now I find connnect does not have a clue. Thanks for wasting my, and every 808 dpreview reader's time.
"the 8.7MP smartphone just scored nearly as well as Nokia's 41MP flagship phone"
DXOMark resizes everything to 8mp before testing so yeah, surprise surprise when everything is shrunk to the same size it all looks the same.
Continually disappointed that dpreview continues to publicize DXOMarks whacked mobile tests, especially without a disclaimer as to how they jimmy the images before testing to iphone size.
I'm disappointed this "must-have" focuses on editing and not on photography.
How about apps to calculate sunrise sunset?
or.... I don't know, you tell me? What apps would actually help me take pictures versus just hacking some pixels in the field?
Y'all need to read your own buying guide, this is not a superzoom and you folks are just about the only ones calling it a superzoom:
From the most recent buying guide: "Super zoom / Bridge'Very powerful zoom lenses - typically 20X+ zooms"
10X is not a super zoom. All we have here is a big inconvenient camera with (relatively) little zoom with a lens that is (relatively) slow on the not so wide end (where most folks use it the most) and (relatively) fast on the long end.
300m is what I use for kids soccer and it's barely enough, forget about birds etc.
It's hard to rationalize the cost and size when you can get a pocketable 7X LF1 for under $400.
10X "super" zoom?
Y'all need to work on your nomenclature?
10X these days is hardly a superzoom. That's more like a pocket point and shoot.
While I like the 808 camera everything else about it is horrible.
Just doing a basic task can take me 5 times longer than on my iphone.
For example: Take a picture, resize it for email, enter contacts/enter a subject text then send.
OMG it is so slow on the 808. You can't specifiy a size in the email program so you have to enter the editor, resize, then save as a seperate file which takes 4evah. Then you go to send it but they give you 3 choices and the screen is so bad (or my fingers so big) 1/5th of the time it goes to SMS messaging, exit that, try again get into email, now your subject is like a 10 didget number, so you try to select and delete that, but the selection is wonky you finally give up and back space 10 or 20 times to delete the filename based nonsense subject enterr you contacts/text and "finally" hit send.
Sigh. End result is I rarely actually send pictures from the phone, which is sort of the whole point of having a camera in the dang phone.....
ManuelVilardeMacedo: They both lack sharpness. I'm sorry for the people who think they'll make great shots with these expensive gadgets, but both of them are short on image quality. Yes, the 808 is better - at least if you can take your mind off the considerable levels of chromatic aberration -, but what's the point? For the price you'll be better off with an enthusiast compact camera like the Sony RX100.
Yeah no one can make a great shot with these expensive gadgets. Just look at all these terrible pictures:
Unlocked 808 $390
RX100 $595 plus then I need a smart phone, so another ... $390ish for an unlocked phone. Twice the price and juggling two devices, go for it.....