Actually, the 1" sensor is 4x the size of the 1/2" sensor. When comparing sensor sizes, you compare surface area, not linear #s. Area, or rather photosite area, is a good indicator of SNR, which is always a square of the linear difference.
AngryCorgi: Weak camera is still weak. 512pix x 512pix photos for $400 is comical.
Actually, the hardware resolution is 540 x 540 (sorry, I was a hair off). They say the native resolution is 1080 x 1080, but that is interpolated up.
$800??! If that rumor turns out to be true, that's some serious sticker-shock!
Rehashing a great camera is fine, but not at a HIGHER price.
Weak camera is still weak. 512pix x 512pix photos for $400 is comical.
It's a shame that it shall be obscenely overpriced. :(
Greynerd: Living in gale battered England it is always intriguing how in the US you can build houses on the beach. You must have very good weather most of the time punctuated occasionally by storms of the like we never see.
The reality is that there will always be an occasional bad-weather-event, so even if there is usually reasonable weather, building a house almost in the water to start off with is moronic. It never fails that the same idiots who build their houses on the beach or below sea level act surprised and shocked when weather does arrive. We are all supposed to pretend its a tragedy, but the real tragedy is that anyone was foolish enough to build in these locations in the first place. Stupidity is tragic.
absolute waste of money...
They should be selling this for right at $1000. Not sure what the extra $300 on the price tag is all about.
Image (a) is ridiculously awful, while image (b) is just plain terrible. I'd prefer NEITHER please.
Meh...I have seen very, very few complaints on DPR of people getting bad results from adapters, and I swear the pickiest people on Earth use this website. In practice, its just not a real issue.
MrTaikitso: I don't think these a special at all I am afraid and cannot believe how people on DPreview commenting think otherwise. My Samsung Galaxy Note (original one) took way better pictures. More punchy, clean etc. The noise in these is terrible and that's even allowing for it being a phone camera. (I have no bias towards any manufacturer.) Sorry to be a bubble burster!
My Samsung Galaxy Note.........I have no bias towards any manufacturer.
These panos look freaking great for having been made on a camera phone. Really nice stitching on the image borders. I'm shocked.
The 1 system was dead, but this actually delivers a small breath of new life. Having a niche product and pricing it like a mass-market product should ensure it gets a lot of looks at least from that small market and maybe even some looking for more flexibility.
Glad to see a conventional sensor option in the lineup. Will be nice to see some results from a good-old Bayer-filtered sensor. :)
Greatly appreciate them offering a non-xtrans option...if this rumor is legit. They have opened up another category of the market that was annoyed by the raw-processing issues and demosaicing weaknesses of the x-trans scheme. The x-trans filtering scheme has some benefits but also some critical weaknesses.
Congrats to Fuji for a move toward broader acceptance.
Interesting, but even in bright daylight, the image quality is terrible. The samples on their website are noisy and grainy in all conditions.
Very nice. Seems Nikon is finally listening to consumers in regard to their P&S cams. Same great lens and sensor and now a much desired good-resolution EVF. Well done!
Oh well...good price, but the highest I have is CS2. Guess I lose out and still won't be buying in.
This is the ugliest design for a smart watch I've ever seen.
If the QX100 was the size of the QX10, it would be a LOT more attractive.
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review