bluevaping: This guy doesn't understand that marketing, adding a feature, removing a feature doesn't drive sales in different markets the same. The reason the Rebel SL1 is not selling more in the US. They wanted to market the smallest DSLR. People in US complained it's to small, but they likely meant that there not comfortable grip for shooting. So marketing got them marginal smaller DSLR that's uncomfortable to many models. And with same lens sizes. WIN/Lose. The competition is giving them marginal better image quality and better handling. Win/WinIt's like they need to do SWAT analysis on future products. Smartphones are threat. They have high resolution screens. A few have bigger sensors than most compact cameras. Most smartphones have faster glass and some have image stabilization. Like shooting with a prime lens compact camera that you like have with you. I have a canon point and shoot for ergonomics and shooting lots for work. Threat of substitution is real.
I didn't say it was a bad product or Cannon does't know marketing to sell stuff. I was just pointing out how he translates the results from from the weaker sales of this product in the US. It's like all things are equal and we have the strong brand.
This guy doesn't understand that marketing, adding a feature, removing a feature doesn't drive sales in different markets the same. The reason the Rebel SL1 is not selling more in the US. They wanted to market the smallest DSLR. People in US complained it's to small, but they likely meant that there not comfortable grip for shooting. So marketing got them marginal smaller DSLR that's uncomfortable to many models. And with same lens sizes. WIN/Lose. The competition is giving them marginal better image quality and better handling. Win/WinIt's like they need to do SWAT analysis on future products. Smartphones are threat. They have high resolution screens. A few have bigger sensors than most compact cameras. Most smartphones have faster glass and some have image stabilization. Like shooting with a prime lens compact camera that you like have with you. I have a canon point and shoot for ergonomics and shooting lots for work. Threat of substitution is real.
SWSF14: With the way iphones sell like crazy, all they had to do was play it safe and introduce minimal improvements. The rest is marketing.
Let see the images and a proper review. I think the advanced multiple exposures per shot and picking the best focus and balance will help to eliminate camera shake that OIS provides. There is some type image stabilization because video section says its improved. I be back in a few weeks.
falconeyes: Unfortunately, this technology is old and has no theoretical advantage.
It is a variant of the class of possible Bayer filter spectra which may be wider or narrower. Clarity+ just uses an extremely wide green filter, the one with 100% transmission for all wavelengths.
However, current Bayer filter spectra are ALREADY optimized to be in a sweet spot: Make it narrower and luminance noise will increase. Make it wider and color noise will increase.
You actually see it in the Clarity+ sample image if you look at the white text's color artefacts.
In a DxO test, this sensor would score better in the landscape and sports scores. But worse in the portrait score. DxO anticipates vendors playing tricks with the color matrix which is why their portrait score has a relatively high overall weight.
Other tests such as DPR's may be fooled though.
Nevertheless, this technology brings no progress whatsoever.
To promise +1EV better sensitivity is a false news statement. Sorry, DPReview ...
Its all about algorithms! If you think that DxO can measure every aspect of every camera sensor technology and image properties you be just wrong. For example, They can't measure X trans sensors yet. There testing is based on their algorithm, not sensor makers or even camera makers. It's ok to get a rough idea of image quality. But I would say it shows more about what cameras work best with their software. As far as your statement, it brings progress, but sorry its not what your looking for and not good enough for what you think DxO measures.
I am in my 30's with a preteen camera A1400 for work. Taking pictures for homes and hazards for home owners insurance. My second camera is a teenager camera, Nikon 1 S1. Here a link to a picture from Istanbul Turkey, shot with 1.8 50mm lens No editing JPG: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ambermarble/8961804402/
I will say both these cameras have easy learning curve for kids, but you can push these cameras to be more with skill.
I used Adobe for school programs for the web, creative, and photography. I used trails and computer lab because I dislike Adobe software. Not because its not useful because the software is as full of itself as the company. If you have a staff with their set workflow that uses Adobe, well that a problem. I can find alternatives that sometimes surpass Adobe. The funny thing is people are stuck on Adobe Creative. When the keyword is creative. Get Creative. You don't need a certain software to be creative.
playForever8: dpreview rating system is quite messed up. I just don't understand how the 77% points come up for X20.
If comparing X20 against Nikon J1. They are in the same price range(even considering J1 price 2 years ago, now J1 is half of the initial list price).
J1 has bigger sensor 1" vs 2/3" J1 has much faster AF, especially continuous AF system. J1 has better video quality. J1 better picture quality at low ISO and high ISO with its default kit lens.J1 is half of X20 price now
J1 only got 67% rating. What a joke!
Based on X20 current price, X20 should be compared against J3(same price range), which has faster AF, higher MP than J1. I am not sure when J3 is reviewed by dpreview. what the rating will be given to J3 ? Shouldn't be well above 80% if X20 got 77% now.
Sure I like the direct access controls and viewfinder of X20. But I like direct access to different lens. There is the trade off. I went with less desirable compact MLC. The nikon 1 s1. Full manual still and video with more menu work. The body is more compact with twice the sensor size and no AA filter as well. The new kit lens is sharp corner to corner, good for general use. And for more depth of field and lower light the f1.8 50 is great. The display has great viewing angles and good in daylight. As for the viewfinder, I found wearing pair of polarized sunglasses cuts glare for even better framing.
vFunct: This is the best compact camera on the market.
Looking at the sample images on Nikon site they're great, mostly due to the lens, which is probably worth more than most cameras. Try finding a cheap fast (>F2.8) lens with aspherical elements - you can't!
There are no other pocketable cameras with better image quality. All the others are either too big & bulky or have a crappier image sensor/lens. This is a pro-grade street photojournalist & documentary camera. It's perfect for bloggers and editors themselves. Its nearest competition is the Sony RX1, which costs more than 2x this.
Also 28mm is much better than 35mm for photojournalism. That is why all cell-phone cameras are at that range.
The only disappointment is that it didn't include the phase detect AF from the Nikon 1 series, which is needed for dynamic street photography. Additionally the wi-fi/sharing should have been built in, as this type of camera is going to end up having its photos posted online quickly.
street photographers and documentary camera ok. Bloggers could save a few dollars and go with something else. For general web blog output this is over kill, but it's whatever works. I think its funny when people shot with big sensor cameras, edit it at the pixel level, to correct super fine detail and then just post it for the web only.
Mssimo: Camera Jpeg still seems to be the best option.
JPG and convert to DNG so you can’t accidentally make adjustments that change the original file. Might be option, if you don't want to go RAW.
Richard Murdey: "The critical thing here is that despite the fact that the D7100 is Nikon's third DX-format 24MP DSLR, its sensor is new, and unique in Nikon's stable."
Yet you don't explain why this is "critical", indeed any of its benefits, only that the LP filter is omitted. But that's nothing to do with the sensor, any sensor can be used with or without a LP filter.
So are you just spinning back the Nikon press release or is there actually anything new here at the sensor level?
"Give meaningfully different results," I am not sure that logic will trickle down to less serious cameras like the Nikon 1 S1 with no OLPF. It more about context of this really being a flagship product to compete with others flagship products.
marike6: IQ looks fantastic. And if you go by DxOMark, the D5200 is using quite possibly the best performing crop sensor in the world right now. Who knew that Toshiba was so skilled as manufacturing sensors?
One thing is odd is when you switch to the K-5IIs in the Studio Test, it almost looks like ACR Chroma NR was left on, as at ISO 6400 it's dramatically cleaner than the D5200. Yet, on DxOMark the D5200 manages 1284 ISO score to the K-5IIs's 1208 ISO Low-Light (Sports) Score.
Anyway, wonderful IQ, and since I'm in need of a small DX body for my new 70-200 f4 VR, this camera definitely on my short list. Thanks guys.
I kind of want to agree with you Marike6 about Toshiba and N1. But I like Aptina output. DXO Mark information has limited uses for me. I like: http://www.techradar.com/ The do a good job using DXO Analyzer, with Raw, TIFF, and JPG to give a broader idea of general performance. I also like: http://www.sensorgen.infoAnd it usually comes down to something secondary in requirement for a camera that makes the difference for me.
All this talk of full frame depth of field equivalent and the like... But how does it compare to my phone's camera? Yawn.
Nikon 1 J3 and S1 do not have anti-aliasing filter. Looks accurate checking Nikons site.http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/acil/bodies/s1/features01.htm
Sergey Borachev: There is not much point comparing prices with DSLR lenses. Many people seem to still have this idea that smaller is cheaper. It should be increasingly clear that an M43 system is not cheap. Low to mid level APS-C DSLR systems are, especially with the heavy recent discounting. There is a price to pay for a smaller and more elegant system and its lenses, compared to the bigger clunky cameras and their lenses.
Buy what suits you. Be happy there is a choice. Ford, Subaru, or a super expensive BMW.
That is one reason I sold my M43 camera, Lens Prices. I went with Nikon 1 System for my basic needs. The lens I want are often less expensive. There upcoming fast prime 1.8 50mm is less than $200.
marike6: There are a surprising number of what are essentially hot pixels in the high ISO samples, even at a relatively low ISO setting like 1250 (see random white specs in full-sized samples).
The T3i / 600D sensor has always lagged behind the 16 mp Exmor sensor. And while the low ISO IQ, as expected, looks good, the high ISO photos surprised me, and not in a good way.
The EOS M might appeal to Canon video shooters looking for a small, capable B camera, but the new mount makes even that a tough sell.
That site with it scores based on raw and what they find weighs high, and based on what their software can get out of the files. The site would be better, if they left the score junk out. And left it at Portrait, Landscape, Sports sections to compare and even then you have to mentally taken in account of the camera features, usability and such.
Sergey Borachev: Trying to make it look like a vintage "F"Nikon is a mistake because those early Nikons are well know for being big, solid and heavy, and this 1-series cameras are small cameras. It does not work. The extra large viewfinder/flash block on top of a small camera just makes it look odd, and also awkward/inconvenient when put into a bag or jacket pocket. The Olympus PEN or the OMD look better, at least to those who remember their earlier cameras, because their sizes and silver/metal looks resemble the older cameras much btter.
This stunt only takes away any size and weight advantage that the V2 should have when compared to the APS-C NEX-6 or M43 E-PL5. Have a look at their sizes, side by side here:
I don't think Nikon can compete in miniaturising cameras with Sony or Olympus.
"look odd, and also awkward/inconvenient when put into a bag" None of those camera with standard kits lens fits nicely in a suit jacket! And how use the any of the cameras is subjective to what your doing! Ultra wide zoom lens for building photos=m 4/3rds, Telephoto compact lens system for moving subjects= Nikon V*maybe, etc
Jaryl: Why nothing for Fuji X-Pro 1? Is it later or never?
I think Adobe just started to support it Oct 2. You can use Adobe DNG Converter 7.2 for free! I have a workstation and it converts it fast then import the image folder of all the DNG Raw files. And then you are ready to edit raw files. If you use Lightroom and import raw it will convert the files to DNG Raw by default. I have to do thing on the cheap, amateur photographer.
skytripper: As fas as I'm concerned, adding that big honking grip completely negates the Nikon 1's main benefit, which was its compact form factor.
Your right. The 1 system lens are generally small even compared to M4/3. I was comparing the 10-110 lens to the 40-150 lens olympus . I was expecting them to be close to the same based on specs. At first, I thought I must have got the kit lens because how small it is compared. Lets get people some bags or a camera strap, or sew in some big pockets already to get the job done.
tomboyter: This camera is about the same size as the Canon G1 X, (which I have enjoyed now for the last seven months) and has roughly the same appearance. I have found the size to be more functional than the smaller form factor cameras just because it fits my hand and shooting style better. Carrying it is not that much more of a burden than carrying the 1/1.7 cameras, and the output is considerably better in my opinion...therefore worth the little extra effort. Wonder how the 14 mp one inch sensor will compare to the 14 mp 1.5 inch sensor in the G1 X ? I'm betting on the extra pixel pitch to make a lot of difference.
Want to see what how it compares in size and stuff, stop guessing, its bigger as hell, its small as blah. http://camerasize.com/
Alberto6674: You can say what you want about the camera's look, but the really great news is that finally Nikon understood the real problem and upgraded the kit zoom from that pedestrian f/3.5-5.6 to a much more attractive f/1.8-2.4. This by itself makes the camera and system to suddenly become relevant for photographers. Great move!
Hhmm... I'm double checking now and it seems that no, they actually didn't change the kit zoom. My bad.
Lots of problems with 1.8 -2.4 . F-Stop range is limited, lens is bigger, problems with depth of field and sensor size (RX 100), less incentive to create fast prime with a good f-stop range. A faster lens would be great for lowlight and VR for video would nice. Nikon 1 hybrid for digital still and video. I think I would rather have the 50mm 1.8 prime with VR. But everyone has their wish list.