new boyz: Well, if you're looking for the best IQ, built-in adapter is better than detachable one. Roger Cicala has tested the effect of adapters, and the results weren't so good.
He does quality his findings with "Like a lot of tests, you can detect a very real difference in the lab that doesn’t make much difference at all in the real world." Generally I'd prefer one adapter that means my lenses could be used on both mounts, than adding bulk to every lens - but can't complain about having too much choice in this case :)
PerL: Slowly coming in full circle and looks very much like the APS-C DSLRs it is competing with. The usual argument for mirror less is that people leave their DSLRs at home, because of the weight and bulk. Is this so radically different?
PS: What do people use for a wide prime for Canikon APS-C these days?
Greg VdB: Of course this lens is not for everybody, but some people could become VERY happy with it. If the 10mm is of the same high standard as Samyang's FF lenses, this will become the must-have lens for crop-system nightsky photography. I couldn't wait and bought Sigma's 11-16mm in the meantime, but if coma and astigmatism are better corrected in the 10mm than in the 11-16, I'll probably be changing. The manual focus is no problem for a lens this wide, and the manual aperture is even an advantage for shooting timelapse series. Can't wait for the Photozone, Lenstip, and maybe David Kingham reviews!
Tokina 11-16 f/2.8? http://www.tokinalens.com/tokina/products/atxpro/atx116prodxii/
lightnfast: My young nephew was watching me struggle with a Galaxy tablet to take a picture in sun light. I had left my camera home. He made a statement that kind of made sense. He said, why don't they just put a view finder somewhere convenient on those tablets, they are big enough and that would help eliminate that 'I can't see the picture on the tablet in bright light issue'. I said they do not put view finders on that smart phone you have. He said I guess it doesn't have enough room , but Uncle that table sure does. And I think they would sell a boat load of them.
Here you go - the world is yours for $29.95! http://www.daylightviewfinder.com/
sunkenbranch: It was pleasing to see the conclusion. I have the D7100 and am getting the Olympus next week! Wishiing good food and good images to everyone. It all started in a Nikon forum discussing the Df camera. Someone said you ought to check out the Olympus. May I offer the following linkshttp://blog.mingthein.com/2013/09/10/olympus-om-d-e-m1-review-1/http://blog.mingthein.com/2013/09/11/the-2013-olympus-om-d-e-m1-review-2/http://robinwong.blogspot.com.br/2013/09/olympus-om-d-e-m1-review-introduction.html
Does DXO take any photographs?
This statement says it all, and show that it is a 'fair' comparison amongst a field of outstanding cameras: "it's hard to imagine anyone being unhappy with any of these cameras". A few years ago people took outstanding professional and fine art images with cameras with lesser dynamic range, slower focusing (remember when you could only really rely on the center focus point) and long turn on times. We're getting a lot of bang for the buck these days. While there are differences between all of these cameras, they all have their happy owners and niche fan base.
That said, I'm not sure why DPR doesn't just provide the list and declare them all winners like they do in the text - declaring an overall winner at the end always exaggerates the differences.
Personally I went for the E-M1 - it is smaller than the dSLRs at this level, has a more consistent experience going between the viewfinder and LCD, and is the high end of a system with very portable options.
OneGuy: I like to read up on Nikon Df but GM1 is something I am actually thinking of getting. But I was looking for an answer to the ol' AF question. Is it better with 1.7/20mm lens? How much? I see some of your samples use the II version and -- come on, no comment on AF speed?
Is the lens protected well enough? I think it needs a wider (read noticeable) yet light and pliable shoulder strap (that could also be used for wrap-around protection in my daily regular bag).
Don't all Panasonics have that? The GF1 and GH2 that I've used had Quick AF: "The GF1 also has a Quick AF function that begins focusing as soon as the user aims the camera to enable quick focusing"
Vizio Virtù: Wake up, folks. They try to sell you this mirrorless / EVF rubbish as innovation for your weightsaving comfort but actually it's only for their cost reducing purposes. Cutting off the OVF is cutting off photographers creativity.
I don't see how an EVF cuts off your creativity. A side benefit to me of designing around an EVF is that AF is optimized around CDAF and sensor based PDAF so that focusing and use of the camera is identical in both the viewfinder and the LCD. This frees me up to not have to focus on two sets of user interfaces. What limits creativity is when I get a camera from Canon where I have to go into the custom menu items to turn on 'live view' and change focus modes... Being able to switch between the rear screen and EVF allows for easily taking shots at low angles, magnified focus with old manual focus lenses, video in the viewfinder, aspect ratio switching, previewing of exposure, etc. Plus, a OVF in a small dSLR is typically much less enjoyable to use than an EVF, in my experience. Nothing against OVFs, but not sure why people are so out to get EVFs! The size difference means I have one camera instead of two or three, and I use it for everything... Not 'rubbish' for all of us!
marike6: This kind of Fujifilm X100s infatuation has been finding its way into a few DPR articles of late, most notably the Nikon Df Preview and the whole "Retro Done Silly" fiasco.
I've enjoyed using both the X100 and X-E1 but I don't know too many photographers who would purposely choose an X100 over a proper FF DSLR, retro or not, for any other reason than convenience.
"Proper"? If the worst you can say about a camera (the X100) is that you enjoyed using it and it was convenient to use, I'm not sure why you would dismiss it...
Love the Halsman/Dali one !
Docmartin: No doubt, the EM-1 is a great camera! However, for those (like me) who want to continue working with the gorgeous FT Pro lenses, the EM-1 will still no replacement for the outdated E-5. I truly believe that FT lenses cannot be used on ANY MFT body without serious IQ loss until a better adapter than the current MMF2/3 is available. The material/build-quality of the MMF3 will for sure cause misalignment, flex and movement. Just have a look at Roger Cicala's findings and their discussion here: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3553373
I don't know - I'd put the 50mm macro on the MMF-3 ahead of any mFT lens I own for IQ. It is hardly just 'good'.
Then again, you should be able to adjust to your heart's content with the ability to set front/rear adjustments on every one of the PDAF sensors, per lens, if you have issues with the adapter... I'd be surprised if the adapter variation is any worse than PDAF variation on a dSLR.
NCB: I think people are missing the point with this camera. Forget about the retro looks. It's the retro controls which are important; direct access to the things which photographers have been using since way back. It's a camera for photographers who are at home with those sort of controls. The looks follow from having those controls. Yeh OK they've made sure it looks like the Nikons of old, but all camera makers pay full attention to the marketing side of things, why not?
And people who complain about the rear looking like a digital camera rear are also missing the point; it IS a digital camera, a fully fledged one. Nikon aren't fool enough to cripple the digital side of things in pursuit of some retro ethos.
This camera is what Nikon says it is; a fusion of traditional controls with a totally up-to-date digital engine. Stop looking at the looks; its a serious camera for a particular type of photographer.
What aperture dial? To me that is their biggest miss here - they could at least have released a kit lens with an aperture ring!
marike6: So more or less as well reviewed as the D7100 or EM-1 mainly due to an emphasis on LiveView AF and the new Dual Pixel AF module relevant mainly for video and LiveView with the 2 STM lenses.
No weather sealing, no 100% Pentaprism VF or dual SD cards. And most puzzling is how easily IQ differences vs a class leading camera like the D7100 can be explained away or marginalized with phrases like "in most situations" or "for the majority of users", "the difference in IQ are slight". Really? Most enthusiast users of this class of camera shoot RAW and edit in LR where the latitude of files or RAW headroom are extremely important.
Don't get me wrong, the 70D is a nice camera and Canon is a great system, but when all the cameras get Gold Awards with similar scores in spite of some key differences, it makes these reviews less specific, less useful for researching cameras than they could be.
I'd be surprised if you could find a significant difference in images taken with the 70D and the D7100 (or the E-M1) in the hands of most buyers of these cameras... There will be differences to be sure - but not significant ones, in my opinion.
DenisBBergeron: Studio ComparisonWHy comparing sharpness and colors from two DSLR cameras without the same lens and without even telling which lens are used on the two camera.
Are we comparing a camera with a Noname 8-600mm f3.5-6.7 @f3.5 and the other with Super Zeiss Tacomar 85mm f1.0 @f5 ?
There is an 'I' in the lower right you can hover over and find out which lens is used: both shot at f/5.6 on the 50mm f/1.4 lenses...
Impressive piece of work! It takes a lot of patience and planning to bring that together...
igorek7: Great news for everyone who are using Micro Four Thirds system! There is a need for a wide-angle high quality prime lens, and I think that 15mm f/1.7 would nicely compliment two other Leica's MFT lenses: 25mm f/1.4 and 42.5mm f/1.2.
My 25/1.4 has a lot better image quality that the full frame camera with 50mm 1/1.4 lens that is left at home... Not to mention that Bokeh can be pretty ugly when stopped down to f/2.8 versus wide open on the 25mm. It is a great 'standard' lens.
Do you take photos or just police MFT equivalence :)
The Manual aperture ring is a nice touch, that pretty much would eliminate my need to hit the menus or need dials on the GM1 for most of my travel shooting :) I suspect, though, that this lens plus the GM1 isn't going to be terribly competitive on price!
Treeshade: Strange that many comments call for a fixed prime lens m4/3. Wouldn't such a camera be at a direct competition with APS-C sensor - GR, Coolpix A, and X100s? Prehaps true pocketability with sunken lens is the answer. Could Panasonic put a touch screen, a m4/3 sensor, and a 17.5mm/2.8 AF lens in a 30mm thick casing?
The 40-150mm R lens, for $90 :)
@photo perzon. Here is a shot Kirk Tuck posted from the A99 at ISO 6400: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-8DZ-132tSRs/Ul8ajNsdcII/AAAAAAAAOIU/ZWXk28GwMgs/s1600/small+girl+for+Craftsy.jpg
And here is a shot I took this weekend at ISO5000 on an MFT sensor: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-5RkyKbRHpBE/UmCDJrSP7KI/AAAAAAAAMHQ/pwXxPA0QyfA/s1600/20131013-170921-EM530316.jpg
I'm not seeing ISO2000 as a limit :)
Andy Crowe: "There's no such thing as a free lunch, it seems. The Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 offers a larger sensor than many of its big-sensor-small-camera competitors, but enters the market with only one lens designed to fit it without tipping over"
Surely all the pancake lenses (14mm, 17mm, 20mm and PZ14-42) would make perfectly good companions to this camera?
Fortunately I tend to be out taking photos with my camera, rather than sitting it on flat surfaces to see what happens :) I agree that with the other pancake primes this would be a nice little camera to throw in a pocket when doing outdoor activities...even the 45mm f/1.8 is a nice light little lens to complement it.