Errm...it´s secret LOL
Lupti: "All run a "pure" un-skinned version of the Android operating system, commonly available only on Google Nexus devices."
Wrong. There are a lot of other devices with pure Android, mostly phones and tablets that don´t come from the "big" companies(and I have one). Strange that DPReview doesn´t know this putting so much effort in their Connect site...
Well, pure Android is better than custom UI anyway. No bloatware from Samsung or Sony. And if this makes the phones more expensive, then a reason more for going with an "cheap" phone with no custom UI(did I mention one can´t use SIM contacts with newer Xpera phones?). I paid 150 € for such a "no-name" phone(which comes from the same manufacturer as the iPhone), specs are similar to more expensive ones that cost at least 100 € and it runs fine, is built well and has a good screen. And there are also custom - free - mods out for it, like for many phones of the "big brands".
"All run a "pure" un-skinned version of the Android operating system, commonly available only on Google Nexus devices."
Lupti: And BTW: They talk about speed, but what about quality? The Nikon 1 system is just fast, but IQ is really crappy for 1". They shouldn´t sacrifice IQ for speed.
Simon97:I doubt you ever used one of these cameras. The quality is just bad compared even for 1". There are compact cameras with smaller sensor that do better. Comparable to DSLRs or 4/3? Not really...even my Canon S95 performed better at low ISO. And comparing to 4/3 is no excuse for bad image quality. Yes, there are some dopey comments here - but not mine. These are these comments like "hey another camera is bad and it´s popular, and this camera performs similar, so it can´t be that bad!"marike6:Well, scores of 52(J3 14MP) and 54(V1 10MP) aren´t something to rave about. And that they score similar to e.g. the Panasonic G2 is (again) no excuse for bad quality, and BTW who said G2 is good? It isn´t.
The music is really annoying but ok, it´s Vimeo, says it all.And the idea sounds cooler than it actually is. The footage shows nothing that anyone doesn´t know, no interesting places, so nice try but boring.
And BTW: They talk about speed, but what about quality? The Nikon 1 system is just fast, but IQ is really crappy for 1". They shouldn´t sacrifice IQ for speed.
Ok, a lot of new sensors with 4k capability and high framerates are announced last time, but when will the first be in a - payable - camera? New camera generations - regardless if P&S, DSLR or camcorder - this year are still limited to FullHD.
I have the GH3 with 12-35mm for a while and it´s a nice combo, GH3 is the camera the GH2 should have been.However there are some issues that could need improvement:- cuts around a half second of video when stopping recording- gain limiter for audio is a good idea but it should be possible to switch it off for some mics- still the same cheap clattery strap holders - I think I will cut them off next time- internal mic is just bad, muffled sound and not sensitive enough, prone to background noise - maybe due to weather-sealing, GH2 mic was better- MP4 recording is just useless, who needs MP4 at 1080p50 with 128kb/s audio and otherwise same datarate as AVCHD?
Ways overpriced! I saw similar cameras for around 60 €. And they all have in common that they are just toys with mediocre image quality.
A 20" tablet? I already find a 10" tablet a bit difficult to handle, and now we have a device that is 4x larger. Not really portable.And BTW, how about some 4k capable (consumer) cameras? Panasonics new camcorder line-up still sticks to FullHD, so their new still cameras.
Camediadude: Probably the coolest story this site has covered in months. Too bad there can't be more stories like this one, rather than the constant coverage of insipid mobile devices with trendy names that will be obsolete in a month.
Nigel Ward 2: Camera World are already taking orders on the new 18-35mm lens for £669 !That's SIX HUNDRED AND SEVENTY POUNDS for an f/4.5 at 35mm lens!
The world has gone mad.
Gone mad? Not really. Considering the price of Canon 17-40mm F4 L which is a similar lens at similar price tag I don´t see a problem here.
Wow, an extended preview. That´s worth a message on the top page? What about a finished review - not just previews? Previews that never become reviews is a disease that only is spread on DPreview. Maybe the name doesn´t stand for "Digital Photography Review" but "Digital Preview". Other sites have their finished already up for some weeks. Don´t you think it´s time to speed up your reviewing process? Should be possible as you have more staff than ever before.
It should be considerably cheaper than the 14-140mm. Otherwise the need of it is questionable.
Hobbit13: I'm happy I bought a Nokia 808, instead of waiting for the 920! My 808 can easily compete with a Canon S90 high-end compact. While the output of the 920 can only compete with compacts in the $75 range!
If only the 808 would have had stabilization.....
I had 808 and S95 and after comparison I disagree with your statements.S95 shows more detail - you have to use RAW but seriously, who buys a S95 to use the mediocre JPEG mode...Regarding high ISO the 808 is not better, only has more aggressive NR.Better screen? Well, the S95 has twice resolution - 808 has better technology but I still would prefer the S95 here.Amazing? Well, there is a difference of 2 years between these devices - and smartphones are still phones, not cameras. People should deal with that.
parallaxproblem: Simply awful: hundreds of dollars for something that becomes landfill as soon as the battery is expired. Shall we also start scrapping cars when the tyres wear or brake pads need replacing?
Apple was the company that started this wasteful trend and I will never buy one of their products for exactly this reason
Agree on that. I don´t see any reason for buying an Apple product, and this one is another for sticking with this decision.
And @Dan not everyone changes the phone just because it´s "oldtech" and there are shiny new ones out. Ironically the old ones are often better for just phoning and messaging as they have better call quality and reception. I bought several replacement batteries for my Sony W200i, 9 € for a new battery is cheaper than buying a new phone.
zoranT: why isn t global shutter implemented in all cameras? too expensive tech? what s the disadvantage?
Well, if they really wanted they could have developed it so far that it should be usable for consumer cameras, but marketing deciced that other "improvements" like 3D or smile detection were more important.The technology of global shutter is already know since 2003 IIRC.Now they introduce it in their top pro cameras, if marketing shows mercy we will see it maybe in the new high-end consumer cameras next spring...maybe not.A lot of people don´t even know what global shutter and rolling shutter mean. They don´t know why their mobile phone footage comes out wobbly, they think it´s due to the lack of image stabilisation but it´s the global shutter which is still pretty visible in most mobile phone videos.
I rather had wished the possibility to adjust mic sensitivity on the NEX-7. But ok Sony, I understand you don´t want to cannibalise the NEX-7 the sales of your VG camcorders, eh?
Ok I now have tested it and have to say this phone is just a overhyped gadget. The camera is ok for P&S standards but nothing in the area of being "impressive, stunning" whatever. 34MP 16:9 mode gives just rather soft images and you see even very little shake. The lack of image stabilisation makes it just not suitable for serious photography. And even at ISO64 you see little grain at 34MP. The pureview mode gives ok results but nothing a good P&S can do. And I liked the ISO200 and above results of my Canon S95 better.Video is just unusable, you hear every little sound of your fingers touching the phone and the lack of image stabilisation is just frustrating(and the one offered is a joke because it just makes the image jumping but not stable).Beside all this it is just a mere phone with nothing special to offer. And IMHO it is just a rather clunky phone, so is the handling.Don´t believe the hype, I don´t recommend it.
Noogy: Strange article. Who is on Google+ among enthusiasts and pros here in DPR? None of my friends who are into photography are on Google+ and since Facebook upgraded its photo capabilities that now allows high-def viewing/sharing of images, FB definitely beats Google+ hands down. How much did Google pay for this article?
Agree. I don´t see a reason for using Google+. Google is trying to force people to use it, not only people with "normal" Google account but also Youtube users.They want to compete with Facebook, but I really doubt the success.
I don´t like it and don´t see any sense in it. Why does every bigger site think that they need a new layout just because it´s "new"? At first Youtube, now Dpreview. What a waste of time they better have spent for real improvements or reviews...