justmeMN: I guess there should be called MFLC. :-)
(Mirrorless Fixed Lens Cameras.)
Why not just fixed-lens cameras? They're all mirrorless, and I don't think we're getting any fixed-lens DSLRs anytime soon.
Flashback: That DL18-50 looks to be a very interesting addition to this group.
No doubt massive software lens correction going on, but who cares if Nikon have put some of their magic into this camera. Can't wait for some test pics DPR?
The lens corrections for some cameras are baked into the raw file, with no option to turn them off in the raw converter. I believe this is the case with the RX100, for example.
Biowizard: Can someone remind me - just HOW big is a "1 inch" sensor? I know it is anything _but_ 25.4mm diagonal.
PLEASE can we start coming up with a STANDARD way of measuring sensor sizes that does NOT keep harking back to ancient vacuum tubes?
IIRC, the inch measurement (the diameter of the glass encasing the vacuum tube) is about 1.5x the sensor diagonal.
webrunner5: None of these cameras are worth the price.They are P&S cameras. People other than few on here are not going to pay 850 bucks for a damn P&S. Ain't happening.
You can buy the best smartphone in the world for less money. You can buy a DSLR for 350 bucks. Way better IQ.
Yet DPR seems t have a shootout about every 2 months on them. Give it up, there is not enough crazy people in the world to support them anymore. If they had to survive on their own every company making them would be out of business in 3 months!
Yes, the compact camera market is still larger than the interchangeable lens camera market, as the CIPA data shows. And that's without including smartphones or action cams, CIPA only reports production and shipment numbers for dedicated stills cameras.So the often repeated statement that the compact camera is dead is exaggerated. The market is much smaller than it was five years ago, but still accounts for more than half of all digital cameras sold.
noflashplease: Point and shoot cameras dominated the beginning of the digital era, in the years immediately before and after the turn of the century. Today, point and shoot cameras belong to a dying niche. On one hand, you have ever decreasing numbers of technophobic elderly people, devoted to flip phones, and on the other hand, neophytes who don't remember the heyday of the digital point and shoot. Fixed lens cameras are a novelty to people who were too young to "Party Like It was 1999." Camera companies really need to dump their point and shoot lines and concentrate on interchangeable lens cameras. Period.
"Camera companies really need to dump their point and shoot lines and concentrate on interchangeable lens cameras. Period."
As long as there is a market for them, why wouldn't they want to cater to that market? Looking at the CIPA shipment data, the fixed-lens market is still slightly larger than the ILC market, even after several years of steep decline. The cheaper compacts are mostly gone, but superzooms, tough compacts and enthusiast compacts all seem to be doing relatively well.
And let's face it, with the rise of mobile photography, dedicated cameras as a whole is a niche market nowadays. If that's the argument for not producing compacts, then why not stop camera production altogether?
gunkan: The body price and the lens prices have no sense to me. APS-C at the price of Full frame. I really loved my Fuji X-A1 ans X-S1, but the price is not real. In Spain, the prices for fuji equipment go really really low because the starting point is surreal.
"It is more ok if the body is expensive and the lenses are not."
I'm not sure I agree. I think many photographers see the lenses as more of an investment than the camera body, especially in this digital age. I wouldn't want to replace my lenses as often as the body, and therefore don't mind if they cost a bit more. I'm not talking about typical kit-quality lenses here, but higher quality ones.
Also, the lenses have a larger impact than the body on many aspects of IQ, and I think the engineering and manufacture of high quality lenses are in many ways more complex and costly.
FBoneOne: Let's all marvel at the revelation that you cannot get long lens, bright lens, large sensor, wide lens, pocketable in one single camera. I am glad somebody wrote an article about this.
That isn't really the point of the article, though. The point is that, because no single camera can have all of those things, there need to be different options available in the market - and some of those options was missing until the ZS100 and DL18-50 came along to fill those gaps.
rhlpetrus: Canon and Nikon have nice compacts, but none comes close to the LX100/D-Lux 109 in terms of controls and ergonomics. These look like expensive toys, the Panny/Leica like a good compact.
No camera is a "toy" in itself. It's how you use it, and the quality of the pictures you take, that determines if it's a serious camera or just a toy.
Mark9473: slide 4: "we can't to see it extended to all Canon DSLRs... and maybe even, well, that's a lot of wishful thinking."
Is it just me or are we missing part of the sentence here? Maybe even what?
Maybe even on a mirrorless camera. That's what they meant.
FantasticMrFox: This camera would be a nightmare to handle for anyone whose right eye doesn't work properly (like me). Put your left eye to the viewfinder and you won't be able to reach any of the controls on the right side of the body. You'd hardly be able to hold it comfortably and press the shutter.
How can a company which continue to pump out some of the best lenses on the planet take one of the best sensors there is and put it into an abomination like this?! It almost seems like they are desperately trying not to sell cameras.
Yes, I'm aware of that. But a DSLR with the Quattro generation APS-C sensor would still be expected, since the Merrill generation (which btw was not the first generation Foveon sensor) likely aren't produced anymore. And if such a camera doesn't appear, then these mirrorless models will be the only current generation bodies for users of the SA-mount system. And I think this is the main target market for these cameras.
johnsmith404: Given that Sigma just released an E-EF adapter, an E-mount would have made more sense for this camera. But I guess Sony said no.
They didn't say no to the wooden NEX-7, I mean the Hasselblad Lunar, though.
TheGreatfulBread: A little clarity on the telezoom lens. It is designed for APS-C. It is called a 50-100mm. But then why the increase in actual focal length when mounted? I thought that only happens if the design was for FF and then it gets mounted on a crop sensor. What part did I overlook?
For fixed-lens cameras, they usually use equivalent focal lengths in the marketing, but with interchangeable lenses, the specs list the actual, physical focal lengths. You then have to multiply with the crop factor to get the equivalent focal lengths.
But it's not really a new system. These cameras belong to the same system as their DSLRs, and for all we know, they could simply be the latest generation of camera body within that system. If an updated SD1 DSLR with the Quattro sensor doesn't materialize, Sigma likely intends existing users to upgrade to one of these mirrorless models.
"It almost seems like they are desperately trying not to sell cameras."
It seems to me that Sigma, when it comes to their cameras, are content with catering to their established customer base, much like Leica. They are doing their own thing, and seemingly aren't chasing after market share or high volume sales.
Greg7579: With 900 comments already posted, I doubt if anyone will see this one ... but as a Fuji guy trying his best to break my Canon DSLR addiction, I am impressed.
Any Fuji lover will understand the appeal of this niche camera. It is beautiful. Retro, RF, small and tight, with all those beautiful controls like the Fujis of all types. We understand the high pricing. We understand the ergo and special feel of cameras like these. We always talk about how it improves one's photography and causes a shooter to do more than point and shoot.
I get it. Congratulations Olympus. I had a PEN back in the 70s. But as a Fuji guy, it goes without saying I won't be getting this camera. But I sure appreciate reading about it and Fuji will improve with the competition, which is good for us all. I won't comment on MFT vs APS-C (much less FF). But I sure like my APS-C Fuji because that is the sweet spot for this size and style of camera. This PEN sounds superb. Nice job Olympus.
It's because it's the same article, which have been a work in progress up until the review is complete.
Kurt_K: I think it's very unfortunate that Dpreview never got around to doing a GX8 review, especially when one considers the size of the review staff.
I don't think we can expect reviews to always be published in the same order as they were started. Some cameras are more complex than others, have more features etc. Perhaps unexpected problems appear, forcing the reviewers to re-shoot images, or even request another review unit from the manufacturer (DPR has done that before).
I have no idea why this particular review has been delayed, I'm just suggesting that the cause could be something other than anti-Panasonic bias.
dcshooter: As an ex-Olympian (I left after the m4/3 switch, since EVFs aren't my cup of tea), I am encouraged to see that they are still managing to carve out their own niche.
Looks like a nice overlll package, and the output images have the characteristic Olympus look. Noise characteristics above ISO400 remain pretty poor, but that'll always be the case with m4/3.
Very good looking, but then again I am a big fan of the original Pen-F (I own 2), and the form factor looks like it will make a nice pocketable street camera and won't intimidate subjects.
Video specs are fine for the body. 4k probably would be waste with the rangefinder-like handling characteristics of the body.
I'd say the price is a bit high given the form factor and specs, but I suppose that reflects what appears to be a very high quality exterior finish.
Yes, image quality is indeed to a large extent subjective, and our tolerance for noise and other artifacts in our images must surely vary hugely. To my eyes, though, you can go quite a bit above ISO400 before the latest m4/3 sensors produce "poor" results.
photogeek: Must be demoralizing for Nikon engineers to work hard on releasing something like this, and then get completely owned by a refresh of Sony RX100 a month or two later.
Actually, if present in the same market segment, I think more photographers would be attracted to the Nikon brand (and to Canon) than to Sony. Sony hasn't been very successful in direct competition to Canon and Nikon in the DSLR field, after all. And I wouldn't be surprised if Canon's 1" compacts are selling more than Sony's RX series, despite the lack of some features that Sony offers.
Mirrorless ILCs is different, admittedly, but in that market one almost gets the impression that Canon and Nikon have gone out of their way to not be competitive.
SeeRoy: Who on earth buys a camera in this sector which lacks a viewfinder? (cue chorus of "me! me!" from the ever contentious cast of DPR participants.) Of course there's an optional add-on wart available - which all helps to obscure the cost of ownership. Why was the detachable lens range of CX cameras apparently abandoned in favour of this latest in Nikon's scatter-gun randomised approach to compact mirrorless camera design? "Maybe this time it'll work... Let's try marketing the lenses - with a choice of bodies attached in an attempt to match Sigma's huge compact camera market penetration?" Maybe they should have licensed a Foveon sensor too. Still, selling two camera bodies in order to offer a range of focal lengths is a good wheeze.I'm really glad that I've abandoned the fruitless enterprise of trying to run up this down-escalator for some years now.
"Nikon's scatter-gun randomised approach to compact mirrorless camera design"
I would hardly call the DL series a random approach. They are entering a market segment which has been proven to be very popular with consumers, and competing directly with similar products from Sony, Canon and Panasonic. In addition, they're launching a product (the DL18-50) that's pretty much unique to Nikon.And the comparison to Sigma is very strange. Sigma offers four models with single focal lenghts, while Nikon offers three models with different zoom ranges. How is this any different from Sony's RX100 and RX10, or Canon's G series?
The 1 system, on the other hand, hasn't exactly been very competitive in the mirrorless ILC market. Why Nikon hasn't offered some of the features they now give us in the DL series, and made some more fast lenses, and settled on a good design (eg. all three V models have had different design concepts!), that's anyone's guess.
Bhushan Barve: So does this mean the end of the line for Nikon 1?
Not necessarily the end, but to be competitive the Nikon 1 system needs more (and faster) lenses, and updated bodies with some of the features these DL compacts have. The Nikon 1 system isn't even compatible with Nikon's flash system, but the DL range is!