Don't forget the most absurdly expensive too.
And if you put it underwater, it once again displays a focus problem similar to the 1 and 2 because of the new lens. And once again, third parties have to come up with fixes for this.
Wilmark: "We covered this issue in our in-depth review of the D600, last year."From the review final page "We're working with Nikon to understand (and further test) this issue and we'll update this review accordingly as we use the camera over time."
First off the problem seems to be OIL and NOT dust. Big difference. The other point is that I see you did consider this issue in your D600 review and yet you awarded it your GOLD AWARD. I cannot see how one can recommend this camera with this problem - it was prevalent in the model you tested, yet you gave it one of your highest ratings for a DSLR. Now you will understand why I never look at DP review for buying choices, I just come for news. How can anyone trust your reviews, when you have highly recommended a camera that probably has a serious design flaw, even when you picked it in your test model. Your high rating is that with oil or without? (a la Mc Donalds combo)
I agree with Wilmark. How dare reviewers mislead possible buyers by rating a product with such an obvious flaw so highly. This does not serve their readers at all.
While the video interview and photos are great, it's 3 years old and I've watched it dozens of times.
Any word on video IS? On the E-PL3 it's not very good because it's digital, on the E-M5 it's supposed to use the in-body IS. If the -PL5 uses the IBIS, then I'm sold and will buy one as soon as it hits shelves.