Antimateria: Ahahah.Minolta Dynax 7, 2000, first modern reflex retro style and direct manual controls for all.Konica Minolta 7d, first digital reflex retro style and all manual controls, 2005!!And now 13 yars after, Nikon.AHAHAHAHAHAH.Nikonians, you are so fun!
Bamboojled - actually Minolta was quite commonly used for shots in newspapers/magazines/tv back in a day.
Sadly they made 3 deadly mistakes: 1. crossed-X lawsuit. 2. Flash system (at it's time it was more capable than Nikon's only noone at Minolta ever created any manual explaining how this thing works, so 99% of people had no clue about it's potential), 3. Digital era (this was basically a shot in the head).Minolta in many ways got brilliant gear, some of it's features still isn't offered by any competitor (eg. STF mode on Dynax 7) sadly they f**** up in US what brought company to it's knees. Still though for example in Europe they did excellent and even these days name of Minolta is well regarded by photographers who remember that era. I guess that doesn't involve you kiddo.
Silversilver: I am wondering what are the specificications that would lead to pure photography? It is not only a question of camera design for but me a whole of caracteristics which help to concentrate on the image. Make photos, not digital files. Less buttons, less functions seems to help. I used aleica M8 at a time. It only had what was needed : wb, file size, A, M modes. Same with Hasselblad H4D. You shoot dng. Then you process. Does not even have an automatic white balance.About video, i dont use it. But working with liveview is sometimes very helpful. Liveview + Tilt shift lens on tripod reminds me of the view camera approach, building up the image on the focusing screen. So as when shooting tethered... I am hoping this camera rethink the process and ergonomy of digital capture. Not only the design of the camera.
"I am wondering what are the specificications that would lead to pure photography?" - well, as few electronic assists as possible, as many buttons and manual controls as it gets. No video. No live view.Basically: Sony A900 with modern-day sensor.
techPro: Not impressed big and bulky camera, out of date style.Mirrorless camera's are the future.
Most likely won't be future either. People slowly start to realize that this race for "smaller and smaller" is even more idiotic than Megapixel Wars.
 JDThomas - X100s is a compact. Not mirrorless.
Cane: To all those happy video is removed, I hope you want that pesky auto focus removed too? Just another thing to get in the way of p u r e Photography.
Well, I did use video on my DSLR. Quite a few times.In first 2 months. Than novelty wears off and you're back 100% in photography. :)
RichardBalonglong: This Nikon DF looks like a Pentax especially the side-view photo, even the size...But, I like it! It's like a Pentax body but with a full frame sensor and a huge view finder...=)
I thought it looks more like Sony A900. With quite characteristic pentaprism.
Edmond Leung: We all like this camera.... just ignore those minority who don't like it.... Those minority were all bullshitting.
Nikon, our most concern is when can we expect to buy this new camera. Can we buy it before this X'mas?
Hope we all can get it ASAP!
And: WILL IT SPILL?
Lawrencew: I still can't believe that wifi can't be used in movie mode.Such a straightforward thing (you would have thought) is putting me off buying this otherwise great camera.I just want to be able to remotely trigger and monitor videos.Dumb, dumb, dumb...
I doubt wifi module on any camera got enough bandwidth to stream 1080p. Not to mention that it's unreliable even with high end PC equipment.
Zigadiboom: This is no doubt a solid camera. To put it into perspective it costs less than the Sony RX10 which is something I consider seriously overpriced despite being a good concept. Yet it is Canon and Nikon that are seemingly getting criticised left right and centre for everything they do.
I will agree however that it would have been nice if the 70D being an APSC had noticeably better image quality and high ISO performance than the best of what the M43s have to offer. But the gap has narrowed considerably making this camera still a good choice but a less decisive purchase than what it could have been.
"marginally better" ? o_O right..... keep on saying that to yourself. I seen shots from EM1 (m43 in a price of barely-used Full frame) and you start seeing loss of details from ISO200. Something unimaginable on an APS-C sensor.
RStyga: I can't see how this sensor is competitive in the APS-C arena today, especially at high-ISO. K-500 provides significantly better high-ISO IQ. 70D's 'new' sensor is as disappointing as 50D's was, when released, back then. The Gold Award is an overall assessment of how much DPR 'likes' this camera... I think I don't 'like' it as much...
Fuji got different ISOs than Nikon, Canon or Sony. You should check exposure time - usually Fuji got much longer exposures for same ISO/f-stop combination.So you can't really compare ISO 6400 on Canon to ISO 6400 on Fuji - in a field you would use much lower ISO on Canon.
phazelag: The lack of focus in continuous burst is a deal breaker, and they give it lower scores on image quality and still give it a gold award. Canon and nikon are selling to the old guard. Sony, Panasonic, and Olympus can move to the top if they educate the consumers better.
Tord S Eriksson - I think he was referring to A-mount, which is using as big batteries as 70D ;) (though still less "juice" due to EVF eating bettery)
Mirrorless Crusader: DPR there is a flaw in your scoring system in that you don't seem to account for size, weight, or portability at all. For example, this camera and the E-M1 are listed in the same category (mid-range ILC/DSLR), but looking at the individual categories, you haven't factored in anywhere how much smaller, lighter, and more travel friendly the E-M5 and its corresponding lens options are compared to the 70D. This is a huge thing for many people to consider when choosing a camera, and again, you put these two in the same category, so it is totally unfair not to factor this into your score, especially the value score. You say the E-M1 is equal to or better than the 70D at everything except video, but that it is a far worse value. The fact is that a lot of the E-M1's value comes from its portability compared to a DSLR and I think you are failing to consider that in your scores.
"DPR there is a flaw in your scoring system in that you don't seem to account for size, weight, or portability at all." - It's not a flaw, it's a feature.
I know that some people on dPreview imagine that low weight and small size are the most important features of a camera, but in fact: They're not. There's very, very few types of photography where low weight can be of ANY benefit at all (notably: travel photography. Perhaps also street to a limited degree).
What you ask for is kinda like asking them to add scoring for available color version - sure, that can be important for some people, and some types of photography (teenager parties) - but in large scope of things it's a marginal factor.
If anything - considering that pros often shoot with cameras like D1 or 1D or 5D+Grip - low weight and size can be considered a disadvantage (less stable grip, worse balance with larger lenses, more twiddly to operate, etc.). So... I guess it evens out? +1 for low weight -1 for low weight = 0.
Calistoga_Guy: Forget all the features, did Canon improve the image quality/image sensor? Nope. It's a good camera to skip based on that alone, same for the Pentax K3.
The Sony A77 is one I passed on and being a Sony shooter, it was a huge let down. I guess it can be forgiven because the A77 has so much tech packed into it. And while I passed on the high ISO issue alone, it does have that amazing dynamic range.
Another flop, like the Nikon D7100 or D5300, lots of extra pixels nobody was asking for trying to catch up to Sony, and did nothing to improve Canon's current APS-C situation, which shows them scoring dead last for image sensor performance. A two year old Sony NEX would crush it.
When do people start skipping all these high pixel count sensors already? A used FF Nikon D700 is looking really good right now, or a Sony A7. too many writers gushing over things, and glossing over the fact that image quality is going backwards for all brands or at best standing still.
Sony A580 from 2010 still beats crap out of 70D in every single category of image quality - including low-light performance.
As for A77 - it's one of the best cameras in terms of image quality I ever used. It's dynamic range is on pair with Canon Full Frame cameras (!!!) beating crap out of everything they ever offered in APS-C market. Only drawback it got is low-light shooting, but as over 90% of my shots are made below ISO 400 anyway - I don't care.
neo_nights: While I LOVE DPReview's reviews and do not share the same amount of complaint many people here do, I still fail to understand the Dynamic Range test.
According to your tests, this 70D has more DR than Pentax K5, which, by DxO's ratings, is measured to have 14.1 EV, while the 70D has only 11.6 EV!Well, if we see more recent reviews here, even m4/3s cameras get higher DR...(which would be highly unlikely due sensor size difference)
Or anything that "scores" image quality on dPreview.
photofan1986: "Score" "Dxo"' blah blah...I really wonder how many of you really compared the actual IQ instead of just relying on Dxo figures. I also wonder how we managed to go out and shoot before Dxo!
I seriously wonder whether the "movie critics" could ever direct, or produce a movie... considering the fact that they act like the final authority on movie evaluation...
Never trust critics...
Digitall: "Oh Lord, won't you buy me a Olympus E-M1?My friends all drive DSLR's, I must make amendsWorked hard all my lifetime, no help from my friendsSo Lord, won't you buy me a Olympus E-M1?"
Cailean Gallimore - Every mother and father shot sports at some point. ;)
vesa1tahti: Nobody says these kind of cameras are TOO small to be kept in hands. I buy a Nikon D7100, an impressive camera, having optimal size.
Sure, but it's still important to point that out to unaware buyers.
Sergey Borachev: I see a lot of reaction from DSLR users.
Especially for all those who keep pointing out the small M43 sensor, I wonder why they bother to read this review at all, and why they then feel the need to post what we all know - that M43 cameras have a smaller sensor, no good, blah blah.
Shouldn't they be happy about what they use, the bigger sensor and cameras etc, and not feel so threatened?
caver3d - the same IQ? Interesting, because somehow I don't see it. Shots start to loose details from ISO200 and as soon as on ISO400 you can easily see how it looses in IQ to even an entry level DSLR (either Sony/Nikon or Pentax).
SirSeth: To my eyes, this looks like a very good camera for a lot of folks. For those wanting a very high quality carry everywhere camera as a companion to a FF system, it would be great. For those looking for their first enthusiast system camera--also great. For those that value a robust sealed system without the Pro price, or a tilt LCD and large VF that entry level DSLRs lack, good news. Better set of lenses than any other mirrorless camera too. The IQ is competitive to any APS-C camera in real world shooting. Adding excellent 5-axis IS for all lenses (even legacy and macro) may actually mean using lower ISOs than needed on other cameras. It's a much smaller as a system, with small lighter body and lenses without sacrificing ergonomics or control options. No it's not for everyone, but my bet is that for most people who are not wanting the cost, size, and weight of a FF DSLR, this is a serious contender.
"without the Pro price" - seriously? You just said it under EM1 review? Forgot how much this thing costs? Add 200$ and you have a FULL FRAME camera with TWICE THE SENSOR SIZE.
budi0251: Where is Olympus Pen F with 1/2 frame sensor a.k.a. APS-C sized?
They did it back around 40 years ago, now technology has advanced tremendously, so where is it today?
"not much larger" - lol
DougVaughn: Some have posted below that image quality isn't up to full frame standards, and I will agree my 5DIII with L lenses can beat the OMD when pixel peeping. I purchased the E-M5 for the combination of size/weight/quality and have upgraded to the E-M1 for the same reason. At 49, the weight of the FF DSLR and lenses hurts my back after a couple hours, but I can walk all day with the Olympus and a lens or two.
By the way, my E-M1 arrived on Friday, and I took it out shooting for the first time on Saturday. It produced my favorite image of the year, and when it gets right down to it, what I want from a camera is something that gets the job done in real world shooting as opposed to tests in a lab.
Image quality of this camera isn't even up to current generation of APS-C sensors found in DSLRs for half the price of EM1. If you care mostly about image quality - EM1 is not a camera for you.