I like them. A lot.
Peiasdf: Tiny sensor, not very interesting for me.
There should be a RX100 vs EX2F, big sensor vs fast lens debate like all the FF vs m4/3 debate.
gl2k: Wanna real serious cam : Nikon or CanonWanna show off : LeicaWanna be on budget : $299 P&SWanna be funny : NEX-7
But this cam ??? No idea who is the target customer ...
"I've got your serious Canon and Nikon in the palm of my hand LOL"
Louis_Dobson: Well done on telling people how to use MF.
I'm surprised and interested in your IQ remarks - from samples it has always seemed to me the odd sensor adds a pleasing glow but a certain softness. Apparently not then.
Interesting review of a fascinating camera. I see myself switching to version 3 for the controls. For now, I am looking forward to the 75mm for my OM-D.
By the way, with all these tight scores, isn't it time to just drop the percentage rating?
Yes. Percentage? Of what?!
What is 100%?
Only here would a company improving a 3 year old product receive so much criticism. You're a petty bunch of folks, dpr participants.
FTW: How about investing a quarter of that and bring the FF camera we all wait for?
How many full frame cameras did you see in the hands of people today? How many smartphones?
It's good business sense. Let's hope they make so much money they can't get rid of it fast enough and aim to enslave the full frame market.
Heh. No, their CEO will get an eleventy billion dollar bonus.
BUT HOW IS THE HIGH ISO PERFORMANCE??!!
PaulRacecar: The fact that the Nikon factory in Fukushima was decimated in the March 2011 tsunami is not lost on the Japanese government. I’m guessing they brokered a deal with Canon and Nikon to allow Nikon to have a distinct price advantage, along with a better product. Japan cannot allow an imaging titan like Nikon to falter in the world market. I think they shook hands under the table and said “Canon you let Nikon have this one, you’ll get your turn next." Just saying.
We are all dumber for having read that.
Any additions to the third party offerings is very much welcome. I look forward to seeing what they put out.
Allioth: I see the pancake as a preview for something mirrorless coming up soon (I hope!!!)... I've read in Canon Rumors that the new Canon mirrorless camera will accept EF lenses... Why would they do a pancake just now? Certenly not for their DSLR market... With the size of their DSLRs, a pancake lens doesn't change things that much...
Something was to be expected this month... We'll see :)
Not to $#!+ on your parade, but this pancake would do zero good for a mirrorless system with a registration distance of 44 mm. Unless you're gung ho for a mirrorless system that is as thick, front to back, as any canon DSLR.
Then4: I think this will be a great camera. Only concern is how hot it will be in video mode in this small body and 20mp.
Sam - That was a pretty reasonable assertion 3 years ago when high quality video seemed to be at something elses' expense, but why would someone buy two pieces of equipment when all the performance you need on either front should easily be available in one?
What you're suggesting here is akin to me telling you that you need Leica's B/W only camera for doing B/W photography, when in truth what you'd buy anyway is fully capable.
Jefftan: Do you guys know it cost $1300not so excited any more?
just yesterday I see attack on NEX lens line up, at least no single lens is price at this ridiculous price
In any case, no one is holding anyone's head under water until they swipe their credit card for one...
Ho. Lee. Sheeit.
Somewhere, some jackass will blow the money on this. And that is why Leica still exists.
Obligatory "WHY AREN'T YOU REVIEWING THE CAMERA I WANT, DPREVIEW?!!" post. :)
There have been ugly cameras in the past, but this one really does take the cake. Others may say what they like about "absolute image quality," and it's not bad in that regard, but if the absolute in image quality came with a Fisher Price badge on it I'm pretty sure I'd not be the only one to shy away. Or "My First Sony" actually seems most fitting, looks a lot like my cassette deck @ 6 years old.
Alizarine: so much talk about the camera's looks, lol.
Seems so many people want everything so Nazi'd into the "every-camera-must-be-black-and-looks-like-a-Canon/Nikon"
how about discussing image quality output? :)
Because I don't want to walk around with a fisher price toy in my hands. 3% of people would think I have a great sense of humor, and the other 97% would assume that I suffer from Down's.
marike6: DPR, what's up with the D3200 colors in RAW? Saturation seems really low, I thought I was looking at the SD1 samples for a second.
Thanks for that bit of info. Knowing that is much better than having to think to myself "what in the hell have they done wrong?!"
wildbild: I do not see the Nikon d3100 being better nor do I see the canon 600d outperform this camera as some of you think. But what I certainly see is that with the right glass--resolutionwise--it is as good as my 4x5 inch camera. Unfortunately the d3200 doesn't come with a funny up side down ground glass (or at least a better viewfinder).
tkbslc: Pretty great time we live in when even the $600 cameras do pretty good ISO 6400-12800 and have enough resolution for monster prints. Add the 35mm f1.8 or 50mm f1.8 for $200 and you have an $800 kit that can shoot places you wouldn't have dreamed of 3-4 years ago.
Yes, it is relative. You've just explicitly stated that your definition of "good" has changed over time, as for what other reason could a good camera yesterday not be a good camera today?
Jogger: but, does it do 1080p?
Well, Jogger... so much for making a joke.