Autofocus at f8, in 2013...
DonSantos: 24-48mm 1.8 zoom for ff please.
dont ask for such things...if a 24-70 f2.8 is 2100$, how much will a 24-48 f1.8 will be?
Peiasdf: Wow, this is real. I thought someone created a bad rumor. Wish it is FF
Jon in theory that all sounds very nice, but you must know by now that in practice that doesnt hold true. APS C sensors are withing 1/3 to 1/2 stop of ff sensors in noise control, heck, m4/3s sensors are getting mighty close. A difference you wont really notice in real life.
I also know most ff users dont go beyond a certain ISO anyway. What if im already at ISO 6400 with my APS C? will you hike your ff to ISO 16k to match my shutter speed? your answer will probably be yes, but samples higher than ISO 12k around the web are scarce and rare, so in reality you probably wont.
HopeSpringsEternal: Amazing! Shame about being only for APS-C though. Anyone notice that it won't be available for Sony/Minolta mount?I think that mount is almost dead despite all the protesting to the contraryPerhaps Sigma and Tokina know more about Sony DSLR sales than Sony itself is willing to let on.
This sucks as all my gear is Sony/Minolta.
calm down, sigma always takes a little extra time to make it in alpha mount (for whatever reason). It was the same for the 50-150 f2.8 and various other lenses
its the first f1.8 zoom ever you bunch of whiners. it doesnt matter if its crop or if they used a "speed booster" or not. They did it. A lot of people sound hurt here. Whats the matter? that f2.8 zoom suddenly doesnt feel as special? Go ahead an say the equivalency mantra to calm yourself
JDThomas: Sigma breaks a barrier and everyone is complaining that it's not full-frame. :)
and complaining about the method on how they got to it too! It all sounds to me like sour ff owners trying to justify their equipment
so the fact that shutter speeds will be 1 1/3 of a stop faster doesnt matter?
D1N0: so for shooting stills it's actually crap. Gold award. Way to go dvreview
R Butler so the stills side of the omd is also not on par?
joe talks photography: sweet camcorder but shows its the end of the road of m43 as far as challenging larger sensors with still image quality.
Howboutraw im very sorry to dissapoint, but yes fuji very clearly uses noise reduction on their raw files. My xpro 1 files at 3200 look like it has about 30 on the noise reduction slider in lightroom, with the smuged details included. And its been proven to death in fuji forums.
If you dont have an xpro to play with download the files from the comparo tool here, its very obvious on the text and the queens face, thats noise reduction if I ever saw it.
Timmbits: For something this SIZE, I'd expect a full frame, or at least an APS-C!
Timmbits get over yourself and calm down, the camera is smaller than a rebel and has the ergonomics of a full frame. And nobody cares if there isnt a crappy 15 times zoom for mft, but im guessing people do find it annoying there isnt a 70 200 or 24 70 for aps c. Heck there isnt even a 85 is there? But hey! Enjoy your soft images on your f6.7 superzoom crap
Howboutraw yes but then the 5n image is very soft compared to the omd and gh3 (resolving only around 2200 lines) and the fuji does noise reduction to raw files.sooooo...
arguros: Why this over the GF2?
4 more mp, much better noise control, nfc, wifi, wireless flash, 4 fn buttons, better jgp engine, and the kit lens is sharper than any other kit lens. You really dont see this as a massive upgrade?
peevee between f4.9 and 5.3 the difference is negligible, what is that? less than a third of a stop? nitpicking at its finest! but the sharpness difference is actually noticeable on the other hand
Sergey Borachev: Sorry I read the preview up to this line
" - 16MP Four Thirds sensor (as used in GX1)"
and lost interest.
people are amazing...the entry level model got a 4 mp boost, a 1 stop more if ISO, NFC, wifi, 4 fn buttons, the sharpest kit lens out there (compare it to canon and nikon in dxo mark), a flip screen, wireless flash control and people STILL complain
Naveed Akhtar: What was wrong with G5 sensor? why Pany like using GX1 sensor? if not GH3's. No doubt controls, size, featureset and ergonomics are perfect!!
revenant, thats what i call shooting one self in the foot. putting the same sensor in all the models like oly is a bad move. Youll see, theyll pay for it dearly when the ep4 comes
lenseye: I quit buying Panasonic right after GF1. Reason: they come up with so many models so fast that you can never keep track and the support for your model stops! Hardly get any firmware updates, etc.! It's a joke!
and canon doesnt churn out a rebel every 3 months? everybody does it
mdanoff: "Movie focused" is a bit extreme. I tried the Olympus OM-5, and while a wonderful camera, for still photography preferred and purchased the GH3.
agreed, its ergonomically leagues better than the em5 or just about any slr i have around here
putomax: as a GH3 owner I say PANASONIC TRY HARDER!!! firmware doesn't address important issues:
ONLY 10 sec display of infoWB shift at record start weird audio compressionAE lock to shutter halfpress48 and 125 shutter speed on manual videomore customizable options to Fn4, i.e. timelapse
feel free to add more ;)
mine locks ae on shutter half press. go on your menu and look for it
VREN: The output is a definite improvement on the D7000. But to my eyes, a bit of a disappointment when you compare its output to that of the K5-IIs. Maybe the raw converters have not been optimized for the D7100. The colours are a bit less saturated on the Pentax. But it is possible that Pentax is cooking its raw output more than Nikon. I don't know, but I thought the 7100 would be notably better that the K-5IIs and it isn't in my opinion.
talks about the k10 k20 and km. It doesnt mention the k5 anywhere
mpgxsvcd: I am actually quite shocked at how little difference there is between the D7100 and the GH3/EM5. Actually pretty much everything in this class is really close all the way up to ISO 6400.
They all achieve image quality that looks great to me.
not applicable? its actually very truthful comparing the photos.
Peter62: Go to Hi-ISO comparison. Choose ISO 12800. Compare to FUJIFILM X-E1.Move cursor to KODAK badge on the right.
Forget Nikon D7100...
i dont really dig the d7100, people are mainly right in what theyre saying (about m4/3s) but the above is right. Fuji does apply noise reduction to their RAW files above 1600, and thats sacrilege to me.
If you really cant see it download the D7100 file and apply noise reduction in lightroom and see that they look equally as "smoothed"