GRUBERND: although i see where this idea might be coming from,it is really pseudo-elitist nonsence.aka: post-post-modern. weird for the sake of weird.
and people will just take another shot with their phone and then swipe and tap and swipe and run into things just like everybody else who is not paying attention to their surroundings.
removing the screen on a digital camera neither makes you a better photographer nor a better person, it just shows that you dont have a clue about photography. at all.
I'd like the price lowered, actually.
Advent1sam: The best mirrorless for fast action is the Fuji xpro-2 according to mirrorlessonshttp://www.mirrorlessons.com/2016/04/06/fujifilm-100-400mm-review/You can also use the ovf much like a red-dot sighthttp://www.mirrorlessons.com/2016/03/30/fuji-x-pro2-ovf-birds-in-flight/Unlike the a6300 the fuji also supports uhs-ii sd has a deeper buffer and quicker refresh/write with the faster card, has better overall iq and is weather sealed, it also has a very nice native 100-400 lens for the system, unlike Sony.
One quibble, the A6300 is weather sealed, too.
Andrew Elliott: Another very nice production.
Were the focal lengths quoted on screen doubled for 35mm equivalence?
I’m surprised the lens model was not quoted with the info for each shot, too.I imagine this is what a lot of DP readers are interested in, also.Maybe in future productions, please?
all the best
Yes, lovely work and interesting topic.
A small quibble that there wasn't more about the camera, the challenges of shooting in low light, etc.
Perhaps a separate, accompanying slide show or discussion focusing more on the Pen-F would be possible?
Atazoth: Your review was helpful...however, I am annoyed by almost every camera review I read by anybody. They almost always gloss over camera build quality. That is extremely important to determining quality and value. This camera (unlike just about any mirrorless camera) is designed to be used every day. The weather sealing, magnesium body and I assume internal components such as shutter construction etc are (or should be) more durable than average cameras that cost less. It is not all about features and image quality. The Nikon D5500 has a great image sensor but if a working professional tried to use it, it probably wouldn't last long. That's is the main reason for the D810 and the D5. Not features! Tell me about the shutter mechanism and internal component build!
I think similarly about build quality. I note the X-Pro 2 and the Leica Q got the same rating from DPR on build quality. I'm a bit suspicious of that. A bit of elaboration on that point would have been useful. Esp. so, because most of us cannot touch these cameras in the metal before purchasing.
bluevellet: sony: best selling mirrorless camera of all time... so let's not support it with any kind of new accessories and lens and other stuff that makes an interchangeable lens camera... an interchangeable lens camera. Still want to use something else than the kit zoom? Here, have some overpriced, oversized FF lenses.
Try the voigtlander primes. Good for the money. I really like focus peaking, you may as well.
Retzius: Those look nice. Its interesting that although these are lenses for 'mirrorless' cameras they look pretty much the same size as dslr lenses. The purported size and weight saving seems nonexistent.
I don't disagree with any of that, Anders. Just making the point that after all this time we finally have Sony lenses that we can compare directly and that size/weight advantage for mirrorless looks moot. BTW, I'll trade you that 200g for 3x the battery life. Horses for courses....
Yes, actually, they look bigger than the equivalent Canikon. That cheering you hear in the background is Canikon using this vid to market their own products. Size weight advantage to mirrorless? Doesn't look like it on FF, apples to apples comparison. Check this out:http://camerasize.com/compact/#312.286,624.515,ha,t
SmilerGrogan: Seeing this video made me feel so sorry for the women who have to pose In the booths and have their pictures taken all day by sweaty middle aged douchebags. They should outlaw that practice.
It's better than 90% of the jobs in the service economy. Beats McDonalds...
I didn't have much luck with gadget. Hard to stop it, at least on my computer. Not worth the effort, imho.
Malikknows: Wow, I just purchased a new A6000 last week for an upcoming trip. Had to laugh (and cry on the inside a bit) when I saw Sony just released its replacement. Usually I go for the newest/bestest just to have it last longer in the end. In any event, after reading this article, I don't feel too bad. Video not important, IBIS neither, to me. That ruggedized body, though, will be missed.
All in all, will Sony sell both versions side by side as they've done with the RX100 series? Wouldn't surprise me as the price of the A6300 seems a bit steep for the level of improvement offered, imho.
$1000 for the body is a 100% increase. Not trivial, and it changes this camera's potential market. $500 for such a capable A6000 always seemed an extraordinary bargain. $1000? Not so much. YMMV.
Wow, I just purchased a new A6000 last week for an upcoming trip. Had to laugh (and cry on the inside a bit) when I saw Sony just released its replacement. Usually I go for the newest/bestest just to have it last longer in the end. In any event, after reading this article, I don't feel too bad. Video not important, IBIS neither, to me. That ruggedized body, though, will be missed.
Kudos to DPR for taking the opportunity of the Pen F to discuss aesthetics and camera design. I value good design and aesthetics and will pay for it.
papa natas: ok, let's see about "BEST"SONY a6000: puny screen pixel count for it's price and hoopla.NIKON D5500: so, but so poor video quality.FUJI X-T10: I no LONGER look at FUJI as a serious camera manufacturer ever since that horror story about FUJI laughing at customers who were trapped with their X-10 model "ORBS"Camera manufacturers stopped being COMPETITIVE about 10 years ago.All they offer & sell now is NOVELTY and LIMITED over priced progress.PHOTOGRAPHY is a religion.Camera manufacturers are the sects.
I'd like the time I spent reading your post back.
nicoboston: Surprisingly [or not], there's nothing about the build quality and the durability of these cameras. They are supposed to be "pocketable", so we should be able to take them everywhere without special precautions. I have purchased 2 "G" Canon in the past: G2 in 2001, G10 in 2008. 14 (!!!) and 7 years later, respectively, both cameras work perfectly and have only minor scratches.
In contrast, my X30 went back to Fujifilm for repair twice and has now a loose hot shoe :-(
I do not have a Sony, but I know that RX100s have quite notorious reliability and durability issues. They have certainly brilliant studio performance, however I do not live in a studio.
Sadly, reliability and durability are not even discussed in your roundup.
This an excellent point. Also a good value for money discussion would be good.
IvanM: I must say as a Canon user I am mightily unimpressed with the pedestrian if not downright insulting Raw performance of the G5X !
Just like the G3x which initially looked quite attractive but the 1 frame per second raw shooting just like the G5X crossed that off my list immediately...
Are these cameras deliberately handicapped or not?
I agree with all the disappointment here, but just want to make the case that the Canon G7X is quite a bit cheaper than the Sony RX100s. In a value for money contest, perhaps it would do better.
thx1138: Canon finally gets the G7X right (well almost as there's no 4K video). But I'd trade that for the more useful zoom range compared to the RX100IV and $150 price advantage. Might sell the G1X for this but not sure yet.
That was exactly the choice I made. That zoom range with no penalty of added bulk was important. And I got a nice leather case in addition to saving $150. The Sony is hot here and is a great camera but I didn't think it worth the extra dough, imho.
Glad to hear the G7X is selling well, too.
Skrocki: Canon is finally realizing their huge blunder. I bought the EOS-M3 with electronic viewfinder and all four EOSM lenses direct from Japan via e-bay when it was first released. It has proven to be a great little camera that produces stunning images. The 24 megapixel sensor is very good in low light. It does not directly compare to the Nikon J5 because the M3 sports an APC-C sized sensor (22.3 x 14.9 mm) vs the 1" sensor (13.2 x 8.8 mm) of the Nikon. The Canon EOS-M3 can also use the entire Canon lens lineup, so it serves as a back-up camera to those who already own Canon gear. 4K video at this point is just a gimmick.
I think you're right. Canon needs to compete in this space for exactly the reasons you list. It is a great travel set-up, or back-up camera for those with a ff Canon DSLR set-up.
Not soon enough for me, though. Waited quite some time but bought a G7X as a travel alternative. Not perfect, but its small size is often a virtue.
Leica got it right on the Q: 28mm.
Steve in GA: Looking through the comments here, I'm struck by depth of the depth of the vitriol. Apparently, few of the commenters saw these pictures and simply paused to remember that awful day and the 3,000 people that died.
Well, uninformed left wingers seem to predominate here, photomonkey. No matter. Read this in a paper today: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/26/us-troop-withdrawal-let-islamic-state-enter-iraq-m/
Surely you must be open to the possibility that your narrative -- created by a left-wing, Obama worshiping press -- is flawed.
Wrong again. A small amount of troops could have secured Iraq's borders and given time for their democracy to take root. Fact is, no one in the security establishment can criticize Obama publicly because it will mean professional death for them. Everyone who worked Iraq knows the truth.