Mister Roboto: Yuck it is ugly!
yes, ugly, the perfect "homage" to hasselblad rebrands, but with more functionality
lap777: 1st place surely got his butt kicked by the horse after setting of a flash in its eye, so he deserved at least a prize ;)
butt kicked by the horse?? i tought it was a selfie taken by the horse itself!!!
I still don't see why this organic sensor is better than another sensor technologies Panasonic is researching like this one:http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/02/04/panasonic-promises-high-sensitivity-sensors-using-micro-color-splittersThis one looks far more revolutionary than fuji's x-trans idea and or even than x-trans and organic sensors combined. Might in fact be really close to the performance of a foveon sensor witout the cost
bcalkins: Sounds promising!
Bayer sensors use each pixel's area to pick information on only 1 of the 3 colors it uses to build images... that means by pcking just 1 color you are trowing away 2/3 of the incident light, there was already a research about a sensor wich used a lens for each pixel, that separated the 3 colors to different angles so each one would be picked by an individual photocite, wich would be like picking almost 100% of incident light (think of the 3ds screen inversed )...i see more future on that, even if the eficiency is not 100%
Marty4650: I really love the polite and tactful nature of some of the negative comments about the camera...
"Mercifully, the Coolpix A avoids the recent Coolpix tradition of poor data transfer and firmware quirks - it works just as responsively and dependably as the company's DSLRs."
The "recent Coolpix tradition"... what a hoot! For me, this is a sign of gifted writer, with a sharp wit.
I want to point that THAT (oh english) negative comment you mention, is actually about one good thing... So, the intention is actually giving a bad impression even about this good feature??? I have seen this before... its called "killing the messenger", and is used when the object of the critic is not bad itself, so you discredit the "doer" for other past actions. I think i went too far :/
WildSammy: what? "We weren't particularly impressed by the Nokia Lumia 920" ? for me the pictures from Nokia looks the best from the rest of junk..
i guess that implies it just delivered the picture quality spected from a smartphone... wich, being the best right now, is still not impressing
Its a great idea, but not for the average smartphone user... if you are a wildlife freak and already are used to carry a lot of equipment, this would be a great add-on that will make you dust-off all those old scopes and give them new life... i guess that concept might bring back to life a lot of different old devices.
TheProv: Day Galaxy S4, night Lumia 920. End of games.
If I had to do only a name, Lumia 920. Even if in the morning light it doesn't perform well, thanks to CRAZY nokia's noise-reduction and sharpening algoritms, it's still more than adequate for web (@2mpx) and little prints.
If you can buy S4 for daylight and Lumia 920 for night, I say choose one, with the rest of the money buy a camera that will perform better than both, in day and night. It will cost you the same and take the same space, cuse you are still carrying two devices.
Mssimo: Very creative but am I the only one that thinks the internals look like a bomb?
try doing THAT in the US right now
ingram98ab: The sensor of the hasselblad H5D (40MP is enough), in a body size and control layer of the olympus OM-D E-M5, and at the price of the nex-6, of course mirrorles with interchangeable lenses...God, if manufacturers tought they could get some feedback....
OOps, i forgot the H5D uses CCD.. change it for a faster CMOS please... with large fries and extra pickles
The sensor of the hasselblad H5D (40MP is enough), in a body size and control layer of the olympus OM-D E-M5, and at the price of the nex-6, of course mirrorles with interchangeable lenses...God, if manufacturers tought they could get some feedback....
Yeah, who said art filters are just for mainstream point-and-shoots??... i will have to compare to other full frame camera's shots tough... 12800 is not an ISO im always counting on...
I didnt spect to see any fringing from a fixed non-zoom lens camera this expensive, but there it is... also i gree that there could be daylight shots above ISO 100... i dont know, maybe trying to freeze a bird in flight, maybe inside some building... get creative!.
Usee: The GH3 has about everything I wanted to see in the successor of the GH2...
...the only thing that could be the show stopper is the IQ......has it the fine grain of the Fuji XPro 1 or the Sigma DP1s in conjunction with Silkypix Pro?
How is the spectral response including fine color gradations?Can one completely disable the noise reduction within Silkypix?
The specs on the datasheet are perfect for my needs - including a suited body for my hands, whilst still lightweight in comparison to a D7000......and a silent mode: wild animals and church visitors love that!
I'm curious to see the first RAW's for download and the performance of the 12-35 mm F2.8 - I hope the lens will deliver outstanding image quality across the whole frame and wide open - without software correction!
All in all, the GH3 seems to be the camera I was waiting for... :-)
I love how you compare wild animals to church visitors!! XD... even when you actually meant wild animal photographers. I like this panny too
c'mon, it's just a camera ;)... why nobody is saying something...pricing??
Sdaniella: Sony Sensor Densities:
SLT-A57 = ~212.7 pixels/mm (lower APS-C model) = ~16.7MpNEX-5N = ~213.1 pixels/mm (lower APS-C model) = ~16.5MpNEX-7/SLT-A77 = ~259.7 pixels/mm (higher APS-C model) = ~24.7Mp
Nikon Sensor Densities (from Sony):D3200 = ~262.8 pixels/mm (lower APS-C model) = ~24.7MpD800 = ~206.7 pixels/mm (lower FF model) = ~36.8MpD4 = ~138.9 pixels/mm (higher FF model) = ~16.6Mp
Samsung Sensor Densities:NX-20/NX-210 = ~242.0 pixels/mm (high-end APS-C model) = ~21.6Mp
sits just slightly better (lower density; larger pixel) than NEX-7/SLT-A77but not as low density as NEX-5N, so overall NX IQ could exceed either NEX/SLT models if Samsung has made pixel sensor progress.
Ja, i think the first line "Sony Sensor densities" just applies for the 3 sony sensors right below it, just as the "nikon sensor densities" line applies for the 3 nikon sensors below it. There's just an extra space there. Still, i would like to know the source too, it's a great bite of information, thanx sdyue!!
Peter Nelson: This is the first camera that is making me think of selling my Canon 1DsMkII. The new Olympus E-M5 from it's dimentions will fit into my pants front pocket without a lens. The lens will be in another pocket.I have the E-P1 and I just verified once again that even with the VF-1 optical viewfinder mounted, the E-P1 fit's into my fount pocket (without a lens). The dimentions are close enough between the E-P1 and E-M5. I like to have a good camera on my person.My Panasonic G1 can be forced into my pants pocket but it seems so difficult to get it back out (without lens). The problem is the front to back distance/ size of the G1 EVF with the built in pop up flash.E-M5 with it's great jpg. color's, multiple external contol knobs,16mp, IBIS, good Higher ISO, EVF, flip up rear lcd, AND it's pocketable (without lens). This look's like the camera I have been waiting for. I will just use the Function 2 button as my ISO button and set the WB via the F1 button. I am well pleased with Olympus!
Wouldn't be much cheaper buying pants with bigger pockets instead of another camera??
I would feel confident using ISO3200, as long as I wont photograph furry things... in the dark... wich would be a bigger problem than the noise itself.
Nobody seems surprised that Daniel Craig appeared in the samples... is he a regular in DPreview's Hands-on reviews??? Or photographers just dont care??
ShatteredSky: According to the manual there are 17.2 total MPs, and 16.05 MP used. Hmmmm ....
that "extra MP" could be the "spare pixels" that you use when you change the form factor of the picture... if you put the sensor in a circle and you fit a 16:9 and a 4:3 photo inside the circle, most of the area is shared in both formats, but the edges are not, the 16:9 is wider and the 4:3 is taller... could it be?