ThomasSwitzerland: He was a hero standing in front of the whole, more than photos with a tank.
There is no question that he did NOT do it for any reason other than honor and integrity. His pay-off and his reputation would have been much higher if he had remained silent. All who honor integrity do, in fact, honor this man.
Maloy is a jealous little troll. Ignore him. His ignorance is so thick you could cut it with a knife.
rrr_hhh: I read Woodford's interview and what he says sounds wrong. He has sour grapes and plays the victim's role, but he just sounds like an angry looser, trying to harm Olympus as much as he cans. He sounds like a manipulator and insinuating things for which he has no proof (like the involvement of the Japanese mafia).He making a meditation retreat with Buddhists ? And giving his money to charity ? Let me laugh, it is not because you stay three days with Buddhists that what you did before was right and how much did he give to charity ? Many people are giving to charity ! And even if he gave half of what he received he still got way more money from Olympus than what most people earn in 20 years ! I will believe it when I see the list of beneficiaries and how much each actually received and testimonies of what they could achieve with his gifts. Poor soul ! He may have uncovered real problems, but he used the wrong way to solve them : he just tried to use them to his own advantage.
Comments from Olympus fan-boys who know nothing about the situation and nothing about Japan, really crack me up. This guy did the right thing under terrible circumstances. As for the Yakuza involvement: very, very credible. They simply permeate this society and the risk was real. I've live in Japan for 20 years, have faced similar, ugly situations and fraud is destroying this country. He did the right thing and deserves ten times what he got in compensation.
JohnRinJapan: For my money, this is the perfect pocket camera at this price-point. As the technology develops and sensor prices drop, they really just need to make the sensor larger, oh and maybe add in-camera panorama-stitching. That's it. It fills up my pocket perfectly and handles like a dream.
I just checked Adorama: the G1X costs 799 dollars. It is available *used* for 549 dollars. Hey Howard, did you buy yours used? LOL The G15 costs 499 dollars. That is a 60.12% difference. Case closed, point proved, I win. ;-)
Good for you, Howard! Attaboy! Unfortunately, a miss is as good as a mile in this case. A 500 dollar price point (in round numbers) is still not a 600 dollar price point (in round numbers). Why do so many people on this comments board lack critical-thinking skills? A missed price-point is a missed price-point. And you still can't put the G1X in your shirt pocket. ;-) FYI: at the time I posted, the price difference at B&H and Yodobashi was indeed 60%. Adorama is irrelevant to me as they will not ship it to Japan. Cheers.
Bruce W Roeser: Best pocket-sized Canon I've ever owned. Worth the price.
It fits all of my shirt pockets except the polo shirts: business, casual, everything. Except the polos. Slips in nicely, can carry it there all day. Of course, I am 6 foot one inch tall and weigh 70kg (154lbs). Not exactly a huge guy. Your mileage may vary.
I said, "this price-point", too. ;-) The G1X is 60% more expensive.
Well, I did say, "pocket camera". ;-)
mark moe: So DP review continues its inconsistent award system... Let's see, in the past week two Gold awards in the same category--almost pocketable zooms (Canon, Panasonic).
And when the camera that virtually professional reviewer says "the best pocket camera" they give a silver. Fine. Imaging resource reviews are better anyway. They emphasize print output and are consistent.
BTW: this negative comment is directed at the "poor officiating" here not at the camera. Enjoy your pursesable camera. Being a guy I'll stick to the best pocketable camera.
G15 is perfectly pocketable, I fit it in my (none-too-large) business shirt pocket all the time. And your sneering sexism is not appreciated.
For my money, this is the perfect pocket camera at this price-point. As the technology develops and sensor prices drop, they really just need to make the sensor larger, oh and maybe add in-camera panorama-stitching. That's it. It fills up my pocket perfectly and handles like a dream.
Mark Chan: Obviously going to come off as an OLY fanboy, but I do not understand how your review did not mention the XZ-1 OR the newer XZ-2 as comparable competition, and have to actually resort to mentioning the Nikon 1 series or m43.
I have held the XZ-2, and its is equally built like a tank; has the fast AF akin to that of the PEN series if not the RX100, and has a nice f1.8 - 2.5 lens, albeit shorter (112 vs 140 at long end). I would expect that your reviews do mention competition in its entirety.
Oh btw, the XZ-2 is a lighter package WITH a similarly sized sensor.
price point is different on the XZ-2.
luxor2: As shown in the photo of the poor hipster trying to use the viewfinder, the finder is placed poorly for easy use, he has to jam it into his nose and tilt his head to peer thru it. Horizons probably won't be level, a "hipster camera" look?However, finder is good for vertical shots.
I have an almost comically long nose and have not found the finder to be a problem. Not that there couldn't be an even better position, but honestly I don't even think about it. It feels very natural.
ProfHankD: Hmm. Isn't this most directly competing with the Fuji X10?
The specs and form factor are strikingly similar, as are the dpreview scores, although Canon's late entry somehow gets gold while the year-older X10 gets silver? Not saying I love the X10 (I only have one because of software I wrote to fix the white orb problem), but I don't see why it isn't at least one of the defaults for comparison with the G15.
When I was shopping (just bought the G15 yesterday), I did not consider X10 and G15 to be in the same class *for myself*. My upper, upper limit was 50,000 yen. The X10 runs about 20% more. Also, I really wanted a camera that could fit in my shirt pocket. The G15 does this. Barely, but it does. If I was a little richer and had pockets just a wee bit bigger, I might have gone for the Fuji. I love so much else about it.
Digitall: Houston, we have a problem.
Will someone please enlighten me?
The significance of the medals worth the importance we want to give, but would like to understand the following situation:
Sony RX100 78% Overall score = Silver medal
Canon G15 76% Overall score = Gold medal
Good heavens, how hard is it to understand that a high score doesn't equal a Gold medal? One year, a high score gets a gold, in the Olympics. Another year, the same high score (out of a fixed total, such as gymnastics) gets only a silver. Why? The competition was better! Additionally there are intangibles which can be commented on in the Medals which are not commented on in the more objective Scores. It's all very above board.
timo: At the risk of being dismissed as a Pentax fanboy, I would respectfully ask why the K30, which scored three points more on the (admittedly dubious) scoring system, got only a 'Silver Award'; while this Canon got a 'Gold Award'?
It would be ignoble to suggest that DPReview has regard to which camera companies butter its bread, so I won't. But I would welcome an explanation.
I cannot speak for the editors, but in some categories a 76% might be worth a Gold because it's really hard to get even that high a score. But, in another category, it is relatively easy to get a 78%. We see this in the Olympics all the time. It all depends on general expectations from the class, other competitors scores, etc. Plus there are intangibles: the simple feeling of joy that one gets from handling the G15 is quite remarkable, for example.
Teru Kage: How much longer can prosumer DCs like this last? Traditionally, these have served as niche cameras to bridge the gap between compact DCs and D-SLRs. But with the introduction of MILC cameras, I can't see much of an argument in favor of buying pro-DCs. The size and price difference is negligible, and the performance of the MILCs are generally a few stops higher.
Not ridiculous at all. I shopped extensively and handled many, many cameras over the period of a month or so. As you might expect, Tokyo is camera heaven, so it was easy to get my hands on everything. I set a budget, which in effect gave me a sensor size, and then just went out and played with cameras. It really came down to the G15 and the Nikon 7700. The G15 won because: 1. It has an integral lens protector; 2. I can actually fit it in my business shirt pocket; 3. It has exactly the amount of zoom I wanted and not a bit more; 4. The lens is faster; 5. I did not want an articulating screen, feeling them more appropriate for video cameras. I am more into stills; 6. In spite of never having handled a Canon before (I am a Nikon SLR guy), I was able, from a cold start (no reading, no prep of any kind) I was able to figure out the operation of the camera in a minute. One. Minute. Standing in the shop. This Canon is a masterpiece.
MaxiMax: Canon PowerShot G15: 76% score, given a gold award.Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100: 78% score, given a silver award????
I thought that 78% was higher than 76%.
Anyway, in my opinion, the RX100 is in a very different class than the G15.
Camera scores are only comparable within the same class, I think. Are these cameras in the same class? Price, sensor size, etc?