mosc: 5.2" screen yikes. I guess I'm getting old.
f2.0 1/2.33" 20mp is an impressive spec. You have to step to a 1" sensor to match that kind of resolution without diffraction. Certainly a tall task to get a sharp f2.0 lens that small for that "large" a sensor and to capture 20mp with a general purpose phone processor with quality but spec wise this should put any sub-1" camera to shame on the wide end.
Might even need to be stopped down once in a while for god's sake. I take it, the aperture is fixed. What's the fastest shutter you can shoot this thing with?
I did the math, it's not.
mosc: Mr. Rehm, well done. Lots of great detail here.
It would be nice to see a 1" sensor camera in the studio comparisons like the RX100m3 or similar. This is certainly a phone with a nice camera but it's priced higher than 1" sensor compact cameras so it's not quite that simple moving beyond pocket space.
It's telling you mentioned the compromises against a smartphone and against a camera, I appreciated you discussing both sides of it.
Personally, I'm not happy with this latest generation of phablet takeovers. Remember when every new phone got smaller? I also think the 1080p screen is a nice balance between detail, native content, and battery drain I'm not convinced there's much value in higher resolution displays. Battery life is a major feature of your phone (and camera). Pushing resolutions beyond 400ppi is just not worth it. I hope panasonic tries again for 2015 with a newer processor, bigger battery, better camera stuff, and the exact same frame/screen.
Thanks for the link. That is indeed quite a bit of difference. The CM1 looks more a match for a 1/1,7" sensor camera like the S120. Even that's a stretch. Maybe that should be discussed in more detail in the review.
Cheng Bao: So, since Japanese hate number 4, why sony named their latest model as Z4 in Japan, and Z3+ elsewhere?
isn't 4 a bad luck number in Japan?
SergioBR: "with 20MP camera" of the same bad camera ! Overexposed photos, grainy, full of noise etc. Yes it's a great phone but the camera is a shame. All the others with the same sensor can take better photos.
F2.0 lens (for 1/2.33") is not a miniscule aperture. It's enough physical aperture to have 20mp worth of information no doubt. Whither it's sharp enough and the sensor is sensitive enough is another question but unlike previous phones that push resolution, this has the physical aperture to back it up without diffraction.
5.2" screen yikes. I guess I'm getting old.
Mr. Rehm, well done. Lots of great detail here.
mosc: Clearly a superzoom review is in the making. I have some suggestions:
1) Take an FZ200, blow off the dust, and do a 2x crop to 1200mm . Shoot all these f-nothing superzooms and shoot them all at 1200mm. Downsample to 2mp and lets see what's what.2) Repeat the same exercise using crops of other formats at 1200mm. For example a Canon 24mp APS-C with a 16-300 Tameron (or other 300mm cheapy) cropped to 1200mm. Should just about get to 2mp3) Try an FZ1000 400mm cropped 3x to 1200mm equiv, also around 2mp
I think it would really help to show the actual results for something as extreme as 1200mm you can already get out of much more general purpose type solutions. Maybe shed some light (or show the lack of light more accurately) on the real value of incredibly long zoom ranges at well past diffraction resolution/aperture/sensor sizes.
I think what grasscatcher describes would be an interesting DPR article.
I think it'd be useful for people who ask "question: what's it like to shoot 1200mm" to hear answer: you already do it trying to pull high resolutions from much larger apertures on many typical telephoto lenses on a variety of formats. The amount of detail (easily substituted for reach in this context) against diffraction is a line walked by many systems and many lenses and simply stamping 16mp ~2000mm equiv on the side of a camera doesn't mean you're getting that kind of detail. Or any additional detail really compared to other telephoto lenses with similar physical apertures.
Clearly a superzoom review is in the making. I have some suggestions:
Karroly: All the pics in the gallery look underexposed...
mosc: "Unfortunately, the Rebels don't support exposure compensation via auto ISO in M mode."I have to say that until DPR started hammering this focus of control I did not shoot this way but I've seen the light and I agree it is really the best way to go. Even in JPG only shooting, it's very handy. I think the real point is in the digital world, ISO is far less significant a parameter than film guys think and really the user wants to set shutter and aperture. Throwing in some exposure compensation to protect some more dynamic content is nice.
Fewer and fewer lenses need to be stopped down for sharpness, particularly in smaller formats. I love locking the camera into the widest possible aperture, having the flexibility of a really low or really fast shutter depending on what I'm actually trying to accomplish creatively, and having the camera figure out the rest.
Rishi, purely a technique question here but I sometimes get around the limits of base ISO by using exposure compensation rather than changing my aperture or shutter to block out light.
I often go full manual locking aperture at open, base ISO and hopefully use neither instead changing shutter creatively and cheating with exposure compensation for a little help on the metering. I haven't tried it on a big DSLR (not that I own one) but it seems to work reasonably well for more restrictive control cameras. Is there a better way?
"Unfortunately, the Rebels don't support exposure compensation via auto ISO in M mode."I have to say that until DPR started hammering this focus of control I did not shoot this way but I've seen the light and I agree it is really the best way to go. Even in JPG only shooting, it's very handy. I think the real point is in the digital world, ISO is far less significant a parameter than film guys think and really the user wants to set shutter and aperture. Throwing in some exposure compensation to protect some more dynamic content is nice.
sykkys: Canon owners have been claiming dynamic range isnt everything for a while, but I bet they will claim otherwise when(if) the Canon starts making better sensors.
Cameras are tools, some tools turn out to be better than others. I mean, I never understood brand loyalty. Why would you want to be played by camera companies? I wonder if they feel the same way about their vacum cleaners and dish washers.
Brand loyalty is in a lens mount you've invested in more than your car. On the softer side it's about less variance in user experience, controls, and philosophy between products leading to shorter learning curves and efficient usage.
There's a bug on it. Too bad it's so shallow a DOF you coudl probably get a usable macro shot of it out of this thing... from a foot away 50mm! sick.
hypnotic macro detail from this kind of distance is almost disturbing.
karsh: I would have expected DPReview to post images that represents more the quality of this lens ! A lot of pictures are underexposed + motion blur ! I own this lens and pictures are FAR BETTER than this ! Guys... you also used one of the best dynamic range camera on the market, the D810... Should be up to revision...
Rishi, I don't mean to be facetious but can you answer "why?". I understand higher resolution means less angular movement in the exposure time before it spills from one pixel to the next but why is shutter/mirror-induced shock more of an issue here than normal?
eddychan008: 85mm 5.6 lens and 42.5mm 2.8 with same diameter of aperture.... that's right because this is how the aperature value is defined.
A 85mm lens at 2.8 may capture 4 times as much light as 42.5mm at 2.8 but at the same time this light is distributed over 4 times as big an area so to each pixel of each respective sensor still get the same amount of light on it if exposed for same shutter speed, same iso and same "aperture".
It is not the same as saying the smaller sensor has to bring the brightness level up with less total light captured ?
The light to noise ratio would be 4x better only if the pixels were the same size on the two sensors. If that were the case, the larger sensor would have 4x the resolution. If they're the same MP but different sizes (and equally sensitive), then they each offer the same diffraction limit, depth of field, and noise though the ISO displayed would be different to give the same brightness.
mosc: Survival comes before the rule of law. I wish more wealthy citizens would fully understand this. If you don't provide for the basic survival (physical and mental) and well being of an individual, they will in turn have no regard for your legislation. Prison is not a deterrent when you have no food to eat. It's an ancient concept. Stealing a loaf of bread to avoid starvation is a moral act.
You cannot legislate (ban underage sex trafficing) your way out of this problem because the issue is not one where the rule of law applies. It's a socioeconomic problem.
Didn't expect to see this on DPR but it's interesting.
"embarassed/psychologically battered to call their parents/law enforcement for help" does express part of the problem. Children leave home for a variety of reasons. Sometimes it's to avoid abuse. Others it's because of trama or mental instability. Regardless, the individual does not have the social support to survive on their own. The cycle of poverty is not new and is not broken by victim blaming.
It is irresponsible to expect these kids are exposed to these situations by their own failings. Exerting independence should not mean having to reach out to illegal sources for food and shelter. They fall into this trap because they need to eat, they need to survive, and for whatever reason feel alone. That's a socioeconomic issue.
snapa: Now, if they can only update the 3.5 year old sensor, they will really have something worthy of consideration. Changing body material, colors, firmware updates is nice, but... a new improved sensor would be even better, IMHO.
I'd also add that the multi-capture shift mode depends on micro-movements of the stabilization system which need percision in proportion with the pixel pitch. In other words a higher resolution m43 sensor would require a similarly more accurate OIS motor to maintain the multi-capture mode. Since the complaints on this mode were mostly to do with the total exposure time, it seems like this feature might die on a theoretical 24mp m43s sensor. Motors don't improve at the same rate as sensor technology.
Survival comes before the rule of law. I wish more wealthy citizens would fully understand this. If you don't provide for the basic survival (physical and mental) and well being of an individual, they will in turn have no regard for your legislation. Prison is not a deterrent when you have no food to eat. It's an ancient concept. Stealing a loaf of bread to avoid starvation is a moral act.