Come on Fuji. Develop a waterproof XP1, provide it with a zoom with 2.8 or faster aperture at the wide end. The sensor should be the new 2/3"'X-Trans Cmos 12mp sensor. Also drop that lousy 9 cm macro which the current 28-140 mm zoom offer. It is not good for anything really when compared to other competing waterproof cameras which have better close-focus.
I hoped that more manufacturers would follow in the footsteps of Olympus and perhaps go for a zoom with a larger aperture then the norm, at the wide end, at least 2.8.
What about the Sticky Aperture Blade problem from the X100? Finally fixed or not? Posts about X100 being sent in for the SAB still shows up frequent in the forum.
Jefftan: Any difference I can find with TG-1 is 50 ft waterproof compare with 40ftand that's it? They call this TG-2?Oh my!
Many users in Olympus talk complained about no aperture-mode and sometimes too short Dof. That is fixed with the TG-2. However it is just ND-filter I can't tell for sure. Seems not like much of an upgrade. Hopefully the Nr is even lower so that more details gets preserved. Maybe it might be worth to skip this model and await the TG-3.I had hoped that Fujifilm and Panasonic perhaps would respond to the fast zoom-lens which the TG-2. But so far they've not done so. Maybe it is not too late just yet. Pansonic released two waterproof cameras last year with different zoom-lenses.Pentax which chose the Olympus XZ-2 zoom for their MX-1 might use the same zoom in the TG-1 and TG-2 for their waterproof camera this year. Problem is just that image quality for waterproof Pentaxes has been like trash since the Optio W90 with too much NR. The Optio W60 was decent and the W80 not bad either, not quite as good image quality as for the W60 though according to the grouptest here in 2009 .
75mm... yawn. Time to get real, Sigma!I still remember when I used, rather tried to use, a Nikkor AF 50mm 1.8D on a aps-c Dslr and didn't find 75mm to be very useful even though it worked, if I really wanted. Eventually I ended up buying Nikkor 35mm 1.4 Ai to have a decent "normal" 52mm for that dslr and since complete it with a Sigma 24mm 2.8 macro. Both two excellent lenses.
schaki: Nice test, but really, why is not Ricoh GR Digital IV included? fixed focal length or not, it belongs to this group of capable compact cameras.Hoping to get a good explanation from Dpreview staff and not some 'it is too old' or similar answer, as it still is an actual camera model from Ricoh in the waiting of the GRDV which should be announced in the first half of 2013.
In 2008 another strange decision occurred when Dpreview chose to include the not so good Ricoh R10 instead of the definitely better suited Ricoh GX200 for the "Holidays '08 Compact Camera Group Test Group 4: Enthusiast digital compacts"http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/Q408enthusiastgroup/The GX200 became available in time for that test. Announced on Jun 24, 2008 www.dpreview.com/news/2008/6/24/ricohgx200R10 announced in September 2008 as is stated in the product-description. Couldn't find any real announcement about this camera on this site. www.dpreview.com/products/ricoh/compacts/ricoh_r10
So, I think we all know that there was enough time to take the better GX200 instead which was announced earlier during the summer. Yet Dpreview failed to do so... The zoom is not long but not shorter than the LX3 which was inlcluded with 24-60mm (24-72mm for GX200) so lack of zoom reach can hardly have been the issue.The real issue seems to be bias against small but good brands in general.
Another poll could be made for cameras with smaller sensors like 1/1.7" and 1/2.3", the small super-zoom compacts as well as for these bulky with long zoom like Powershot SX50 and Coolpix P510.
Trying to keep brands or certain models away from a test by making it a test for zoom-cameras only sounds problematic to me. It could easily be explained shortly that the GRD-line is slightly niched but still belongs to the group of advanced compacts with 1/1.7" sensor.
If the GRDIV is too old. That means that the Fujifilm X10 not would have been included either because it is obviously near the end of it's life as well and announced only 14 days before the GRDIV - on Sep 1, 2011
The GRD IV announced on Sep 15, 2011, according to the announcements on this site. GRDIV http://www.dpreview.com/news/2011/9/15/ricohGRD4announcedX10 http://www.dpreview.com/news/2011/9/1/fujifilmx10
Richard Butler wrote"Each camera we include adds significantly to the amount of time taken to produce the article, so we have to draw the lines somewhere. I'm afraid that meant excluding the GRD on this occasion."
And also excluding future GRD models from upcoming tests as well, presumably ;)
Photomarcus: The fuji x10 has probably for me the best body. But if I compare it in terms of IQ with the others,it'sreally steps below. And it's a real shame because I love it. I don't understand why we can finf it in this roundup.I will have your opinion..
Have you lowered the Nr for the ooc jpegs in the X10? might be possible to squeeze out more details by using Low Nr or if Off is available. It should benefit from raw as well. With this said I've not used the X10 myself.
Nice test, but really, why is not Ricoh GR Digital IV included? fixed focal length or not, it belongs to this group of capable compact cameras.Hoping to get a good explanation from Dpreview staff and not some 'it is too old' or similar answer, as it still is an actual camera model from Ricoh in the waiting of the GRDV which should be announced in the first half of 2013.
ybizzle: Why would you not take the X100 over this? Half the price and much better looking!
Sure, X100 is certainly good but for me I would rather choose an Epson R-D1 or a Leica M8. This X2 seems to have slight problem with CA as well, looking at the right rear wheel of that wagon in following picture. With that said I don't know how serious it might be. Have only had a look at 4 of the pictures.http://masters.galleries.dpreview.com.s3.amazonaws.com/2306079.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=14Y3MT0G2J4Y72K3ZXR2&Expires=1353223952&Signature=YH5ASZa3vLp8XgA%2fmRJH4NQmf%2fs%3d
Aps-c for the lose - Full frame for the win...
wus: I wonder what the real sizes of these sensor are... normally 1/4 is 3.2 x 2.4 mm, at 5 MP (2582 x 1936 pixels) this results in a pixel pitch of 1.24 microns, resulting in a pixel area 22% smaller than what it would for the 1.4 microns claimed above.
The OV8835 are 1/3.2-inch according to information on the homepage. http://www.ovt.com/products/sensor.php?id=127That is ather disappointing sensor-size imo and also to some part explains why it is only 8mp. Would not make huge lot of good sense to try and stuff 12 or 16mp on such a tiny sensor. yet Nikon have managed rather well with the Sony cmos 1/2.3" 16mp in their Coolpix P510 which is a really good superzoom. That sensor size is usually marginally bigger but still not found in many performance-compacts.
worldcup1982: Here comes the V2...with minor improvements, too bad...im into photos, not video....nikon, you will stay behind competition....mirrorless all over the place, and nikon worried about not hurting their APS-C sales....
"nikon worried about not hurting their APS-C sales...."
That's exactly what they'll do by not respond properly to mirrorless camera systems like Fuji X-mount, Sony Nex, Samsung NX and also to some extent m4/3.Many new buyers or existing is going to make the switch to mirrorless aps-c with short flange back distance sooner or later. More bulk is not what most of them want so they'll probably not look a lot at aps c dslrs.
The image in this 'news' are taken with from the 1/2.3" AR1820HS.Not the 1"AR1011HS.It is especially the DR-Pix Technology in the 10mp 1" AR1011HS which I find to be the interesting feature with that sensor."adjustable pixel response optimized for best noise-performance in all scene conditions"Sounds good. But remain to be witnessed how well it actually works.Problem is that most manufacturers are in bed with Sony when it comes to sensors and not willing to even test something new or different for their compact cameras.
Lol @ how the red highligts in the red Kodak-signs have been badly blown to a lighter form of red. Not a very good shot imo. But it somehow comically just mirrors the fading away of Kodak.
Paul Petersen: I think this is where building DX lenses will come back to haunt Nikon since folks that bought them will resist upgrading to FF and stick with their Cropped sensors. Rather than upgrade their Camera and Lenses.
I never bought any single DX lens when I still used my D1H actively and never am I going to do so either. Basically I stopped use my Nikon gear about two years ago but since the old manual focus lenses I have for it is quite good I chose to keep that kit. 105 2.5 AiS, 35mm 1.4 Ai, Sigma 24mm 2.8 macro and also the AF 20-35mm 2.8 which is a non DX PJ-zoom of the good old school.Just in case Nikon would come up with something good that makes sense like mirrorless aps-c camera bodies which I can use these lenses comfortably with. Until then, I'll continue use quality compacts like the Ricoh GR Digital MKI and also keep an eye on the battle of the mirrorless systems. Especially Fujifilm and Samsung.
Still the same NP-50 battery as in X10 which had a slight reputation for being power-hungry. Hope that Fujifilm have managed power consumption better this time.As others have noticed, the slow 4.9 aperture at the long end is a downgrade. The zoom is at least wider now.
Soon to be, R.I.P Kodak photography.
As bulky as a entry level Dslr or wrose and only 1/2.3" cmos and a short zoom compared to the Coolpix P510 and some others that it probably are about to struggle to compete successfully with. Pentax are out to make fun of themselves again it seems like. Maybe Pentax should have focused on something that might make better sense like small pancakes to that mirrorless Q, which was another mistake from their side.