in short this is the end of the 1.6 sensori mean no more semi pro camera like 20,30D,50D and 7Dit's sad
I dare to doubt that. Nowadays when so many people upgrade from p&s to APSC cameras (either DSLR or mirrorless) and buy dedicated APSC lenses there is not a big threat that APSC DSLRs will ectinct.I have an APSC DSLR with couple of lenses and do not plan to go mirrorless, neither buy a FF. APSC is an ideal compromise between quality and size.
keeponkeepingon: "once you go below APS-C the next logical size is 1/2.3 inch'"
And this is reason #5 why I am dropping canon after 20 years and too many cameras to count. Idiotic management.
How can anyone in canon leadership make such an inane statement given the popularity of the S90/S95/S100/S110? All four cameras were certified hits, and all use a sensor bigger than 1/2.3 inch.
And if he would take his canon blinders off just for a second he might notice that M43 cameras have taken over nearly 20% of camera sales in his own country:
What an amazing statement. Right up there with you will never need more than 640mb of ram.....
This statement surprised my es well (not only because I have a 1/1,7" sensored Canon). The gap between 1/2,3" and APSC is huge and especially for compacts I see a lot of reasons to have a sensor smaller than APSC, but bigger than 1/2,3" (e.g. 1").On the other hand I agree that for a mirrorless CSC an APSC (or at least 4/3) sensor is optimal.
Has anyone downloaded the updade already? I mean are there noticeable changes, is it worth updating? (I do not have DA 560mm and did not encounter stability problems by now on my K-30).
I don´t want to be too critical, but f6,7 at 600 mm eq. does not look good. I have a 55-300mm telezoom (83-450mm eq.) with f5,8 at the tele end and I constantly feel the need to have faster lens, because holding a safe time (cca. 1/400s) requires higher ISO even at f5,8. 1/2 EV slower and 150mm longer lens is not something I would long for.
If I look at this camera in context of other p&s compacts with 1/2,3" sensors, I have to praise Olympus for releasing such camera: super-bright lens, RAW, PASM modes, this is something most competitors miss.However when I look at enthusiast comapcts with 1/1,7" sensors, most of them offer the same, with bigger sensor and for similar price (no need to go further than to Oly XZ-1). So in this contet the camera seems pointless.
arqomx: would like to see the noise performance for both XZ-2 and XZ-10. My XZ-1 doesn't fare well from ISO 800 and above >. < (though with f2.7 lens you'll find it seldom to crank the ISO more than 400)
@Camp Freddy: no need to catch black cats; try to take a picture inside poorly lit room and you are at ISO3200 even with f1,8 (had an f1,8 compact, so I know).
GeorgeZ: I would like to know how much better a lens could be if it only was a reasonable 25-250 instead of 25-400. I guess quite a bit but maybe not?
If the lens was shorter than 25-400 (e.g. 25-250), the speed of the lens might be f3,2-4,5. Would it be much more tempting? I doubt it. And for the manufacturer 20x zoom is a much better selling feature than slightly lower f-number on the tele end.
Great shot. Was it taken from other plane or from the ground? The focal length is fairly short.And it is surprising that the plane is reasonably sharp, given the speed (Mach 1) and only 1/1000s.
16 Mpix on 1/2,3" CCD, combined with f3,1-5,9 lens... I don´t need to read any more.
A sensor larger than standard p&s, RAW, PASM modes and 20x zoom seems to be a tempting combination and probably the best travel zoom on the market.
io_bg: For this price it should've been f/2... And I hope it won't be as soft as the 16mm f/2.8.
@pureaxis, neo_nights: yes, I consider the Samsung 20mm/2,8 pointless just as I do with Sony 20mm/2,8 and I would not buy such a lens. What advantade does it bring compared to kit zoom? 0,66 EV is not enough to justify the price. 30mm with f2 is much better, it´s 1,66 EV better, not mentioning the fact that with 16mm prime you gain focal length that is not covered by 18-55mm kit lens.
Or have a look at Samsung pancakes: 30mm with f2 or 16mm with f2,4. A prime lens with f2,8 is pointless.
ianimal: Yes a nice lens if you want to keep the system small.Rumors says some Zeiss primes for NEX comes later this year, forthem who want something fast and expensive.
Exactly. Faster does not necessarily mean expensive; look at Samsung pancakes, e.g. 30mm f2 costs cca. 200 euros.
adrianf2: I think DP is losing the plot. Still no G5 review for eg, yet we get a review of what is a rather uninteresting camera so soon after its release.. The priorities of this site are hard to fathom these days. It certainly doesn't seem that detailed reviews of interesting and innovative cameras are high on the list unfortunately.
Be glad you can see review of 1/2,33" sensor compact/bridge along with APS-C or full frame cameras. How else would you be able to compare it and see that superzoom image quality is still bad? ;-)
Rachotilko: Regarding sensor improvement: grils&guys, you can use DPR studio comparison tool to compare Canon SX20 vs Canon SX50: you'll see that 1/2.33 sensors have improved, quite substantially.
Sensor imrpovement is general rule, applying not only on 1/2,3" sensors. I agree that according to comparison scene the outcome from SX50 looks surprisingly good and I cannot tell the difference between this and (e.g.) the FZ200; 1/1,7" sensors do not offer much better pictures either. However I believe it is the real life where the difference shows up: then the lens speed plays part - f2,8 of FZ200 vs. f6,5 of SX50 means difference of ISO400 vs. ISO2000, which means usable picture vs. unusable mess.
Steen Bay: Overall a fine/fair review, but can't agree that a tripod almost is a necessity when shooting at full zoom. The IS is so effective that you most often will get sharp images (of at steady subject) at 1/125 sec or so at 1200mm (equivalent), or even at even slower shutterspeeds with a bit of luck. So in good light it's perfectly possible to shoot handheld at base ISO at full zoom.
On one hand I agree that it is not easy to shoot at long focal lenghts hand-held and with my 55-300mm I see the pictures are not sharp enough at 300mm; so I do think a tripod is a must for sharp pictures at 300mm+. However looking at pictures I took with 300 mm there are mostly animals that were not waiting for me to set a tripod; they just run away.
On one hand there is success of 1 system on Japanese market and on the other hand it is a fail on European market. There is no better way to confirm this than to look at price drop: in November 2011 the V1 was launced with a price of 681 eur; now it sells for 299 eur. There is no other camera with such big price drop (OK, there is the Sigma SD1) and the only reason is bad sales in EU. However now becomes the V1 a truly interesting camera; it is the cheapest CSC with EVF and now is cheaper than any other enthusiast compact.
Piggy the bad: My Olympus xz1 with vf2 is much better combination.
You are basically saying your XZ1 is much better than XZ2. ;-)
Casadilla: Anyone seeing what this enthusiast compact offers to the segment that doesn't already exist? Just looking as the basic hardware of sensor, lens, processor...
Sensor:Larger than 1/1.7"? No.Multi-aspect ratio? No.
Lens:Faster aperture? No.Wider FOV (e.g. 24mm equivalent)? No.Longer telephoto? No.
Can't say I'm very excited about this one on paper, though it's still early to know the full story.
It is not the best, that is true. However the sensor is standard in this segment (G15, S110, XZ-2, EX2f, P7700) and the lens is one of the fastest. AND it is for great importance for Pentax, since it finally has something to offer to it´s DSLR users searching for a decent small back-up camera. And knowing the price politics of Pentax, it will be reasonably priced, I bet it will be cheaper than XZ-2 and most other competitors.
SETI: Restyled old good Olympus XZ-1
Edit: it´s more an Olympus XZ-2 (ens, sensor).