fatdeeman: Oh dear, the shadows in the processed ISO 200 shot are awful, I've been spoilt by my NEX 5n. The low noise floor in modern Sony sensors really does make the files very robust when it comes to recovering shadows.
Could this technology not be incorporated into a 4/3 sensor?
The sensor used in Olympus E-M5/M10/P5/PL7/PM2 is made by Sony, of the same generation as the NEX-7 sensor, I believe.
The Olympus E-M1 and Panasonic's GH4/GX7/GM5/GM1/GF7 all use a Panasonic sensor.
I don't know if there's a difference in the ability to recover shadows between the two 4/3" sensors.
0mega: I just don't see how this can compete with Sony mirror-less.
The information about the lens used, as well as FL, aperture, shutter speed and ISO is right there below every image.
Mike FL: The super zoom seems getting better after these years as the HIGHER ISO images starting to worth a look.
It would be nice if DPR can run a Lab Studio Comparison test for these $300+ USD pocket super zoom such as but not limited to:- This one- Sony DSC-HX50V - Canon SX710 HS- Nikon S9900- Olympus...
I know it is lot of work, but should be very helpful for us.
Sony's latest offering is HX60V, which for some reason isn't to be found in the DPR database.
Edit: It seems the HX60V isn't available in the US. The main difference seems to be the inclusion of NFC and the Bionz X processor.
mpgxsvcd: I have to commend Dpreview on this interview. Most interviewers wouldn’t dare ask the questions that were asked here. Most companies would just answer no comment or give a very generic response like “We are working on that but I can’t talk about future products”.
This guy gives his own personal opinion several times. He should know that some people won’t care that he said it is his own opinion. He is there representing Canon so some people are going to attribute his opinions to Canon.
His comments are just too off the wall to be a translation issue. Simply put. He thinks Canon is doing everything correctly. Only time will tell if his customers think the same thing.
"He thinks Canon is doing everything correctly."
Well, he did admit that he thinks Canon is moving too slowly when it comes to innovation, and he implied that he thinks Canon USA might have made the wrong decision in not selling the M3 in North America.
ThePhilips: "But to be honest when we’re looking at mirrorless cameras, and entry-level DSLR cameras, and high-end compact cameras, we don’t know which of those will become mainstream."
That's quite telling that Canon itself, after so many years, doesn't consider entry-level DSLRs to be mainstream.
Even more revealing is the dismissal of the mirrorless by throwing them together with the compacts and entry-level DSLRs.
"Even more revealing is the dismissal of the mirrorless by throwing them together with the compacts and entry-level DSLRs."
This shows that Canon doesn't (yet) see mirrorless ILCs as DSLR replacements, but rather as a stepping stone between compacts and high-end DSLRs, or maybe as a cheaper companion to a DSLR.
Daniel Lauring: American's don't want small cameras. HUH?!?f
This was the worst interview yet.
Canon or Maeda as it's rep, seems to lack any bit of humility and this interview only enforces that fact that Canon is a poor listener and completely detached from reality.
For a company that is so detached from reality, they sure seem to know the inner workings of marketing, because no other company sells more cameras.
mpgxsvcd: I wish I could just laugh this article off. However, I really feel like crying over it instead. Canon will not recover from this. That is a very sad thing to have to say.
Canon will recover just fine. This is just Marketing Speak 101, they have given thousands of these interviews over the years.
I hope you will recover, though, because you seem to have reacted quite strongly.
lacikuss: This lens defeat the very purpose of m43 system. These look like FF lenses. Heavy and bulky.
"The F number is essentially a ratio so its the same light spread over four times the area with full frame so ISO would need to go up 4 times for equal brightness."
No, it seems you've got that backwards. The physical aperture size is related to the total amount of light, but the f number, being a ratio, is related to light intensity, i.e. the amount of light per unit area, which in turn determines brightness.However, since a FF sensor is four times as large, the total amount of light over the entire sensor area will be four times as large.
In other words, image brightness will be the same, because in terms of exposure f/2.8 = f/2.8. The signal-to-noise ratio will however be higher on FF, because the entire sensor receives four times as much light.
Unless of course I'm missing something in your reasoning.
dosdan: I like the bit about the use of a more complex chrome-plating process out of concern for the welfare of Sigma's staff. That seems to be an advantage of a family run relatively small concern.
One thing I'd like to know, why were there so many QC problems in Sigma lenses a few years back? Centering issues seemed to be endemic at one time.
Sigma now quality checks every single lens that's coming off the production line. Maybe they didn't always do it like that? It's more common, I believe, to only check random samples, not all of them.
zakaria: Mid range DX format? !
In terms of build quality and ergonomics, the D7200 is more enthusiast-oriented than the D5500. The smaller size of the D5500 just reinforces the fact that it sits below the D7200 in the line-up.The same goes for the touchscreen, which most camera manufacturers regard as a consumer feature. Not many high-end cameras have a touchscreen, after all.
I never quite understood the "defeat the purpose" argument. The primary purpose of any camera system surely is to take pictures. I don't see how these lenses defeat that purpose.
ThatCamFan: This is insanity at its best, if a legislation like this were done in Iceland, the people who backed it up would be quickly removed from congress.
"should we not just ban helicopters, airplanes & cars because they can crash into something?"
No, but we should regulate their use by requiring driver's and pilot's licenses and having traffic rules. And, in fact, most countries already have done just that.
"maybe we should ban GEESE from flying?"
I think that, if there was the slightest chance that geese would respect laws and regulations, we would already have such laws and regulations in place.
PicOne: Can't they just decide what brand and name they want to use..? Getting old with the Ricoh announces the latest Pentax yadda yadda. "Ricoh's Pentax Q-Mount Roadmap".. is this all really necessary?
Kinda like saying "Procter and Gamble"s Crest Toothpaste Cool Mint"..
Nice to put out a roadmap though. nice idea I wish more companies did.
As I said, Pentax is no longer used as a company name. They renamed Pentax Ricoh Imaging to Ricoh Imaging. There is no entity named Pentax in the current corporate structure.
Kangaroo Court: Do they actually include the camera bodies into their imaging division? I thought it was just sensors. I remember people over the years talking about sony and why they keep selling their sensors the competition. The answer was always "their imaging division makes as much money as the cameras do", I guess we shall see.
Why would the imaging division make sensors? They make cameras and lenses, not sensors. Those are made by Sony Semiconductor, just like other semiconductor components.
prossi: An R&D guy that doubles as marketing manager?!!? I am loving Olympus more & more by the minute. Definitely this one is low on the bs-ing and high on the doing. They need more of these at Canon.
It seems that Chuck Westfall has some kind of technical background. From Canon's biography:
"Chuck's involvement with digital cameras began in 1994, when he assisted Canon and Kodak engineers in developing the EOS-DCS series of professional SLRs. Since then, his responsibilities have expanded to include participation in the development and launching of many other Consumer Imaging Group products including Canon's professional and consumer-oriented digital cameras."
Except that Pentax is not a subsidiary of Ricoh, or even its own division. Pentax was completely merged with Ricoh's own imaging division, so it's not like a company that is part of a larger corporation.
Under Hoya, Pentax was a subsidiary. That subsidiary was acquired by Ricoh, who merged it with their own imaging business, creating a subsidiary called Pentax Ricoh Imaging. That subsidiary was later renamed to Ricoh Imaging.
Simon97: Surprise, surprise. Pathetic image quality. Why bother reviewing cameras with pin-head sized sensors. I thought DPR stopped this awhile ago. There are many good cameras that need a review. Please put the effort into that.
Amazon sells all cameras, don't they? Even the ones that don't get reviews at DPR. Why would Amazon single out this specific model for a review?
Boky: There's immense amount of noise and jpg artefacts even at base ISO. This second incarnation does not even have an option for GSM...??? What is the point of producing this...piece of plastics.... why the (wasted) effort?? Most importantly, why would dPreview missuse their already strained resources on this piece of plastics?
People complain that DPR give an award to every camera they review (which btw is false), but when they do review a bad camera, people complain that they misuse their resources.
The confusion is caused by the fact that people still think of Pentax as a company. Pentax is just a brand name that Ricoh uses for their interchangeable lens cameras. It would be wrong to say that Pentax announces new products, because only a company can do that. And the company's name is Ricoh.
Horshack: Yet another article about a Pentax camera. How come no mention of Canon or Nikon?
Did you miss all the articles about the Canon 5DS, the new Rebels and the EOS M3? And the Nikon D810A?