The head is a good concept. Switching between my ballhead and fluid head is a complete drag. The problem as I see it is that Manfrotto plates are not compatible with the more common Arca Swiss plates and L-brackets. And really the best way to use a ballhead is in concert with an L-bracket. That way switching to the vertical orientation, you don't ever have to use the awkward drop slot of the ballhead. The video plate of this head is a bit of a non-starter for this reason.
keeponkeepingon: Canon makes a camera about the same size as an older rebel or nikon.
Gear of the year!
> and in the end you save quite a lot of volume.
The volume savings comes from the shallow grip of the SL1 / 100D, which only benefits portability while hurting ergonomics, especially with larger lenses and telephotos.
The small size difference between a small DSLR like the D5200 or K-30 and the SL1 basically means the Canon user can get away with one size smaller camera bag, nothing more. Since none of these cameras are pocketable, I can't imagine why some are quibbling over differences measured in millimeters.
Many including DPR staff often focus on portability issues which more often than not hurt ergonomics. For larger hands, or working outdoors in winter with gloves on with any of these miniature "walk around" cameras is truly an exercise in frustration.
The real "Gear of the Year" for an APS-C type DSLR is without a doubt the D7100 or K-3. Serious users and people not so focused on grab and go photography would be better served by one of these two cameras.
forpetessake: It stands out among entry level DSLRs, it's lighter, smaller -- some like it, some don't. But nobody really likes the outdated Canon sensor, which is a generation behind the Sony sensors used in many other cameras.
Yes the DR is the biggest difference followed by color depth. I was a bit surprised to see a full 20 points scoring between the two cameras.
> Most importantly, this article is about a very very tiny proportion of the camera buying public
Sorry, I was speaking more generally about the Gear of the Year series of articles in their totality where portability has been a focus.
Iskender: I've always really liked Pentax cameras, but after reading the frothing-at-the-mouth Pentax comments below I'm now considering hating the brand. Just to spite the fanboys, you know? :P
Some of you almost sound worse than the whiners in Olympus SLR Talk back in the day.
I didn't read the comments below but Pentax users have a right to feel slighted. Pentax builds high spec'd entry-level DSLRs that are small, weather sealed with 100% Pentaprism OVF (no cheap pentamirror), in-body stablization, 6 or more fps burst mode, etc. But because DPR is now prioritizing small cameras for walking around grab shots, none of the Pentax cameras (or any other high performance cameras) get picked.
Personally if I never read the line "it's smaller so it doesn't get left at home" again, I'll be happy. Small size is perhaps the most overrated feature of the last 2-3 years. None of these really tiny mirrorless cameras are selling all that well, so perhaps DPR is miscalculating what photographers want most in a camera.
> Anyone shooting in JPEG won't experience that.
Of course buying a decent DSLR or MILC and shooting JPEG is kind of a waste as now all of your archives are 8-bit compressed files.
But at least DPR has one DSLR in what is IMHO, a poorly named the "Gear of the Year" series. The SL1 might not be the most thrilling or performant APS-C DSLR, but it's a very well done camera in spite of the shallow grip and fixed LCD.
> So it's fair to say the sensor in the SL1 isn't the best in class, but unless you're pushing low ISO Raws
It's not only DR where the SL1 is lacking compared to the other non "Gear of the Year" cameras. Color depth, high ISO and resolution are also behind most other APS-C cameras.
This new trend of picking all small size, so-called "walk around cameras" to focus on is strange considering that this type of user is only a small percentage of the camera buying public.
D1N0: low light champ (just)
Nothing is wrong with Sony sensors. Someone above wrote:
"They should have gone for 24mp. The minor gain over the D4 isn't worth keeping it at 16mp. I guess sensor tech has hit a bit of a barrier, they've milked the Sony's for all they can?"
The point is Nikon is not "milking" anything, they use sensors from Renesas, Sony, Toshiba, Aptina, et al. Anyway, it's hard to believe that some people are complaining about the sensor in the Df, which is absolutely great. I have a D800, it's great, but file sizes are pretty huge often making it overkill for everyday casual shooting. The 16 mp sensor in the Df is perfect for high volume, event or travel type shooting.
Calistoga_Guy: This is a perfect camera for me. I work mostly doing event photography, and the light is always bad, or it's outdoors at night. While everyone is complaining about this and that, I'm just looking at what is currently the best image sensor you can find in a dSLR. If resolution isn't an issue, then the D3s is still KING.
As for noise, I work with nothing but high ISO. 800 is my base, and 3200 is where I live most of the time. But noise from a single RAW file that people look at isn't the whole story. When brining up shadows, that's where things can get ugly, and sorry, the D610 or D800 or Sony FF sensor just won't cut it. For roughly half the price of a D4, two of these bodies would work for me. Is the df perfect? Far from it. The images posted here that are from RAWs and not from the camera jpeg engine are very, very good. comparing this to a 5D III? Sorry, not even close. Only the 1D X sensor is worthy enough to compare.
He's right. Above ISO 800, the Df does have better dynamic range than the D800/D610. I don't remember if it's 1 EV or 1/2 EV but it's a fairly significant difference.
FoveonPureView: Pay ONLY (!) DOUBLE (!!) the price of the 16MP Df and buy a 40 MP MEDIUM FORMAT Pentax 645D instead. Nuff said.
The Pentax 645D is $9000 in the States, $7000 body only and $2000 for the 55 f/2.8 normal lens. The other two lenses are $5000 each.
You must be using some of that new math. :-)
Petrogel: Will this kind of consumer DSLRs be dead in 5 years?These DSLRs are already dead, but they don't know it yet
Camera Shipments Worldwide Jan-Sept 2013
Single Lens Reflex404,927,271
Seems like you have it backwards. In spite of all the best efforts of websites like this one to promote mirrorless, it looks like the only interchangeable lens cameras making money are DSLRs.
mholdef: I am just baffled about the wildly negative reactions about this camera
@Blue Swan Media Nikon is not about to put the D4 AF system in other classes of cameras. They remember what happened with the D700/D3.
@Teru Kage It's hard to be "style over substance" with that sensor performance, which amazingly edged out the legendary D3s on DxOMark in Low-Light score. But Nikon users for years were asking for this type of camera (i.e. FM Digital). Its hard to fault Nikon who listened to users and delivered.
Lots of the negativity in these boards comes from mirrorless fans. And some comes from our friends abroad in European countries where Nikon's pricing is unfortunately high.
But the Df negativity started right out of the gate, not only on the forums but from so-called professional reviewers. Language like "silly" and "eye-watering price" started early on in the Df Preview in spite of the fact that the Df offers D3s level high ISO performance for a little over 1/3 of the price of the D3s/D4, a price that sits between the affordable D610 and D800 in most regions. Honestly don't remember such a negative camera Preview in all the years I've been reading this website since early Phil Askey days.
And I'd bet the farm that the negativity will continue straight through the actual review in spite of the fact that the Df is turning out to be an extremely capable camera that is easily in the upper echelon of cameras released in 2013. Is it a Fujifilm X? Thankfully, no.
Jogger: Still waiting for the D700 replacement.. i.e. the 16mp chip in a D800 body. I prefer the modern SLR controls because i can operate them without taking my eye away from the OVF.
> but you are forced to use the locking exposure comp dial on the left shoulder of the camera.
Yes the EV comp dial is locking, a GOOD thing. I can't tell you how many time I accidentally move the EV comp on my X-E1, not realizing it until after I've made an image.
Some reviewers are making a big deal about the Df locks on the exposure dials but in actuality the EV comp and ISO dial can be operated with one hand and changed quite easily. The same for the shutter speed dial.
> I guess sensor tech has hit a bit of a barrier, they've milked the Sony's for all they can?
The D4/Df sensor is not made by Sony, it's designed in-house by Nikon and fabricated by Renesas.
I can't understand news organizations laying off photographers. Such a powerful media!
Not simple economics, that's just corporate doublespeak for slashing jobs. Just like moving manufacturing to factories overseas while getting huge government bailouts and tax shelters are justified as "simple economics".
Expat Nomad: But there ARE differences to the design (e.g., mode dial, AF assist, port locations). Edit: I presume the menus are different too.
If this was the music industry, we'd be talking about the remix/tribute/cover.
This case is more like the music industry equivalent of a sample. Maybe an artist will speed the sample up changing the pitch a la Kayne West, but it's still a copy of an original work.
CameraLabTester: This sentence is a justified punishment for Sucker... or rather, Sakar for stupidly trying to imitate what is already a very poor, ugly, horrible and forgetful design devoid of beauty. They should have at least tried a more poorer, uglier, more horrible and oblivious design like Leica Lunatic or Leica Lambroast or something...
Never thought a random dot could be so interesting, kind of like a pin prick letting out hot air.
The D5200, with its articulated LCD and outstanding video quality seems the good choice over the D3200. For more experienced users the lack of 1/3 EV ISO adjustments on the D3200 could be a minor annoyance.
The D5200 kit with the really good 18-140 comes in at 946 USD here in the States, although this may be a temporary promotion. But it's a good deal considering that zoom is a $600 lens.
The D5300 which removes the OLPF and adds 1080p60, a first for any Canikon DSLR, looks like a good upgrade. I haven't tried one yet but it tested well on DxOMark, and images I've seen look great.
The K-50 is quite a lot of camera for the money with its 100% Pentaprism finder, and weather sealing. Like the K-30 before it, its has some of the best specs out of any DSLR maker. With the right lenses its a great choice.
And Canon, as usual, offers some really well done, versatile cameras in this range. Thanks guys.
DMJones: Sorry but I'm not impressed with the underwater shots. From 2004 - 2010 I used a Canon IXUS500 in an underwater housing & that 5MP camera was producing images that look just as good on my 27" monitor. It was just a point and shoot not a dedicated all weather / underwater creature.
You must have only looked at the 2-3 underwater images in the article which the author explained had reduced contrast and were taken on a cloudy day. The actual AW1 gallery has lots of images that look very good, significantly better than any 1/2.3" sensor compact could do. Not to mention the fact that this camera shoots RAW for even better IQ vs JPEGs from your IXUS.
I neither own nor use a Canon 5D. Canikon lenses aren't optically good enough for my purposes and I don't care about shooting sports so don't need fast AF. Then none of the 5D bodies can match the best Nikon's best high ISO DSLRs.
However the Canon 5D bodies are still a big deal.
> I've used the Nikon 1.4 85mm it's optically crap compared to the Zeiss 85mm 1.4.
Sure you have. Photos?
Check DxOMark, Photozone, or Lenstip. You'll see that the Nikon 85 f/1.4G is a much better lens than the Zeiss ZF 85 f/1.4. The ZF 85 softer corners and center than the Nikkor and doesn't get sharp across the frame until f/2.8. Photozone MTFs tell it all.
> Olympus 4/3 and m4/3 lenses corrected?
Olympus m43 lenses use software correction. Fact. They are also designed for the significantly smaller m43 sensor. How hard is it to get sharp borders and corners with that tiny sensor? Let them try designing some optically corrected FF lens. They don't even compete with Canikon with their software corrected lenses for the smaller m43 sensor. They aren't shaming anybody.
> So I believe my eyes, and my results.What results? Where's your gear list, your gallery photos? If Samsung, Olympus images are embarrassing Canikon, let's see your photos to prove it.
> Zeiss lenses are a good bit optically better than anything from Canikon--say the 85mm 1.4.
1) Zeiss 85 1.4 is one of their weaker lenses, not nearly as good as the Nikon 85 f/1.4G. Don't believe me, look in DxOMark and Photozone.
2) Second, Canon and Nikon makes every focal lens from UWA zooms, standard zooms, large aperture primes, telephoto zoms and super telephotos. Cosina/Zeiss makes a few overpriced manual focus primes.
3) Samsung, Olympus, Fuji better than anything Canikon?? Now you've gone off your rocker. Software corrected lenses designed for tiny crop sensor better than optically corrected pro-grade Nikkors or L FF lenses? Sure. And I'm going to be the next President of the United States.
4) Where are all these photos of your for which Canikon lenses are not good enough? I can't find photo from you on DPR, but you sure do say a lot. :-)