Johnsonj: Jpeg rules. RAW is for posers.
Only thing missing is face recognition.
The whole JPEG vs. raw debate is a pseudo-debate. It's not like they are two conflicting image formats.
You do realize that the JPEGs you get from the camera started out as raw sensor data? And that the end result for those who shoot raw is also a JPEG image (or another RGB image format, such as TIFF)? The only difference is that raw shooters prefer to have full control over noise reduction and other parameters, rather than using the limited in-camera controls. Why does that make them posers?
marike6: The problem with cameras like the SL1 receiving a Gold Award because of the "suitable for the target entry-level user" argument is that DPR has traditionally been a website for enthusiasts who mostly would like to see the Gold Award reserved for the very best performing cameras. Such a loose definition of criteria for the Gold Award kind of cheapens it. And the third problem is it calls into question the thinking behind truly deserving class leading or revolutionary cameras like the Nikon D7000 and Sony RX100 getting only Silver Awards.
This is a nice camera, and as a DSLR fan I happy it's doing well, but because it uses older sensor technology, I don't feel it's the absolute cream of the crop. The new 70D may be, but the SL1 is essentially a smaller Rebel with an even smaller 95% VF view and more shallow grip.
Of course one has to consider the target users. No one would make a buying decision between, say, a Nikon D4 and a D3200, or a Panasonic GH3 and a GF6. Sure, the same person could be interested in both cameras, but not for the same purpose. So there's no point in comparing them directly.
If all cameras were to be judged by the same criteria, then no entry-level system camera or P&S compact would be considered good, since they would fall so far short of the quality and performance of the high-end cameras. But, as many people who have bought these cheaper cameras surely can attest to, they ARE good cameras for their intended target users.
white shadow: There are just too many people who are concern over whether a particular camera gets a gold award or a silver award. The review and conclusion is just more information about the camera. Different users will place importance on different aspect of a camera. Ultimately, if you think that a particular camera suits your requirement and budget, buy it and if doesn't buy another.
The 100D is only one of the choices and its good to have them.
I agree. And since DPR clearly state that the awards are completely subjective, and unrelated to the more objective scoring system, there really is no point in arguing with the choice of award. You can only agree to disagree, if you don't share the reviewer's opinion.
The award is given by the reviewer, if he for some reason, whatever it might be, thinks the camera deserves it. It's his personal feelings about the camera that determines if it gets an award, and if so, if it gets gold or silver. You can't dispute someone's personal feelings; they aren't objective facts.Of course, given this, one might question the value of such an award system for the consumers, but that's different from questioning the specific choices of awards.
PeakAction: I have now officially lost count of how many Rebel models there are.
From the DPR review of T5i/700D:
"The EOS 700D replaces the short-lived EOS 650D but the EOS 600D lives on in the overall lineup, to effectively drop down a notch to the position currently occupied by the EOS 550D / Rebel T2i, which will be discontinued."
Juck is right, there are four current models. T5i replaced the almost identical T4i, but T3i is still in production. Canon usually doesn't discontinue the previous model, instead keeping it in the line-up at a lower price point.And then we have the 1100D (I forget what it's called in the US), which is still current, since the SL1/100D is not its replacement. SL1 sits above 1100D in the line-up.
Leandros S: Under what terms are you using these images? You're a commercial site, and commercial use is not permitted by the copyright holder (Val Klavans for the retouched versions). Your versions are on the rather large side to be claiming fair use.
This is a news item, and they don't charge anything for it. Does that really count as commercial use?
nikanth: Is this a ploy to make the Sony camera owners feel satisfied that their camera is as good as a very costly camera? Marketing trick? OR may be just an advertisement trick of Sony? Hassleblad is an advertising company for Sony. These expensive cameras are reported by various magazines etc..
Yes, Leica use their own firmware. Do we know that Hasselblad doesn't? Not that it really matters, but I'm curious to know if they just reuse Sony's JPEG engine (which is not that great IMHO), or if they use their own.
Rachotilko: I don't get it. By definition, you can't add any DR to camera by firmware update, as it's given by the noise levels of the sensor in the shadow areas.
In other words, this is JPEG tweak, it does not translate to DxOMark results, since these are RAW based.
This is not a JPEG tweak, since the dual signal amplification happens before demosaicing. Just like any other processing, or "cooking", of raw files before conversion, it would affect DxOMark's results. However, DxO usually indicates this in their graphs, when they are aware of it. See, for example, some Pentax and Nikon 1 cameras.
GabrielZ: Not keen on these cheapo-plasticy XC series lenses. I hope these two are the only ones they're going to make. I thought Fujifilm's 'X'-series of cameras and lenses were supposed to be quality premium products.
It's pretty obvious that Fuji wants to build a complete system, which can compete with Micro Four Thirds and Sony NEX on all levels, from cheap entry-level to expensive high-end. Maybe the original plan was to only offer premium products, but it's hard to increase your market share without catering to entry-level users. After all, enthusiasts and professionals are only a small sub-set of all camera buyers.
ShutterbugDougG: Re: 20-1200mm zoom, I'm waiting for this crazy lens technology to make it into the SLR space - that is, hoping for small and lightweight Bigma alternatives.
There is no special lens technology involved here. This is made possible by the small sensor. If you want this zoom range for a DSLR, it would require a really slow lens (as pointed out by the previous poster), or an enormous lens, or a small sensor DSLR.
mr.izo: hmm, 7d only for stills? hope they're working on 6d too, or it's already integrated?
Apparently, only 5D3 and 7D have two signal amplifiers, which is necessary for using two ISO values simultaneously.
KW Phua: Let talk about review on DSLR on dpreview, after previding the score to each function and feature, let the reader put the weight/priority to them. e.g sport shooter prefer AF & FPS and high ISO quality (Noise & DR) but landscape shooter prefer wider DR in low ISO.
You might want to read the last section here. It's about future plans:
Andrei Todea: Is this Digital Sociology Review?
This site is devoted to digital photography; that means not just reviews of camera gear, but also news and articles about things that may be considered relevant or interesting to people interested in photography. People who buy camera gear online and read customer reviews could very well find this study interesting, so what's the problem?
I'm sure no reviews were harmed because of this. ;)
ManuelVilardeMacedo: What - no morons claiming it is an f/16 lens yet? Ooooh...
Guess you missed it, but of course someone did.
"F8 on mFT is equivalent to F16 on FF which is basically useless."
Zvonimir Tosic: Q is a system camera, which can instantly switch its modus operandi and take all new perspectives on photography depending on lenses and converters used. In fact it is unique and incomparable. To say it looks like the G15, P7700 or XZ-something, is true to the same degree as to say that you look like Albert Einstein.
Personally, I regard the Q as an enthusiast compact with a unique bonus feature: interchangeable lenses.
Tapper123: Another small sensor compact. But with interchangeable lenses...? Seriously?
If an ILC with a 1/1.7" sensor is a dead end, aren't the less versatile fixed-lens compacts with the same sensor size also dead ends? And yet they seem to be quite popular.
The problem is that people think of the Q cameras as competitors to the mirrorless ILCs with larger sensors, rather than as enthusiast compacts with the added bonus of interchangeable lenses.
Rod McD: Quote from the conclusion :- "Details are smudged at base ISO (though likely not an issue for target audience)"
Why is there this ongoing assumption that people who like the outdoors aren't interested in better IQ? In my experience, people who want tough, WR cameras to take to wild places greatly value where they go and the images they bring back. Perhaps the target audience who buy these cameras do so because there's simply nothing better available. It doesn't mean it isn't wanted and wouldn't sell. And no, one shouldn't have to carry a D4 in housing. We need something in-between - a modern day Nikonos with a fixed wide to standard zoom.
Surely someone could make a better small WR camera with a 1"- APSC sensor, a WA zoom, and real O-ring seals? Yes it would weigh more and cost more, but many would be prepared to pay more for a comprehensively better outdoor camera.
@GestureI judge images at the image level, not the pixel level. Isn't that how you look at and enjoy images? If an image looks good at the viewing/print size you normally prefer, then what's the problem?
Mikhail Tal: DPR Why are you wasting time reviewing these ridiculous underwater cameras, they are toys for kids and nothing more, anyone who wants real underwater photos will get a housing for their real camera.
Underwater photography is not the only (or even most important) use case for these rugged compacts. How about being able to use your camera out in the rain or snow, in environments with a lot of dust or sand in the air, or in situations where it's difficult to handle your camera like a newborn baby?
smatty: Isn't this what the Fuji X100s already implements?
Yes, Fuji X100s has on-sensor PDAF, as do X20, F900EXR, HS50EXR, Sony NEX-5R, NEX-6, SLT-A99, Nikon 1, Samsung NX300, Canon EOS M, 650D/Rebel 4Ti, 700D/Rebel 5Ti, 100D/SL1, all with different number and arrangement of PDAF pixels.But what is revolutionary with the new 70D, is not the fact that it has on-sensor PDAF, but the way in which Canon has achieved it: by splitting every pixel in two, rather than using only the left or right half of a selected number of pixels. This promises to be much better than all those other implementations, none of which is flawless (although Nikon 1 has very good AF, and NX300 is supposedly quite good too).
Scorpius1: I am very curious to see if this sensor improves on the banding and pattern noise problems of previous sensor's..The only issue's preventing me from buying a canon body(still have most of my L glass..)
It couldn't have been the same sensor anyway, since Canon's APS-C sensors are slightly smaller (crop factor is 1.6x).