Perhaps Fuji should produce a version of the XE-2 with this Beyer sensor and at $200 cheaper........
Some years ago I read a Zeiss article on manual focussing. Can't find it now, but it basically seemed to be stating the most consumer level DSLR PDAF was set to work at fairly small apertures, so getting the focus accuracy for say even an F2 lens would require a change of focussing screen. Well, I admit I didn't understand the thing, but it sort of explained why I was unimpressed with manual focus on a Pentax MZ5N when using old mf prime lenses. Anyway, I wonder if the some of the improvement being shown is due to the fact that the PDAF in the comparison is not set up for wide apertures.
maxola67: Posts score K3:D610 - 556:538.Great job, friends!
If you discount the posts moaning about Nikon and the posts moaning about posts moaning about Nikon I suspect the numbers are closer ;)
peterpainter: The important bits, though. Logos!The DPR sample has a 'Ricoh' logo under the LCD whereas the Ephotozine sample has a 'Pentax' logo there. Perhaps thay haven't made their minds up yet - could yet end up with 'Ricoh' on the front and 'Pentax' on the back;)
Ah - that explains it, thanks.
The important bits, though. Logos!The DPR sample has a 'Ricoh' logo under the LCD whereas the Ephotozine sample has a 'Pentax' logo there. Perhaps thay haven't made their minds up yet - could yet end up with 'Ricoh' on the front and 'Pentax' on the back;)
peterpainter: Interesting. I came across 'shutter shock' a while ago, but many people seemed to be in denial at the time. I have a number of old cameras - a Zorki 4 and Pentax P30n in particular have pretty mean shutters. They make quite a 'snap' and it can be felt when holding the cameras 'casually' - hold on firm and it's not too bad.There's probably a fair amount of energy involved in getting a focal plane shutter across fast with an abrupt start and finish, so the issue is not terribly surprising. I don't think the impact is restricted to cameras with sensor-shift stabilisation, however I guess it could be classed as 'camera shake' rather than shutter-shock, but the root cause, a 'rather violent' focal plane shutter, is the same.It's interesting that I have come across it mentioned for Sony SLTs but not for Pentax SLRs in Live View. I wonder if that's because it doesn't happen or because nobody has noticed.
Note: to be fair to the Pentax, I only noticed the 'violence' because I'd been using a bridge camera before trying it out again fairly recently. The Zorki's shutter, on the other hand, always struck me as being pretty 'violent.'
Interesting. I came across 'shutter shock' a while ago, but many people seemed to be in denial at the time. I have a number of old cameras - a Zorki 4 and Pentax P30n in particular have pretty mean shutters. They make quite a 'snap' and it can be felt when holding the cameras 'casually' - hold on firm and it's not too bad.There's probably a fair amount of energy involved in getting a focal plane shutter across fast with an abrupt start and finish, so the issue is not terribly surprising. I don't think the impact is restricted to cameras with sensor-shift stabilisation, however I guess it could be classed as 'camera shake' rather than shutter-shock, but the root cause, a 'rather violent' focal plane shutter, is the same.It's interesting that I have come across it mentioned for Sony SLTs but not for Pentax SLRs in Live View. I wonder if that's because it doesn't happen or because nobody has noticed.
Nice. However, it's rather interesting that some people say a painting is really good if it 'looks just like a photograph' and now this. Whatever, all good fun. I like number 4 best, I think number 2 looks like it could be Impressionist brush strokes but is a bit flat to be an Impressionist painting so is a near miss from my point of view - the other two are probably fine too, but don't do much for me. All subjective, but as they've managed to get the billing they have got they're better than I can do!
and it's not even 1st April today!
cheddargav: I'm guessing the news here is the "Pentax design but Ricoh logo" part. Maybe the DSLR's will go the same way? I just hope they sprinkle some of the GR magic over the next batch of cameras, come on Pencoh, get your behinds in gear please
That's the impression I got too - I don't think the camera itself is 'newsworthy' or that DPR think it is either. Ricoh could actually be shooting themselves in the foot here, though, as their compacts do appear to have a sort of cult following whereas I think Pentax offerings in the compact market have not had the best of reputations for quite a long time.
It would be nice if there were the original Q and Q10 studio samples to compare with - actually, it would be nice to know what differences if any, other than the sensor, exist between this and the earlier Qs but I'm sure that's available somewhere on the internet. All in all, though, after reading it more carefully this time I have to say that it's a very interesting review (and a very interesting little camera)...thanks, folks!
Interesting review of the original Q:http://www.seriouscompacts.com/f90/pentax-q-real-world-user-review-11773/
Review seemed quite enthusiastic but score is very low. Rather strange.
It's quite cheerful, really. Nice one, Pentax.
Full frame (to conserve angle of view), lightweight (????) camera with live-view EVF that uses my old Praktica (mostly CZJ) EDC M42 lenses. Nice if it could auto-focus them as well.Ah. No, I don't expect it to fit in my pocket as the lenses don't, come to think of it...
Pixel Judge: I don't believe I actually read the whole review of this 18MP c$#*%p! Good to know DPR is reviewing it, amature bird photographers buying it, and enthusiastic readers comment on it, and Sony making it.
In this camera category, I would like to see the review of 12MP Fuji XS1. It has good useful range and bigger 2/3" sensor, which I think may produce better result than this.
DPR, if you can review Sony, why not Fuji? (or, if you can review this, why not the best/better ones in the category?)
Yes, the up and down movement of the lens was quite frightening on the video I saw too - then I noticed the up and down movement of the back of the camera. That poor cam was getting some beating! I don't know if it was the same video, though, so if you have a link to one where a better tripod was being used used, the whole camera isn't moving and the guy is genuinely not messing about (yep, I've had a zoom compact in my film days that would have certainly given up the ghost with the treatment I saw meted out there) I'd like to see it as I still haven't made my mind up (and I've seen some excellent shots from the Panny...) that may help. I'd heard about them sagging under their own weight, but haven't seen that...Buying a camera seems so difficult!
Rachotilko: I am surprised to read all the negative comments here. This camera's output is not meant to be cropped, rather downscaled. Especially when raising the ISO.
You may ask: why increase the resolution then, if it ought to be downscaled afterwards. The simple answer is: contrasty edges. If you compare the shot taken by any old 3MP compact camera and the downscaled output of this beast, you'll surely see much better defined edges in the latter sample.
Sounds reasonable to me. I downloaded a photo of a sparrow from some samples taken from a review of the Kodak Z990. Pixel-peeping the picture was not something that would impress, but resized to 'screen size' (and about life-size) it was really rather good. Sure, not many people are interested in having a nice photo of a sparrow, although I'd have been quite satisfied to have taken it - it all depends on what one wants the camera for!
peterpainter: If you look around the internet you'll find that a number of people use superzooms primarily for bird photography and get surprisingly good results. The long lens reach with image stabilisation for the lowish price makes these cameras attractive - alternatives in MFT / DSLR etc. work out a lot more expensive. The smaller sensor allows for shorter focal lengths to supply this reach, easier macro because of depth of field..... Before the world went digital I used to use a 24X zoom Hi8 video cam with steady shot for birds and got some good footage. I have to admit, though, that I think the studio shots are actually, well, pretty horrible (as are those from the Panny - not really sure why DPR were so enthusiastic!). I was considering getting one - perhaps the Canon SX40 - but it looks like for general purpose photography it may not be a good idea.Still, iif people are managing to get good photos from them, 'internet size,' ..I'd prefer the small sensor with less pixels.
KonstantinosKAs far as the Sony being more overprocessed looking: I have to admit I didn't look that closely - just thought 'yuck' - so thanks for pointing that out. I guess that in general the more overstuffed with pixels the more processing is needed to combat noise. Perhaps the extra pixels give some advantage in light-gathering (or marketing?) and manufacturers are using noise profiling etc. etc. ...
KonstantinosKYes, the price!However, getting the 600mm equivalent reach (stabilised) means that a long (expensive) lens is needed for the DSLR and then the price rockets. Closer in price, from what I can gather, would be something like a Panasonic G3 plus a Panasonic 100-300 zoom (stabilised and possibly betterI think from 'reading around' than the Olympus 75 - 300 for the purpose) - with the smaller sensor 35mm equiv 200-600. Still costs a fair bit more than the Fuji....I get the impression (possibly wrongly), though, that it's easier (and often more effective) to stabilise the shorter focal lengths of the bridge cams.
Hi MarcusGRYes, I think you are right. I'm not sure the weight is a problem - my current cam is 560grams and I really don't notice the weight, not sure that doubling it would make any real difference. I guess it's just the Canon is so much cheaper and does have a longer reach. The Fuji appears to have bettermid to high ISO and very effective stabilisation - so tempting. It's interesting, though, that generalised reviews don't always give the Fuji the nod - a certain amount of 'reading between the lines' (i.e. I want this for a specific purpose) is needed with all these reviews. Decisions, decisions......