Casio is the Rodney danger field of the computer world and they deserve it.
At one time they released fairly well made high end cameras, that had a premium price and were built like a tank with class leading inovative features.
These days they are a joke. Look at the ZR100 image samples here and compare against the similar Canon or Nikon. Incredibly bad. I was so disappointed in my ZR100 I returned it after a week.
If all you need is a few happy snaps for email or an occasional 4x6 for your great aunt Meg. OK fine you won't care how bad it is. But if you ever need to crop an image, even a little, youll be suprised at how quickly the images fall apart.
Now the dpreview and my ZR100 may have been bad copies (mine actually had a scary rattle) The IR samples were MUCH better. But that's another big issue with Casio..... QC. So good luck if you go with this camera.
And the FH100? Perhaps the last decent camera made by casio and that had it's share of issues.
Did they put the crop tool back into the library module?
That's one of my biggest gripes with LR3. I hit the R shortcut to crop then after cropping often forget now i"m in develop mode then I hit the E to go back to the loupe view. If you crop a lot it may sound like a silly gripe but it really slows me down.
Also it would be cool if the popular culling shortcuts such as pick were on the left hand. I find myself taking my hands off the mouse a lot just to hit the right hand shortcuts such as "P"
putomax: NOT INTEGRATING/OPENING PREVIOUS CATALOG!!! ... ha ha hathey're just so funny
probably ADOBE people think it is okay for us to PROCESS OUR images in a new environment (read from scratch) with their latest piece-of-binary-jewlery-money-sucker-bigger-neatier-megabombastic-expensive-thinggie.do you REALLY think that i don't have anything better to do with my time?!!!
you are NOT paying me, you are NOT giving me ANYTHING (useful/engaged with previous versions of LR) TO WORK WITH or for free... so why the frogging hair would i spent my precious time testing your product if
1 - there's no integration with work/workflows done in previous versions2 - case i decide not to buy LR4, would have the same problem reading LR4 catalog TO LR3
as a professional, as LR user (since day 1) and as person i am truly mad at this way of fooling us around.
I would think it is a "good thing" to not let beta software muck around with your production catalog?
Can't you just export your edits/metadata to the jpeg/dng or sidecar file if you decide to go back to LR3?
Very nice update Lars!
Was there any sight of a D10 replacement? It's going on 3 years I think and we are all waiting for a D20 or D10x or whatever.
Will of course wait for the dpreview and make sure the IQ delivers! If so I may be "in for 1" !
M4/3, NEX, NX, and Fujifilm X-PRO 1?
All of those are bigger and (much) more expensive when equipped the lense to cover the same zoom range.
It's great to see that video support got some love!
What I really need is some help just going through all of my videos. My perfect video library module would allow "time compressed" video play back with pitch correction so you can still understand the voices. Just accelerating 1.25-1.5X or so would have a significant improvement in my workflow.
I really wish dpreview applied the high standard they have for camera reviews to app reviews.
This little product blurb leaves a lot unanswered:
We need to know how this app compares to the other apps, how is it better (or worse)? What is unique about king camera?
Performance! How quick is the camera etc?
Will this app run on older IOSes and how does it perform on older hardware such as the 3gs?
Why should use this app instead of the top camera/ photo apps, (camera+, camera plus, photosynth, adobe, snapseed etc)
Since apps appear to be a recurring subject, perhaps a template similar to the photo reviews would be useful to standardize these reviews and help us compare against this market.
note: edited to be a bit less..... critical...
" From this we can see that the S100's lens is in fact only about 1/3 stop slower than the S95's across the cameras' shared range "
Is there an error in your table?
Because the 1/3rd stop is true for every focal length except 50mm.
At 50mm you are reporting a 2/3rd stop advantage for the S95.
DPreview missed a con:
ISO is fixed at ISO 80 for any exposure greater than 1 second.
This may not be an issue for many folks but if you are paying top $$ for manual controls, you would expect the S100 to have a wee bit more control of ISO.
Nick Carrigan: Sorry DPReview but you haven't convinced me to shoot in RAW.
You've claimed that shooting in JPEG is a terrible experience. Could it also be a fact that certain companies just have a poor JPEG engine design?
Olympus has created a truly excellent JPEG engine. It isn't just in the XZ-1 but also the E-P/E-PL series as well. Why can't other manufacturer's do this?
Most P&S cameras have awful JPEG engines that can't even compete with an Apple iPhone image. If Apple can make this work, then certainly a *camera* company should be able to -- (a leer towards Canon/Nikon.)
If everyone would invest the time to create a good JPEG engine then RAW mode really wouldn't be necessary for the average user. Sure, RAW has some advantages but it shouldn't be a requirement to justify the camera's IQ.
Personally, I find it sad when I read a review that says "well, the JPEG engine sucks but RAW is great. So, we'll give it a Gold award."
I used to agree with this sentiment.
However, since converting to Lightroom my workflow does not care if it's RAW or JPEG so given that both formats require the same level of effort, I'll take the RAW any day for better post processing flexibility.
It is very disappointing that this popular segment gets a watered down buyers guide instead of a "group test" complete with conclusions, ratings and most importantly a winner.
OneGuy: I am reading all comments here so far -- and yet we did not get to the central issue: How bad is it and how it manifests. Barney is doing his best to say he does not have to say because it is likely an aberration (and he's got the cool glasses to prove it).So I think the whole thing is very simple and centers on the dpr standard studio scene. My guess is that the s100 shots came out badly on that, possibly worse than s95's. When doing MILC (m-less inter lens cam), you pick the best lens and go with that. But, geez, this cannot be done with P&S. So you have to go to the source and get the best sample because, well, you get the pic. I think the studio scene is the best thing DPR has compared to other sites and so I say let the chips fall where they may. There is nothing wrong s100 being a $350 camera. Possibly some P&Ss have reached limits vis-a-vis MILC if the robot-assisted lens assembly cannot do better at present.Why, Canon might discover MILC a real and a profitable segment.
where can you get the S100 for $350?????
List is $429 which is what most sites sell it for (or more)
just a suggestion:
Make the grip in pink and they will sell like hot cakes.
It will look good on the black S100 plus it will give the camera a better WAF. (at $429 it needs all the WAF it can get!)
Gosh I hope this is better than the EX-ZR100.
I purchased the ZR100 hoping to revive the glory days of the EX-Z750/850 but could not stand it. Cheap build quality, horrible IQ. I saw how bad the IQ was in the dpreview tests but did not believe the tests and got it any way. +1 for dpreview and +1 for amazon's return policy!
Perhaps explain why, for the eye-fi card, I would pay for shutter snitch or mofoto when eye-fi now provides a free app to do the same thing?
Or am I missing something?
thethirdcoast: Thanks for doing this.
I especially liked the shot-to-shot time and AF tracking segments of the video. I'm a little envious of the Nikon's write and cycle times after shooting my Pentax Kx in RAW for the past few days.
The size comparison with the Panasonic G3 was pretty startling...the Nikon is about the same size with the significantly smaller sensor. I also don't care for the simplified mode dial on the Nikon. I will be curious to see how the Nikon 1 vs Pentax Q comparison turns out.
It's interesting that DP Review used a big MF43 camera instead of one of the small ones such as the GF3 or EPM1 or even the EP3 w. OVF.
George Lepp: The people responding to Ellen's article seem to have a problem with the fact that she is affiliated (not employed) by Nik. This means she is an expert in this software (even the software company is impressed with what she knows). Would you rather DP used anyone for their articles? There's plenty of that on the Internet. I'm an Explorer of Light with Canon, does that mean I can't write articles about Canon cameras for Outdoor Photographer magazine? If you can't tell that Ellen is knowledgeable about this subject, you have no right to criticize it or call it Spam! We write about and teach what we know, and you are the benefactors!
I thought it was curious that there is no comparison between what LR/PS can do and what Nik can do. The image for each example is different. Make them the same and let the readers decide if Nik is worth it or not.
Also I thought it odd that the 8 settings under detail in LR are not mentioned. I know the intent was to keep the article short but at least mention the wealth of other options (or did I miss this?)
These omissions make a LR user go "Hmmmm" and now a possible unstated conflict of interest make me go "Hmmmm" twice....
As a new Lightroom user I'm a little disappointed the article on increasing "detail" does not touch on any of the settings under "Detail" in Lightroom.
I was a little confused by the clarity description but after watching this short tutorial all was clear:
The plugin demonstrations would have been enhanced if you compared the end results against not only the the original image, but against what could be accomplished in LR/PS without the plugins. As this would have been easy (just use the same image in all the examples) I have to assume not pitting the plugins and LR/PS against each other "head to head" was intentional?
In LR 3.5 under Develop/Detail are the following sliders:
Sharpening: Amount, Radius, Detail, Masking Noise Reduction: Luminance, detail, contrast, Color, Detail
keeponkeepingon: Here is why I am not canceling my S100 order
The camera looks very pocket unfriendly. "Is that a light field camera or are you happy to see me". Quick shooting is useless if you have to spend precious seconds ferreting it out of your backpack.
I love that it does not have a pinochio style zoom lens. I've had way too many "lens errors" from the current state of the art but I have an old Casio P505 that keeps on going (5x non telescoping out lens).
The lack of controls makes it look very easy to water proof. It's a shame it is not water proof as many folks might then be able to justify this as a second camera plus it would be easier to compete against the IQ in that market.
Accessories: A video DSLR style LCD eye cup for the display for use in bright sunlight.
Software: Alot of folks still use cameras to print out 4x6's to send to their 90 year old great aunt who won't touch a computer. This market will be lost, unless the software allows you to fix the focus and output a jpeg.
I'm a dad looking for a camera to take pictures of his kids. Both are $400 putting them as direct apples and apples competitors.
TLDR: One camera I can fit in my pocket, the other I can't (comfortably). I'm keeping my order for the one that fits.
Here is why I am not canceling my S100 order