AngryCorgi: I don't hate this camera. I think it "looks" sexy with the grip on it. But the price remains stupid given its performance. It simply is outclassed in terms of IQ by just about everything.
Set the comparison tool to ISO1600 with the J3, FZ1000, G16, and RX100-III. Set the quality to "Print" and walk around the image. The G16 is closer to the J3 than the J3 is to either of the competing 1" sensors. This is just SNR. The color accuracy and dynamit range are also poorer than its competitors.
The other 1" sensor'd cameras (RX10, RX100, FZ1000) outperform the 1" sensor used in the V3 by a healthy margin. There are compact P&S cameras that are on par with the V3 in terms of IQ (S120, G16, P340, etc). With the kind of deficit the V3 has in terms of IQ, the pricing should be more competitive. As it is, the pricing isn't remotely competitive. It's $500 more than a RX100 mk3, $300 more than an FZ1000, $200 more than an RX10 and many, many times more expensive than the P&S cameras with which it shares many IQ qualities. All that for a little faster AF and poorer IQ? That's absurd.
I don't hate this camera. I think it "looks" sexy with the grip on it. But the price remains stupid given its performance. It simply is outclassed in terms of IQ by just about everything.
AngryCorgi: Leica seems to have stumbled toward the path labeled "Hassleblad".
The lenses in the M system are not cheap compromises with large price tags; they are competent-to-phenomenol performers with large price tags. Hence the term "all hat and no cattle".
It's not simply a matter of rebadging, but of selling the badge with no substance behind it. Something you cant say about the M-system; this camera is all hat and no cattle.
Leica seems to have stumbled toward the path labeled "Hassleblad".
Love the last one. These are great.
I really, really appreciate that DPR put this little hands-on review together. I know it's not a mass-market product, but I really like to see these kinds of articles that shed some light on the less well-known aspects of the photography universe.
AngryCorgi: I predict a whole lot of trying, but not a lot of buying in this offer. Still, it's a cool idea by Sigma.
You make a very good point. Sigma cams are very difficult to happen upon at US retailers.
I predict a whole lot of trying, but not a lot of buying in this offer. Still, it's a cool idea by Sigma.
mosc: The RX10 cropped at 1.43x is f2.8 with a smaller sensor and matches the panasonic's speed. That equates to a zoom range of 286mm. The panasonic is only "better" in terms of light gathering from 300-400mm than the RX10. It's not much of an advantage and only when you're really far away.
These graphs need to include digital zoom equivalent apertures. Especially with 1" to APSC sized sensors, there's lots of room to crop.
But an RX10 cropped to 1.43x is only delivering a 10MP image. How is that supposed to compare with the Panny at 20MP and 300/f4 or 400/f4?? No, these graphs are fine like they are. If anything they need to account for resolution variance, but that is not at issue in this comparison of like-resolution cameras.
Sonyshine: Sony needs to cut the price if they don't want to lose significant sales to the Panasonic.
Half? Ummm. Keep on dreaming. Best Buy has the RX10 for $999 ($100 more than the Panny). There is less than 0.01% chance they will drop the price to $500 to compete with a $900 camera.
Really like the colors on the Panny videos more than the colors on the Sony video. Both are competent cameras, but at $899, the Panny just seems like the best value.
AngryCorgi: That fieldscope is gauranteed to be poop in terms of IQ. Like a $50 ebay "telephoto lens".
6x4s?? Low standard there. Yeah, probably....same standard we hold entry-level P&S super-zooms to.
That fieldscope is gauranteed to be poop in terms of IQ. Like a $50 ebay "telephoto lens".
Expensive but nice!
gregbartgis: I really do wish you'd also include shooting results with 4/3 sensors. They're becoming ubiquitous and there are quite a few of us who would love to have such a lens for use on our Oly's and Panny's. If there are compatibility problems, please explain. If the lens is just too unsharp to be used on anything smaller than APS-C, please inform. I love the idea of having a zoom with the reach of one the equivalent of 300 - 1200mm on FF. There are presently no supertelephoto lenses of very appreciable focal length being made for small sensor cameras. This one would be a treat.
Yeah, Brendon is right. Why would the parent companies make an adapter that allows you to purchase OTHER PEOPLE's LENSES??
This lens is not offered in MFT mount. They couldn't test it there without using an adapter of some sort, which could skew the performance and be unfair to the product.
ThePhilips: "[...] the company responsible for such iconic products as the Box Brownie and Kodachrome [...]"
On a slow news day, DPR actually can actually review some of the classical cameras like Brownie or Leica or Contax. Having them in the studio comparator would be interesting.
P.S. I hope one still can buy film?
P.P.S. That reminds. We are obsessing about the IQ of sensors. But before that people were obsessing about the IQ of films. Review of the films is a long overdue.
I agree. Film reviews would be great, as would slide scanner reviews. I'm not holding my breath, because it could be deemed to be falling to far outside the lines of "digital photography", but getting it hear DOES have a digital process, so it could be seen as relevent.
tkbslc: I might finally cave.
That's about 5 years of $10 a month to add up to the retail cost of buying the software retail before.
This is the price I argued that PS-CC alone should have been. The inclusion of LR-CC is just a bonus. I paid $650 way back whenever for CS2, so I figured that amount over 4-5 years made sense, but that amount over 2 was absurd. Now the price point takes 5 years and 5 months to equal what I paid for CS2, so I'm happy. I think if Adobe had the good sense to offer it at that price from the word "go", there would have been considerably less backlash to the subscription model they invoked.