By far the biggest issue with the other XE cameras is the AF performance. Something we have regular comments and complaints about in store. Having owned an X-E1 i have to concur that the first few versions of firmware were awfully slow.. Considering Fuji now claim that the XT-1 has the world's fastest AF, how come there is no comment whatsoever about this claim. It would be somewhat of a game changer for many enthusiasts if it really does live up to the claims, making the XT a candidate for action photography which none of its predecessors could ever have been accused of being suitable for. How come there is no comment, in fact the whole 'first impressions' reads like 'our interpretation of the specs with a smattering of opinion' i have to say I'm surprised that focus point selection (as mentioned by Andy Westlake) has only just been mentioned, this has always been a pain on other X series cameras
matty_boy: I'm as baffled as some others about the very heavy weighting that seems to come from the reviewers perception of jpeg processing. We have an a7r alongside a D800E in store, connected to a 4K monitor. I have to say the general consensus is that jpeg output is good, much more inline with other reviews i have read, but reviews are subjective i suppose. The a7 has been a massive hit, i think the size and form are great but its the price that has really got customers excited. Id also say that professionals tend to use jpeg a lot, especially when quickly posting reportage stuff but the a7r is a consumer Full frame camera, id say these users (based on experience selling this sort of kit for many years) are much more likely to use RAW anyway. I really haven't seen the kludgy sharpening artefacts mentioned though and the evidence on here really seems inconclusive.
Stu 5: I didn't say I'm not familiar with jpeg artefacts, I'm aware of them, Sony are relatively new to serious photography and most P&S cameras are very similar so i wouldn't really scrutinise them and we've never really shifted much Sony stock. The a7 certainly seems to produce good jpegs and its not just me who thinks this. Given the set up we have its on a par in most cases, with the D800 standard output but it is all subjective at the end of the day. For monitor we are lucky to have a Dell Ultrasharp 32" (not cheap!!) calibrated using a DataColor Spyder (which sells surprisingly well). Im not sure where your sales information is from but news from our reps is that the Sony's are selling strongly (better than many of the big brand Full frame models). Full Frame cameras (other than the 5D MkII which must have broken sales number records based on our experience) dont sell in large numbers. Even the Sony's with a decent piece of glass will set you back £2K definitely doing well though
I'm as baffled as some others about the very heavy weighting that seems to come from the reviewers perception of jpeg processing. We have an a7r alongside a D800E in store, connected to a 4K monitor. I have to say the general consensus is that jpeg output is good, much more inline with other reviews i have read, but reviews are subjective i suppose. The a7 has been a massive hit, i think the size and form are great but its the price that has really got customers excited. Id also say that professionals tend to use jpeg a lot, especially when quickly posting reportage stuff but the a7r is a consumer Full frame camera, id say these users (based on experience selling this sort of kit for many years) are much more likely to use RAW anyway. I really haven't seen the kludgy sharpening artefacts mentioned though and the evidence on here really seems inconclusive.
more of this kind of stuff please. After the very disappointing 5s review (the last time i came here). I vowed i would never come back to read some of the trivia posted as reporting but came here thanks to a link someone put on a favourite site of mine. Excellent article. well written and really interesting, actually feels like some real work was put into this article rather than just someone sat in their pyjamas hammering out another staid article about nothing much. great work
went to app store, saw price, closed app store, got on with my life
christiangrunercom: Why is the Ricoh GR left out ? It would have nuked all the others...
Is there a plan to cover this niche ? its one i am more interested in than any other - candidate camera list:
Coolpix ASigma DP Merrill (DP1, DP2, DP3)Ricoh GRFuji X100sSony RX1 (might leave the others out of their depth)Leica X2
surely this is easily enough for a round up?
Jane79: DPReview should really refrain from posting rumours and speculations to generate website traffic. You already know everything and probably have the camera in your hands; pretending to speculate is silly, to put it lightly.
why should they? This site is here to serve millions of photography lovers not just you and as pointed out, this is not a rumour and the speculation is very well presented. Im all for more of this kind of stuff on here.
I'm just a nobody who had a whine about DPReview not being that active, but things really seem to have picked up in the last few days and its articles like this i really want to see more of. Keep up the good work, loving all these recent articles
ThePhilips: That's just crazy, Panasonic.
OK, it had to be done at least once, I'll give you that. And you did it right too: the cam is very very sexy.
But otherwise, your own LX7 would own GM1 in all relevant - portability - aspects. RX100 even more so.
P.S. And funny thing is, the GM1 body is smaller than the LX5 which was too small, the reason why the LX7 was made larger.
im with T3 on this one, this is not just about shrinking the body and not really tackling the lens size issue and this seems to be something the original poster ignores completely. The lens released with this camera is very small and so does make sense as a package - if i Use this lens and body on their own i get something very close to an RX100 but with a larger sensor, for a similar price. Even if i never get another lens the reasons to buy are compelling but when i consider that i can buy other lenses, its loses none of its RX100 competing credentials but gains a lot. Plus there is the tiny 15mm leica lens being released which also compliments this camera. These are really compelling reasons to opt for a GM1 over an RX100 and im sure a lot of people will.
matty_boy: its weeks like last week that really throw DpReview's failings into the light. A web site that is run like a magazine, with weekends off. News about the new cameras breaks elsewhere, I read about all these new cameras on other sites, samples appear in other places first - there are sample available for most of these cameras now but none on DPReview, other than links posted in the forums. Also hands-on video reviews that give a much deeper insight than the first impressions articles which seem to be the fixture for most cameras, many popular models never being reviewed. I've read the defences before but i dont get it. I've read that some cameras are more popular than others and you have to concentrate on the popular ones, yet no other site seems to suffer this problem, and judging by empirical evidence over several years, other sites reviews don't seem to suffer because of it. why isn't this place run like a proper web site ? 24/7 it should be a go to place of choice but isnt anymore
Very academic response Samuel. Let's deal in practical reality. I like the in depth reviews a lot but they review less than half of the mainstream cameras in this way, with glaring omissions. Its not just me saying this, check the forums. How can a site thats aim is to be comprehensive, first, etc (their words) ever achieve those goals when they have so few reviews. Surely if this were the ultimate destination its where i would come to make any informed purchasing decision, but the last two i made: I wanted a Compact system camera for travelling and a Compact camera with a viewfinder that was good in low light.. After some research i worked out roughly which models to look at but DPReview only had one review of all 6 cameras i was looking at. That is not comprehensive, i made my decision based on other sites on the internet and i'm quite happy with that. I refer back to the original point, in isolation content on here is good, but measured against their own mission statement they fail
Samuel Dilworth. I do read other sites, didn't you read my post where i clearly explain why i prefer other sites?? maybe you didn't.. if this is some 'well go and look at those sites instead' thing then i will politely decline. I look wherever i want on the internet. Ive made it clear what frustrates me about this place. it is run 9-5 - blatantly obvious if you are from the UK like myself. Breaking news is rarely on here. thoroughness ? so would it be thorough to not review many mainstream cameras ?? all the other sites manage to do it in great detail - read the forums, there are plenty of people waiting for these reviews. Read the 'About us' to see the mission of DPReview and its frustrating that it fails to achieve its main goals. I take exception to the comment about video reviews, that is just your opinion, i think if you look you will find some incredibly good video reviews.
rfsIII, I have never stated anyone is arrogant. Don't try to make this into something it isn't so you can wow us with oh so clever witty thing you posted. If you read the about us, it states:
"Digital Photography Review's mission is to provide the most authoritative reviews of, the fastest, fullest news reports about, and the most comprehensive database of consumer digital cameras in the world, and to provide an open, active forum and useful tools for its community."
fastest ... no, fullest.. no I will admit the forums are good though. This is not about being 'clever' or sycophantic twaddle about 'corneas', this is about a website. It also states in the About us
"Today DPReview is the world's most popular dedicated enthusiast digital photography site"
is it really? i guess we cannot answer that, for me though, regardless of the rather strange stuff in your post, most big websites break news, are run 24-7 and ARE comprehensive in their coverage, DPReview does none of these
I disagree, AbrasiveReducer and my reasoning is not conjecture, its empirical. Go and look at the other big photog sites on the net, not the rumour sites, you may be familiar with some, if not look them out. These sites and some of the better gadget blogs manage to get their reports out in earlier do High definition video reviews that demonstrate as good an understanding as any other site of what matters to a photographer and give samples and opinion in bucket loads. They also manage to produce comprehensive reviews on most if not all popular cameras. As for their 'position' it was only a week or so ago that when criticised for not giving many details on a new camera the staffer on here responding said that they had only had the camera for a day or so, indicating only at release time, not in advance. This site is run like a 9-5 business, posting frequency proves it, and although the staff have given reasons in the past, they don't stand up to scrutiny. and dont get me onto dxomark...
its weeks like last week that really throw DpReview's failings into the light. A web site that is run like a magazine, with weekends off. News about the new cameras breaks elsewhere, I read about all these new cameras on other sites, samples appear in other places first - there are sample available for most of these cameras now but none on DPReview, other than links posted in the forums. Also hands-on video reviews that give a much deeper insight than the first impressions articles which seem to be the fixture for most cameras, many popular models never being reviewed. I've read the defences before but i dont get it. I've read that some cameras are more popular than others and you have to concentrate on the popular ones, yet no other site seems to suffer this problem, and judging by empirical evidence over several years, other sites reviews don't seem to suffer because of it. why isn't this place run like a proper web site ? 24/7 it should be a go to place of choice but isnt anymore
i agree with others, Fuji are just too late with this. A quick glance at the aperture comparison chart shows that even with the larger sensor this has the second slowest premium compact lens after the canon s120 which is pretty much an entry level premium anyway. the year old LX-7 blows it away, even the nikon does.. now they have shown their hand the RX100 looks as good a proposition as ever
matty_boy: Ive never been a fan of connect, its sits in an awkard no-mans land between serious photography and gadgetry, not really knowing what it should be and sometimes being guilty of very tenuous photographic links to some technology.
I promise i will never visit this site again, having read this review that lists, amongst the bad.
"Less detail in good light than some higher-res sensors"
there it is, insight at its lazy worst - bordering on tautology. And what does 'smallish screen' really add to this, surely (given the 4" size of the iPhone screen being larger than most dedicated cameras) all SLRs and compacts barring the frankly silly galaxy camera, should also have 'smallish screen' listed as a 'bad'. terrible fence sitting review ruined by the awful lazy conclusion
@tompabes2 firstly, I lied, I visited again - it happens i hope you can handle that.. Secondly fools rush in .. I am actually in the market for a camera phone at the moment, out of contract etc. aside from the self-flagilation thats seems to be occuring re the new lumia (which actually does look amazing) i was interested in the iPhone as ive seen many good shots with it and it is popular. My only issue (as documented in my comment) is that the review contains pros and cons that are worthless, that could quite easily come from a pro/anti apple troll (such as yourself) in that they are meaningless e.g. iphone screen is bigger than that on any compact other than silly ones, and regardless of some people's argument that resolution doesn't necessarily equal more detail - i accept that but the wording is such that there is no doubt. The 'con' in this case is that higher resolution cameras have greater resolution. The review is as poor as your assumptions tompabes2 and yes, you did rush in...
Ive never been a fan of connect, its sits in an awkard no-mans land between serious photography and gadgetry, not really knowing what it should be and sometimes being guilty of very tenuous photographic links to some technology.
Bill Donnell: 35mm portraits at arms length, showing such an example and saying it is ideal is ridiculous. Take a look at the picture of the lady again. Look at her huge head on such a small body? Was she born deformed or was it caused by the distortion of a short focal length lens? I'll bet on the lens, but I'll give you the benefit of a doubt. Maybe she was a dwarf.
I can appreciate a lot of what the author says as its something I've wrestled with for quite some time. Im not sure this kind of overreaction is relevant though. There doesnt appear to be a great deal wrong with the picture, that i can see. Maybe what you saw was distorted by your rage?
Vladik: Here are some Office Samples, looks like they use noise reduction even at base ISO, looks a bit smudgy to me the pixel peeper:
I think Fuji have their range spot on, affordable fast glass that is mostly good, and in the odd case excellent - perhaps not quite as good as some make out but price performance is very good. They have cannibalised their x-pro market a bit in chasing the mid market with the X-E1 which is heavily discounted now. It does make me wonder why they are discounted substantially so soon - the x100 price was like this as well. The image quality is like marmite some will tell you its the best ever and others are cynical when there is evidence of noise reduction at base ISO, raw tinkering and mis-reported ISO, this tarnishes things a bit. Personally (and i speak as an ex- X-E1 user) I think the images look good but they aren't noticeably better than any other system at this price point. Im sure plenty will disagree with me on this but as a store owner customer feedback seems to reflect this, its a shame that some of the build issues that plagued the x100 appear to have been carried over though.
JackM: Has Nikon ever made a class-leading camera short of a DSLR? Nikon constantly plays second fiddle to cameras like the Canon S-series and G-series, and the Nikon 1 system is a joke. Now yet again they arrive as an also-ran in this enthusiast compact market - nobody with a brain will choose this camera over the Ricoh GR. I guess Nikon is content to make compacts only for the uninformed.
the Nikon 1 series (at last count) outsells ALL other mirrorless cameras added together by 2x. I dont think you can accuse Nikon of not knowing what they are doing. Starting with the D90 and D3 they re-invented themselves. their D-SLRs are class leading and so are there mirrorless when it comes to sales. I hate this snobbery about cameras.. "compacts for the uninformed" get over yourself. They are just cameras, if you look at them and decide they arent for you fair enough. But to deride them as some sort of personal insult only worthy of some lesser being is, well, a bit weird to be honest