DT200: Big Disappointment. The VF is worse and sensor will either be the same or slightly worse than the NEX 7 due to all the PDAF pixels (just tlike the NEX 6 was slightly worse).Even if the the PDAF works this time, there are still no long lenses with wide apertures to use it with. The 55-210 is too slow and is F/6.3.I guess you could wait for the 70-200mm lens, but its size is bigger than the Canon and Nikon full frame versions which defeats the purpose of the system.For now the NEX 7 is a bargain. Better VF, possibly better sensor and instead use less expense more abundant legacy lenses.
If you have two identical sensors but one with the PDAF cells, usually that one performs worse from the IQ point of view. Why? Who knows. Maybe those PDAF cells take away some sensor area. But this has been observed at least on the latest Fuji cameras. Another problem with the 24 Mp APS-C sensors is, that while they provide better resolution, their noise goes rapidly up with the higher ISO settings. See for example Pentax K-5II vs K-3 camera performance. And, such highly dense sensors are much more demanding from the AF, lens quality and, at the case of such mirror-less cameras, from the proper alignment of the light rays, sensor cells and microlenses, especially at the corners when using wide angle lenses.
Vladik: Seems bland and lifeless
Actually the X-M1 sensor should deliver higher IQ than X100s as it doesn't waste a single pixel for the PD AF.
I am not sure whether this new studio scene is so good. For example those “grass” areas are placed too far away from the centre, so any smudging might be attributed to the poor lens performance in the corners rather than as a result of aggressive NR.
So, it looks like the sensor used in GX7 is identical with what the GH3 uses. At least that's what the "digineff.cz" claims: Podle prvních informací by měl být model GX7 výkonem rovnocenný s modelem GH3.
flektogon: Still the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 seems to be the best camera in this section.
O.K. but then why almost each bar in the graphical comparison (including the low light performance) is longer for the LX7? I would like to get the explanation from the authors of those reviews, how reliable are those graphical comarisons.
Just add the other cameras at the graphical comparison. Unless those graphical bars are not comparable.
Still the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 seems to be the best camera in this section.
In spite of the conclusion that the Coolpix P7700 has a better lens:
"While both cameras produce some of the best photo quality of any small-sensored compacts, we were especially impressed with the results from the Coolpix P7700 - at least at low ISOs. What stands out the most in the P7700's photos is just how sharp they are (for JPEG and Raw), which is a testament to the quality of the lens..."
the "Optics" bar at the graphic comparison is far shorter for the Coolpix. It looks like those graphic comparisons are meaningless.
JacquesBalthazar: Looks great. I have the A already, and love it. But I am pretty sure I'd love the GR even more. If only because I still have a GR1 film version in my bag, purchased back in the mid Nineties, that i truly enjoyed and that still works.
Wish I had known this one was about to be launched.
The 21mm adaptor is pretty cool as well and not an option for the Nikon. Optical quality of that adaptor will need to be tested.
I like the GR's grip a lot. Makes it easier to grab and pull from pocket than the A.
The A produces superb pictures. Judging by the corner test here, looks like the GR might be even more spectacular in that respect. .
One thing I certainly prefer in the A is the manual focus ring on the lens! That is more user friendly than the GR lever on the back. OTOH, Ricoh's "snap" feature is cool, even if one will have to consider much less forgiving DoF than with the small sensor GRs.
For the rest, feature list looks practically identical. The Nikon A is made in Japan. The GR?
Yes, finally a fair discussion of how it matters where the products are made. I remember how I bought a blender (which we actually didn’t need) several years ago in Walmart. I’ve bought it only and only because it was the only item not made in China (it was made in Spain) :-)
The “scoring bars” show far worse high ISO performance of the NEX-6 in comparison with the NEX-5N. Is this really possible, or it is just a result of the different review (expectations) time? I have been convinced that if the NEX-6 IQ is not better than the IQ of NEX-5N, definitely it is not worse.
h2k: Is the style and the word "retro" so captivating that you don't mention the sensor size in the news text?
It seems like the same sensor from their MINOX Digital Camera DC 1422
Ashley Pomeroy: Kodak reminds me of Atari, a little bit; they held the future in their hands for a while, but ended up little more than a bunch of patents, and then the only thing left was a name. I wonder if people will start stockpiling Ektar and Ektachrome and so forth?
Rather Amiga (Commodore).
jkrumm: They appear to have done a decent job with this. If you compare the raw file to the Lx5, Canon S95, and Olympus XZ-1, this camera is right in there at iso 800.
No, Canon, Nikon and very likely Samsung as well use SONY sensors for their P&S cameras. So far only Olympus/Panasonic and Fuji use their own sensor. However, because the sensor size of the FZ150 is identical with the SONY 12 Mp sensor, there is a faint possibility that FZ150 is equipped with the SONY sensor, which would be great, as this sensor is definitely one of the best. Panasonic sensors have been traditionally noisier than Sony's ones.
flektogon: Finally Sony HX100V gets a serious competitor. Well done Panasonic!
The same 12 Mp sensor (or similar made by Sony) is used in a high-end Pentax Q camera. Nikon P300 uses it as well. And Canon SX230. And many others. It looks like 12 Mp at 1/2.3" sensor is an "optimal" pixel density for contemporary cameras. I've bought Canon S90, because I am considering even those 12 Mp as too many. And 16 Mp is just crazy pixel density.
When comparing images of FZ150 and HS20 (at full resolution), FZ150 is far cleaner. Yes, switching HS20 to the reduced (8 Mp) mode helps. But still 6 years old 6 Mp S6500fd delivers better results. So, handling is one thing but performance is what usually counts. And I am not talking about poor IS, which is one of the weakest points of all Fuji cameras.
The last good Fuji camera was 6 Mp S6500fd. Since then Fuji is going downhill. FS100 was flawn with CA problems, HS20 has overheating problems, F550 has lens problems, etc. Fuji should be forbidden to make cameras. They should concentrate only and only on the sensors development. I do not even believe that X100 is their product. And if yes, then it happened by some mistake.
Just compare pictures taken with those 3 cameras, i.e. HS20, HX100V and FZ150. Look at them at 100% zoom. Both, HS20 and HX100V are closer to paintings than to photos. It is due to their 16 Mp sensors. Now the advantage of lower pixel density of the FZ150 sensor is pretty evident. I just do not understand why FZ 47, which apparently uses the same 12 Mp sensor, is not so good. Anyway, FZ150 is the camera to go!
Finally Sony HX100V gets a serious competitor. Well done Panasonic!
For the first time Nikon beats Canon. Pictures taken with this newest P7100 are definitely better than pictures from Canon S90/95/G11/G12. Because of the same sensor I think that the difference is due to better (finer) JPEG compression. Canon, provide us a new F/W with improved JPEG compression, otherwise, at least my next camera will be NIKON!!!
spoorthy: IF the new 24mp sensor is just as good as the 16mp sensor of last year, then imagine what they could have done if the crated a all new 10 or 12 mp sensor?
Exactly! Sadly, Sony is repeating their megapixel madness, which they started with 16 Mp sensor used in their P&S cameras.