RichRMA: Hardly self-powered. Just more photovoltaic applications. Could be used to monitor wildlife for long periods, that kind of thing.
Self-powered in the sense that it neither needs to be connected to an external power source, nor runs on batteries that need to be charged using an external power source.But of course it receives energy from the outside, since it's not a perpetuum mobile.
TORN: "equivalent to 24mm on APS-C" is not right. It is 24mm relative to full frame.
Light per unit area determines exposure, and hence image brightness, which is not irrelevant. Surely, in practice, most photographers are trying to achieve a certain exposure, not a certain noise level? You work within the constraints of your chosen sensor format, fully aware of its impact on DoF and noise levels.
Bjrn SWE: "... and can function at temperatures as low as -10° C/14° F. "DPreview
This suggests that this lens will probably not work outside in wintertime!?
That's the minimum temperature that the manufacturer guarantees that the lens will work at without problems. In reality, it will likely withstand lower temperatures, but if it doesn't, you can't blame the manufacturer.
Simon97: Finally, a glimpse into this Sony (?) 20mp sensor. Seems on par with the fabled 16mp APS-C sensor and a bit less noise than the 24mp sensor.
Sony used the 20 MP sensor in the A58, A3000 and A5000, so we've had plenty of glimpses already.
Timur Born: "making it the first truly 'pocketable' compact high-zoom camera with a built-in electronic viewfinder"
Sorry, but no. The TZ70 may come with 5 mm more height, but in return it comes with 1.6 mm less depth. And in this general height x width size category it's depth that defines how pocketable a camera is. I guess you can put both in a jeans pocket, but the LF1 still trumps them in size (only up to 200mm in return for a bigger sensor).
For comparison, the HX90 is 36 mm deep, the LF1 is 28 mm. And while you can squeeze a RX100 into a jeans pocket the LF1 does that far more comfortably because of its lesser depth.
Still a nice offering, if only Sony would include a raw file format, which the Panasonics do.
DPR never made that claim. It's from the press release, so it's Sony's words.
It's probably not worth anyone's time to fact check every claim made by the manufacturers' marketing departments. We all know that they have their own definition of the truth.
Eleson: If optical steady shot means 'in-lens' then I don't understand 5-axis stabilization?
I don't think the sensor shifts at all. Some Panasonic and Olympus compacts has '5-axis' stabilization that is achieved by combining optical and electronic stabilisation.
riveredger: It's funny that some of these lenses are priced higher than motorcycles. I mean, really!?
Unless you have actual knowledge of the profit margins for motorcycles and high end lenses, that's pure conjecture.
It tells you something about the cost and complexity involved in making high quality optical equipment. Also, the really expensive lenses are low volume products, which drives up the prices even more.
KonstantinosK: Wow. One wonders why it took them so many years to offer the obvious. If I was to buy again a camera in this class it would probably be this. Next, Olympus, please make a rugged version of the XZ-2.
"Lens distortion is not an effect of the raw file."
No, but an uncorrected raw file makes it visible. I think that Ocolon's point was that the makers of tough compacts might not want us to see exactly how severe the lens aberrations are.
The fact that Olympus now offers raw capture could mean that the particular lens used in the TG-4 is actually quite good, and the reason for not offering raw in previous models could be that they didn't think that the target market cared about it.
Mike FL: It would be nice to have PASM, TG-5 may be.
OR PS without AM are fine too, but "Aperture Priority"? No kidding?! get real!!!!
OR, get an real Aperture.
I don't think the manufacturers want to advertise the fact that they use ND filters to simulate aperture changes.
Some high-end compacts have an ND filter as a listed feature, but those models change aperture with a diaphragm, and the ND filter is there for other purposes.
Anyway, I can't seem to find another reference at the moment. Most sites, like Imaging Resource, just mention that it's a three-step aperture, but they don't mention how it works.
It has been pointed out in various reviews, like this one of the TG-2:
"Since the aperture is simulated by sliding ND filters, it does not affect depth-of-field, only force the use of faster shutter-speeds or lower-ISO which is still useful."
Using ND filters for this purpose is common in compact cameras, and most low-end models (such as Canon ELPH/IXUS) do it that way.
An aperture is an opening, and the lens certainly have one. However, there is no diaphragm to change the size of the aperture, so f-stop changes are accomplished with built-in ND-filters, just like in many other compact cameras.
The TG models have a three-step 'aperture': f/2.0, f/2.8 and f/8.0 at wide angle, and f/4.9, f/6.3 and f/18.0 at telephoto.
ZeneticX: so many people mistaken this as samsung's FIRST DSLR, shows how much they messed up the styling although I won't say it's a bad move, probably offers better ergonomics compared to most mirrorless out there
impressive camera none the less
Even if it was a DSLR, it wouldn't be Samsung's first. They launched their GX series of DSLRs already in 2006.
StefanW: Of course they can't disclose their roadmap and because of culture aspects and not loosing their face they can't confirm they had done anything wrong in the past and would do it differently if they would start all over again.
Even though I typically expect these kind of political answers that don't say anything I am surprised that most of the answers are even more extreme as they sound like Nikon don't need to do much development in the future because their current products match already everything the customers might demand.
Maybe Nikon meets the customer demand of the Japanese market, but looking at the overall declining sales of Nikon, maybe Nikon should rethink their answers ... actually rather rethink their strategy.
Most of the other manufacturers have official, published lens roadmaps, so why couldn't Nikon disclose theirs?
Miki Nemeth: Unfortunately, unlike Sony, Nikon V1 and no other Nikon 1 series cameras are capable of outputting clean HDMI, and they cannot be used with Atomos or any external recorders. I picked the V1 as my very first camera, and I had to learn the sad truth that the Nikon 1 system is practically an abandonned child of Nikon. This made me terribly disappointed with Nikon, and no way I'd buy anything from Nikon again. I kept the V1 and a nice 1Nikkor lens collection, in the hope that eventually Nikon makes at least a half decent Nikon 1 model.Atomos is terribly important for concert and interview videos to override the 30-minute video recording limitations.
The time limit doesn't apply, as the OP said:
"Atomos is terribly important for concert and interview videos to override the 30-minute video recording limitations."
I only mentioned the time limit to correct the claim that Panasonic cameras don't have a time limit. They do, in the EU.
The 30 minute limit is required in the EU to avoid the camera being classified and taxed as a video camera. Cameras intended for the European market always have this limitation, including Panasonic's cameras.
mpgxsvcd: Could you define "convergence" as opposed to "Hybrid"please. I fail to see the difference at the moment.
"The FZ1000 and the GH4 both introduced the photo from video mode for Panasonic. That truly is the epitome of a hybrid or converged camera to me."
A true convergence device should offer both the ergonomics and user experience of a stills camera, as well as that of a video camera. The FZ1000 and GH4 are very capable video cameras, but they handle like DSLRs, not like camcorders.I think it's this ergonomic aspect that DPR is thinking of, when they say that the XC10 is the first true convergence camera.
Dale Baskin: Since there have been a lot of questions/comments about this camera relative to cameras like the FZ1000 we've decided to put together a small addendum to add to the article that may clarify the differences between cameras. (Which is why I'm not hanging out here responding to comments.) I'll post a message as soon as it's up.
I don't know any videographer who thinks that DSLR ergonomics is optimal for shooting video. There is a reason why stills cameras and video cameras/camcorders are designed differently.
The XC10 makes an attempt at offering both types of user experience. If it succeeds, I can't say without using it first.
PerL: As a side note...Interesting to see that despite over seven years of development the latest most high tech APS-C sensor still can't match the high ISO/low-light sports shooting capability of a FF Nikon D3, introduced in August 2007. (DxO ISO 2303 vs 1363 on the Samsung).
Sensor size have a larger impact on ISO performance than the sensor technology, especially since both sensors are CMOS. I wouldn't expect an APS-C sensor to achieve the same high ISO performance as the D3 sensor anytime soon.