thx1138: Wow another camera with the worlds fastest AF. That makes about 4 in the last year and none of them are DSLR's. Does anyone ever verify these claims?
Also, "determined with internal measurement method". Impossible to verify (or disprove) their claim without knowing their method.
mpgxsvcd: Just quit while you are behind Canon. At least your G1X II was a promising announcement. Your DSLR business is going no where fast though.
Well, they aren't behind in the one area that really matters to a commercial business: sales and market share. Canon's brand name and market position are so strong, that they don't need to be on the cutting edge to sell their products. That may change in the future, but right now that's the status quo.
RyanBoston: I thought they had a T5 a couple years ago?
The T5i/700D is the current 'advanced' entry-level model, while the T5/1200D is the stripped-to-the-bones budget offering.
Andrew ATM216: Wow!!!! This is really unbelievable....in 2014 introducing a dslr (even if its entry level) with digic 4....
And the g1 x ll is rumored to have digic 6....so honestly, I am in shock and disbelief about this kind of "innovation" coming from canon....and I have been shooting with canon for over 20 years....
I think someone needs to tell the executives at canon to wake up....
The 1x00D series is Canon's low-budget entry-level offering. It's for those who think that the 100D/SL1 and 700D/T5i are too expensive and advanced. Innovation were never an objective for the designers and engineers who worked on this.
Artifact: ... and this is just one of the reasons why instead of newest Rebel I bought Nikon d5300. Seriously, how many times can Canon re-release the same sensor? Did they fire their entire sensor R&D department? I loved my Canon lenses but could not justify buying new rebel with the same old sensor.
Look at it this way; this camera actually got a sensor upgrade, because the predecessor (1100D) didn't have the 18 Mp sensor.
(unknown member): You've got to be kidding . . . what is Canon thinking? Actually, it's like they stopped thinking some time ago.
Blame Sony instead ;)
Kevin Purcell: The Sigma claim that the three layers are blue, green and red is just not true. It's marketing BS along with the 39MPx claim.
The probablility of a photon being absorbed in the top layer is highest for the blue, next most light for greenish and least likely for the red but all three do get some absortion in that layer. It's a desaturated bluish cyan.
In the middle layer a lot of the blue has been filtered (but not all) so that middle layer is a desaturated greenish yellow (some blue, some red and mostly green). The bottom layer is orangish red (mostly red, a little green and a very little blue).
To get to real RGB primaries you have to stick these (noisy) signal though a color matrix to remove the crosstalk between the colors (giving even noisier RGB signal out).
This is the major reason for Foeveon sensors poor high ISO performance (noise goes up quicker than you'd expect) and poor color fidelity (because your original primaries aren't very good).
First of all, I didn't dismiss the camera.Secondly, what I wrote isn't dumb, because it happens to be true.And thirdly, this doesn't happen in regular sensors or with film. It's a consequence of the layered sensor design, where the colour filtering is achieved by way of different wavelengths penetrating to different depths. If you're familiar with quantum physics, then you know that photons behave in a probabilistic manner. There will always be photons that penetrate deeper or shallower than the majority of photons of the same energy level.How large the practical consequences is, I don't know. They may very well be insignificant. I just wanted to confirm that the colour crosstalk that the OP described is indeed based on known scientific principles, as he seemed to be met with some disbelief.
There is indeed cross talk between the colour channels. Photons are subject to the laws of quantum physics, which are all about probabilities. Some photons will always be absorbed by the 'wrong' layer.
joyclick: Sigma are OK with lenses but insist on being odd and quixotic when it comes to their cameras.I don't understand why !
Because such a small camera maker must distinguish itself somehow, and create a niche that nobody else exploits. Who would buy a Sigma camera if it were no different than the cameras made by the bigger players?
RFC1925: Clearly this is for people that choose cameras based on looks or what other people might think of their camera.
Well, the marketing speak from the press release seems to contradict that the DPs are targeting studio photographers:
"It’s a simple but powerful lineup that delivers medium format-level image quality anywhere, anytime. Take all three with you and select as needed for the perfect shot."
aris14: Τhe only problem I see till now in every cam design is that the digital era needs new designs...Especially because still and video are getting closer.It's almost ridiculous still to have a back and lens perpendicularly on it...There is no need for that any more...There is no film reel...We need a design to function with available technology...We don't need to batch technology in older forms...Can't they understand that current cams layouts undermine their products?
As for this cam...The GH-4 seems to be more than just fine...
Cannicos can deal with what they usually do. Low level marketing.
The old designs and their modern variations work just fine with current technology. Film reel or not, from a handling/ergonomics perspective the basic design just works for most people. It doesn't undermine the cameras.So why fix something that isn't broken? What kind of practical user problem do you think needs to be fixed in today's cameras, and what is your proposed solution?
Usee: Still unreliable ISO numbers from Fuji,which should be mentioned and taken into account...
Fuji: 1/60 @ F5,6
Canon / Samsung: 1/100 @ F5,6
...at the same scene with ISO 200 setting!
Again, the Fuji ISO numbers are sadly nearly one stop beside reality......otherwise probably a fine camera. ;-)
Camera manufacturers follow the ISO standard, which is defined with respect to final output, i.e. JPEG brightness. Even so, the standard allows the manufacturers to decide the "correct" exposure that results in a given output brightness. Therefore, the manufacturer can choose to state the Standard Output Sensitivity and/or the Recommended Exposure Index.The so called "measured ISO" of DxO, is completely different, and has to do with exposure at the sensor. It has nothing to do with the ISO standard or the ISO values stated by the camera manufacturer, and it's therefore incorrect to say that a manufacturer misstates the ISO.
Zeisschen: DSLR is just a transition technology from film to digital. Mirrorless (or better CSC) is the only future, even Canon and Nikon have to admit that sooner or later. In 2013 mirrorless already took the crown in picture quality and equaled in sensor size (A7r) and 100% replaced the OVF (A7, E-M1). In 2014 video and AF are the last things that mirrorless will fully catch up and overtake the DSLR (actually I think AF is already better today because accuracy is more important than the last 1\100 of second a DSLR might be quicker). In 2015 CSC will surpass DSLR in market share, in another 3 years the DSLR as it exists today will probably be reduced to one pro FF body and one crop body per brand for some people who still prefer an OVF. The actual only other reason to do that is to serve people bodies for all the the lenses they still have. But most will adapt then to a CSC (without the advantage of having a smaller system).Finally in 2050 Nikon is going to release the DF mkII. It's basically the same thing but it has a video button to record 1080/30p.
Given that DSLRs still outsell mirrorless ILCs roughly 4:1, I don't think mirrorless will surpass DSLRs in market share already in 2015. Remember that mirrorless cameras recently have shown less growth than DSLRs, and that they have yet to conquer the European and American markets.Maybe it will happen that soon in Japan, but if we're talking global market shares, 2015 is far too optimistic (or pessimistic, depending on how you look at it.)
raztec: The more I read about what Panasonic, Fuji, Olympus, Sony and Pentax are doing, the more I dislike CaNikon with their incredible greed and pretentiousness and lack of innovation.
These two companies are riding on their name only and either charging ridiculous amounts of money for their high end products or putting out consumer oriented crap.
I can't wait to sell all my Nikon gear and invest completely in another system.
I would say that Canon's Dual Pixel AF is one of the greatest innovations in recent years. It makes on-sensor PDAF possible, without using dedicated pixels that can't be used for image capture. So the "lack of innovation" mantra, that is often repeated, isn't entirely fair, IMHO.
Artpt: @DPReview, was there any press release given regarding compatibility with Olympus lenses?
The camera uses the blur of OOF areas to determine distance. This requires a lens-specific profile describing the appearance of the blur at every aperture value. The camera has profiles for all Panasonic m43 lenses, but apparently they didn't profile any Olympus lenses. Such profiles could be added with future firmware updates, though.That Panasonic and Olympus share a lens mount, doesn't mean that every feature in their cameras must support the other company's lenses.
sean lee: Is it about to come next generation of coolpix A?
Apparently, the Coolpix A hasn't exactly been a bestseller. If Nikon doesn't understand that the reason for this is that it's overpriced, but rather thinks that people didn't like the concept, then they might not bother with updating it.
Musicjohn: So when are manufacturers going to design a photo-camera which excells in taking photographs (just as the word PHOTO-camera implements) instead of concentrating on video features? If I want to make superior video images, I'll buy a video camera instead.
There are more cameras that excel at taking photographs today than ever before. If you can't take a decent photo with any of them, then you need to improve your photography skills.
Samuel Dilworth: Does the P340 really have GPS “BuiltIn” as it states at the bottom of the specs? The press release makes no mention of it.
If it has GPS, this camera is interesting. I don’t care about Wi-Fi – I’m only ready to share a photo after I’ve developed the raw file using a colour-calibrated monitor – but geotagging is seriously useful for me.
Otherwise this is purely a catch-up camera.
Yes, the S9700 has a GPS receiver, but not the P340. From Imaging Resource:
"It's a follow-up to last year's Coolpix P330, and in place of that camera's GPS receiver, the newer model has built-in Wi-Fi connectivity."
Shamael: In simple words, we had until now photo cameras that could make video, and from now on, we have video cameras that can make photos. What the heck is that good for? And, then, 2000$ for a body that contains things I never use. When do camera manufacturers start doing again cameras for photographers? Now, stop talking about Nikon DF low resolution cripple and it's fantasy pricing?The world is definitely upside down.
Also seems a bit strange to complain about paying for features you never use. The GH4 is obviously intended for people who are interested in advanced videography; if you're not one of those people, just don't buy the camera. Problem solved.
I think Fujifilm, Ricoh/Pentax and Olympus will continue to make stills-oriented cameras. They don't seem to have videography "in their blood".