Rooru S: no mention of the QX100...it has a 3.5x zoom with a 1.0 Type Sensor too...! and a better bracket to mount it on several types of mobile phones... Perhaps because DPR doesn't want to hurt DxO?
Right, now that Olympus sponsoring is gone you have to make do with whatever money they throw at you...
John Thawley: https://flickr.com/photos/38348003@N05/sets/72157654328514118
Not bad. Not bad at all.
I find all the hate comments hard to understand. This is a perfectly valid product, but I can't help noticing whatever DxO does is always followed by this kind of bitter criticism. Again, I can't understand it. Is it because DxO are a french company? Some neoconservative hard feelings still hovering around, perhaps? The 'freedom fries' brigade up in arms? People should save their criticism for a time when there are sample images to evaluate the merits - or lack thereof - of the ONE. Claiming it's not good because it won't fit when iPhone covers are on is ridiculous.Hélas...
Bev81 from France: Note: The editor learned French a long time ago and to a relatively poor standard. As such, translations provided in this article are based on minimal research and may contain inaccuracies.
Not bad Barney. Could have been much worse :)
Just curious where you really did learn french.Frankly, you knew "une couille dans le potage" ???
It's perfectly OK, Barney :)
That's 'a testicle in the soup.' Makes a lot of sense.
Pepe Le Pew-style french, anyone? :)
Can we still call this a 'compact' camera?
This is sports photography with a difference. I was particularly impressed by pics no.4, 7 and 8. Great timing. Well done, Martin!
lbjack: Amazing all the carping here, that pulling photos from cine is useless or not real photography or that burst mode is sufficient.
The first rule in photography is GET THE SHOT.With continuous shooting your chances of getting the shot improve exponentially, even over burst mode.8 Mp is a benchmark for quality. It will get you "Photo Quality" up to 16" x 20" and "Excellent" up to 20" x 30".
Of course, all this depends on the sensor and the processing algorithms. But in principle, cameras like this are a watershed.
I'm one of those carping. My motto is: "Carp Diem".
For some reason this makes me think of fishing with dragnets.
richtea777: what is worrying me here is what appear to be hot pixels scattered all over the place in shadow areas in lower light shots.....check out the bottom row of chairs in the foreground of library shot , the one that has had adjustment.....its concerning as its only ISO 320 ! with some boosted shadows
Richtea777: no matter how hard I looked, I couldn't find any hot pixels. Anyway, if there are any, that isn't necessarily related to the ISO value. I used to get them at ISO 100 in long exposures. According to Ken Rockwell, every digital camera produces them. Hot pixels have to do with sensor temperature (as the name suggests), not with ISO sensitivity. I had the sensor cleaned and the problem seemed to go away - only to return later. It was so infuriating it led me to abandon long exposures with digital cameras.
rds: Leicas, sadly, have become bling, status symbols, Christmas gifts Mick Jagger gives his posse. *** You won't become Cartier-Bresson by getting a Leica, and photography is not and never has been about the tool. It's about being there and seeing. If C-B were around today he'd use an iPhone or a GoPro.
Don Sata, that's true. Some of his portraits, in particular, are so unsharp you'd be forgiven to think those would be write-offs. It's true that he aimed at the heart of the image, even though his 'decisive moment' ethos is not what many people believe it is. The 'decisive moment' is the elusive instant when everything in the framing forms a significant composition.JF69: go bother someone else. I don't have patience for false morals and hypocrites. Just get out of the way. YOU are the only troll here.
I like radissimo's reply. I love it when debating photography turns into a discussion on supernatural. It's happening all the time.Henri Cartier-Bresson came to me all dressed in white, with two angels (also dressed in white) by his side, and told me: "I need a GoPro to shoot St. Peter's cats. Life doesn't get very animated in Heaven, you know. There are no street scenes or anything. And they don't allow Leicas up there. Oh well." (All in french, of course; it was not 'oh well', but 'hélas'.)Actually it wasn't HC-B but Mary, Mother of Jesus, who was talking to me. I fell on my knees and found out I died of boredom while reading comments on dpreview. Mary kept saying: "you should talk to JF69. You should talk to JF69."
So I assume 'stupid' is less offensive than 'silly' for you, right?
JF69, you really should curb your aggressivity. The discussion was going along nicely until your rather blunt reply. Try not to be rude - if at all possible.
ManuelVilardeMacedo: Even Leica has to survive in this business - hence the Panasonic clones and the T series. They need it in order to continue producing the most desirable cameras in the world, the M series rangefinder cameras, as well as the M-mount lenses, which quality is second to none.The fact that digital has democratised photography led to there being crowds who will never comprehend the 'M' concept; this explains the incessant Leica criticism we read here everytime Leica launches whatever product. The Leicas are not for those who buy cameras based on specifications.It's true Leica exposes themselves to ridicule every now and then with those Safari, Hermés, Titanium and Correspondent limited editions, but that's part of the business: as long as there are people willing to buy them, why not? It's a win-win deal.I don't have the money for a Leica; even if I had, I couldn't care less for rangefinder systems - but I respect the fact Leicas are aspirational products for discerning photographers.
Zlatko, I found the assertion that Canon was doing the workflow for Sebastião Salgado very doubtful - to say the least. People really should stop making unfounded statements. You're right, that's how myths get spread on the internet.
Glad you're more sensible now than you were in your first comment. There's no way of knowing what HC-B would use today, save for a seance...Henri Cartier-Bresson wasn't exactly a pixel peeper, but he was extremely demanding about the quality of his prints. I've been to many photography exhibitions, but so far I've seen nothing that could be compared to what I saw at a HC-B exhibition I saw last summer. The prints have an almost tridimensional feel to it, the tones were superb and the pictures had a tactile feel. It needs to be seen to be believed. There's none of the plasticky look of current photographic paper, and the pictures seem to have a life of their own. (Incidentally, this exhibition induced me more respect for Leica and the Tri-X film.) I doubt digital files from an iPhone would look the same if printed onto silver paper. That's not bashing the iPhone, it's just an impression I get from what I've seen thus far.
Now the debate is finally getting interesting! PhotoKhan and Mfritter, I found this article on Sebastião Salgado's printing method some time ago: http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2013/09/dxo-film-pack-and-salgados-method.htmlI didn't find any evidence that it is Canon that provides him this 'workflow', but I can't exclude such possibility either. If they do, that might explain why Salgado is using Canons now.
Those suppositions are absurd. At HC-B's time there were lots of compact, unobtrusive cameras: Olympus Trip, Rollei 35, Ricoh GR, etc. There was even the Leica CL. He used none of them. Why should he use a smartphone or a GoPro?As for the smartphone's prints quality: they may be fine - as long as they're sharp, white balance is correct and there isn't too much noise -, but not quite in the same league as an enlargement on silver paper.If you want to fool yourselves by pretending HC-B would use a smartphone if he were alive, that's OK with me. I appreciate a good laugh.