J Kerppi: This is what the majority of camera users always wanted. We did not buy the DSLRs on voluntary basis. We were forced to do so as compact cameras offered no high pic quality. Things are moving to the right direction. Cameras with very high pic quality and reasonable zoom can soon be carried in jacket or even shirt pocket. You don't anymore need a mule to carry your equipment when travelling.
Actually the pocket size APS cameras can cost even more than basic DSLRs. Price is not important when you get what you always wanted and get rid of something you never wanted. I will give my 3000USD Canon to my dog once a small quality device is available. My dog knows better how to carry useless obstacles around the yard. It may even enjoy this. I never did.
Many buys DSLRs and use only the kit-lens and for those kind of people the DSLR is a point and shoot camera. If you like to travel light, then these one in all cameras are the way to go. But you loose the ability to put on a macro lens, or a long tele lens, or a large aperture fixed lens. For those people , travelling with the kit-lens when you don't want the extra weight. And having the ability to take more advanced lenses on when that is wanted is a really large plus for the DSLR.
hdkhang: Regardless of the technicalities behind achieving the score, or the validity of such a score, or the relevance of the score to the general photography centric market that dpreview serves... the important thing to take away from this is that advances from video technology has the potential to improve still imagery. So all of those people who whine about camera companies using up their precious budget to add video capability should really think twice before adopting such a stubborn egocentric viewpoint. Much the same as how smartphone photography and all that onboard processing power has the potential to shape future standalone camera features. The improvements in video/processing etc. spill over into other areas and so far have yet to negatively impact still photography capability.
It might be able to help the long exposure scenarious. But not the action shot. Because video usually have quite long exposure of each frame.
But still, the DxO mark is not very consistent in the way it calculates the score since it compares a multi-exposure with a single exposure. I thought DxO mark was to compare sensors. Not software.
It seems they compare apples and oranges. A pure still camera is quite different than a movie camera. If you cannot get only the data from one exposure, then you really cannot compare to a normal camera because you get more sampling to get results, hence have an edge.
thx1138: Pixels wars are over, ISO wars have begun. Now if only we could get a real ISO 50, with L ISO 25.
Have you ever heard of ND filters? Solves your issue.
wilde: Most reviews of the Canon Canon 24-70mm f/4 L IS lens are not complete and much to positive. I hope Depreview will give us better and objective test results. This lens suffers from a severe obtical problem.When (with manual focus) stopping down, the point of focus shifts backwards, see file below. So, if you use a tripod and try to make a portrait you need to focus again when stopping up or down.I hadn't expected this problem in such a costly lens. Not a lens for canon to be proud of.
has other people also verified that effect? I have my doubts because if you focus manually, the aperture is always full open. Really makes no sense for me.
why not give a general support for AF at F8 in center point as the previous 1D line cameras?
RPJG: "the new EF 200-400mm F4 L IS 1.4x lens ... when it is used with an extender ... the combined aperture is F8"
Shouldn't f/4 with a 1.4x extender give a combined aperture of f/5.6?
it is a 200 - 400 f4 as is. And when you use it with the internal extender the aperture becomes f.5.6 and if you use an external extender it becomes f.8 max aperture.
This is a clear way of letting people earn money on other peoples work. A clear violation against the rightful owner of the copyright.
If an images does not have a clear copyright holder. Nobody should be allowed to make money of it. ( because we don't know what type of license is attached to the image ).
Only the original copyright holder of a piece for art should be the one to decide who can make money from it.
ThomasSwitzerland: Full frame 35 mm comes from the Mr. Barnack (ancient chief Leica engineer) size out of the 1920s when just plastic movie rolls of film forced him to 35 mm. Minds get obsessed with sizing. Like a religion.
The future is the software reading out sensors from mechatronics (the camera, no more film). The importance of size shrinks rapidly, like modern cars coming down from their physical bulk, less steel but more intelligence.
This Canon FF camera (me-too product) like the Nikon FFs or Sony FFs (translucent, my god) - to name them - are over their technological peaks, already. Industry just wants to get your hard earned consumer dollars – now, before common knowledge is in the markets priced in.
There are so many equivalents or better choices available. Buy smart.
But unlike cars, you don't get the same result from different sized cameras. But all cars can go from A to Z regardless of size.
Footloose1949: I wonder if the main reason why some people yearn for something like this, is because they are cheapskates, and just want to keep on using what they already own, without having to 'shell out' for film and a film scanner?
Well, that might make people cheapskates anyway. does it not?Or many think, why buy new camera? my old one is working still ....
wkay: WHy is sharpness so much higher on 5D2 than 7D? Sensor limitations? If so then this is little more than apples-oranges comparison. Lens tests need to be on a standardized sensor or preferably sensor independent, such as a projection target, or heaven forbid, film.
very easy: when using a full frame sensor, then the image has to be enlarged less to make same output image. So the conclusion is: buy a full frame camera. It is only when you always have to crop your image, that crop camera can be equal or better than full frame.
hajime93: I thought the camera still focuses when you have an aperture smaller than F5.6 or F8 right? I don't really understand this... Does it mean that it will focus better now at F8? Thanks
larger then you mean :p Apertures that are smaller have a larger F-value
it is about lenscombinations that have smaller than 5.6 max aperture. Before it supoorted only combinations with larger or equal to F5.6. ( And larger here is of course more opening )
Shamael: what makes me laugh is this eternal affordable camera stuff. Even at 1500$ it is only affordable to those who have the money. You can sell anything at any price if you find a sucker who pays that.
Is it not time to speak about a cheaper FX camera, not an affordable one. We are far away form a budget pricing anyway. If you consider that a D600 is a D7000 with FX sensor and that it's development and production costs not more than the first, the price is much too high anyway. All that prices are scaled in a way to protect other models of the brand, but not with any affordable or budget for anyone in view.
I believe that they could set the price to sub $1000 for it, but they don't want to as long people are willing to pay , and no competitor sets their price too low
Seems like the 5DIII is a much better all-round camera than the 6D. Especially concerning the AF system , and frames per second.
The first ever camera to be virus infected.......
zumzum: I am quite disappointed about this camera and also about Canon. This company does not live up to its name.
Since the digital cameras are around there has not been significant upgrades. The field is lacking INNOVATION.
This is why I am so angry with Canon: it has the opportunity to create something great and yet it fails again and again. This is a shame.
The good thing is that this is about average delivered and not on the top and hence may be quite cheap soon. Good for the customers. The lack of innovation is no problem here. When going into a mirrorless segment last, how can you expect Canon to innovate? They do it as a cheap way of being there among many others.
RichardBlaney: I went through all the comments and everyone is just talking about missing viewfinder, ibis or price or whatever, no one talks about lenses and image quality. If sensor is up to expectation this camera will be at least on par with N5 and N7, so, if this 22mm pancake is decent will make a better combo simply because no one realizes that Sony 16mm pancake simply sucks! So you can have a wonderful N7 with your viewfinder and all that geeky cool stuff but then your pictures will suck because that 16mm is barely usable.
On top of this we have to consider that this is Canon, so 10 years from now there will be a lot of EF-M lenses, a huge used market and a lot of new cameras, why? Because it has always been like this with Canon. Regarding other brands, except for Sony and Nikon who can say this? Olympus may not even exist 10 years from now.
So, imho this camera and the EF-M lenses are a good long term investment, and, as always, launch price means nothing, lets see 3 months after launch.
A lot of EF-M lenses? Unlikely.Maybe a handful. Because the good interopability with EF-lenses.some zooms and some fixed lenses.
Koulang: Why there is no wide angle or tele lenses like 10mm, 200m or 300mm for mirroless camera?
no need. You have adapter to the EF-lenses. Only small lenses are needed for this camera.
edit:They actually are planning for a fix of the problem .that is good.
ronandroscoe: I think chasing frightened animals from airplanes and helicopters sucks.
well it is not very nice doing nature photography like that. All nature photographers should try to get their shots without impacting too much on the life they want to photograph. But that shot is unfortunately not easy to get without using helicopter. I hope some make silent helicopters for nature lovers soon.....