NotSteve: So, this is basically the X-mount version of the K-01, if it's for real. More conservative in design, but the shape of the hand grip, non-black colour options and textures are very reminiscent of the K-01. The K-02 -- by Fuji.
This is the NEX-3N/E-PM2/GF6 of the X-system. Why comparing it to the K-01?
onlooker: Interesting that it would have a regular Bayer sensor. Indication of things to come?
No, this is product differentiation. The entry-level model gets a less advanced sensor, but the high-end models likely will continue to use X-trans.
Robert Morris: X-E2 Please.
Entry-level models are refreshed once a year, not enthusiast models. Sony refreshes NEX-3 and NEX-5 each year, but not NEX-6 and NEX-7. Canon refreshes the Rebels each year, but not the higher models. Expecting a new X-E1 and X-Pro1 every year is not realistic, but X-M1 and X-A1 probably will be replaced once a year.
Northgrove: Goes well together with earlier rumors of the same blue shaded camera body. :) But I don't really get it. The X-M1 is the "cheap" one with several trade-offs. *shrug* A whole new body to trim off a sliver of the price further, with a lesser sensor and two more colors? Sounds a bit strange.
I rather wish for an X-E2 or X-Pro2 (the Pro will probably be released first) with the improvements to AF, MF, and sensor found in the X100s.
I guess Fuji wants to match the Sony NEX line-up: X-A1 vs. NEX-3N, X-M1 vs. NEX-5T, X-E1 vs. NEX-6, X-Pro1 vs. NEX-7.
CNY_AP: What I don't understand is that the Nikon 5200 for example is highly rated by DxoMark, but when I look at high ISO shots in the Comparometer tool, I think the various Canon 18MP sensors fare well against the Nikon (in terms of detail retention versus noise).
Better example - Nikon D3200 is very highly rated in DxoMark, but in the T5i review, it looks awful. The review says so, not just me:http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-t5i/canon-t5iA.HTM
So I wonder if DxoMark doesn't measure sensor performance correctly (wrong methodology). For example, maybe Nikon simply blurs their images more, hiding noise, but losing detail.
Or maybe Canon has superior firmware/processing which overcomes/hides their sensors' inferiority. But in the end, if the images look the same, what does it matter.
They analyze undemosaiced raw files, not demosaiced RGB images.
yabokkie: it says "fast and wide" in the title.
I'd say moderately fast and moderately wide for a 35/2.1 equiv. that's the work it can do, no more, no less.
This lens does exactly what a 23mm F1.4 lens is expected to do on an APS-C sensor camera. It's pointless to speak of its equivalent performance on a sensor format that it's not supposed to be used with.
iamphil: So this is Nikon's take on Canon's PowerShot N? Do these two "competitors" do anything other than copy the "innovations" coming from the other?
The WiFi-equipped Canon is meant to be used as an "accessory" to a smartphone, whereas the Nikon is just a tiny P&S with no connectivity options at all.
sportyaccordy: Seems like we are going to run through a lot of bad ideas before arriving at the inevitable most logical conclusion (largish sensor cameraphone). Nikon's V1 system would still be with us today if they had introduced it as an Android phone (and came with a pancake lens- I don't know what the lineup was). An "RX-10" APS-C camera from Sony would be a hot item with a thin design, collapsable fixed focal length lens and full on 4G phone capabilities. Hell, even if it were thicker I wouldn't mind- most of my phones (Ericsson P800/900, Treo 650, G1) have been pretty thick; I think serious photographers would be OK with a bigger phone if it could take pictures like a "real" camera.
I suppose Sony deserves credit for taking a risk, but it was a stupid risk and doesn't really address any of the issues facing phone photography. If I have to bring an extra device that won't fit in my pocket I will bring my cheaper, easier to use, faster NEX-C3 + kit lens.
The Nikon 1 system is still with us today with three current models.
Bernard Hill: What about Olympus E100RS? Only 1.2Mpx but it captured photos *before* you pressed the shutter. Once it was half-pressed the camera started taking photos, and kept the last five in a circular buffer. Make a full press and the buffer was kept and of course the current view was recorded. And the next photos until you release.I can't understand why no-one else has used this concept (or do you know different...?) but it's great for action shots waiting for a particular event such as a bubble bursting.I eventually sold mine because my thing is landscape shooting and it didn't do a lot for that <g>
Don't the Nikon 1 cameras have a similar feature? I'm pretty sure that they do.
In the DPR comparometer you're looking at raw files converted to JPEG using the default settings in Adobe Camera Raw.DxO's test results, on the other hand, are based on analysis of the unconverted, undemosaiced raw files. They look at numbers, not images. They do this to avoid being dependent on any particular raw conversion software, and come as close to the hardware performance as possible.
Hubertus Bigend: I'm not in the least sure that I understood the principle correctly, but wouldn't such a device, no matter to what specific setting it was configured in a specific moment of time, always somehow act like a polarizing filter screwed onto the lens, procducing more or less unnatural images?
No, this is not a polarizing filter, that filters out light that is polarized in a certain direction. It just changes the polarization angle of all incoming light.
BlueBomberTurbo: Couldn't they just take Panasonic's approach to video, scaling down the entire frame instead of line skipping? No moire at all on my GH2, and it's infinitely sharper and more detailed than my old D7000 and current D7100...
I hardly think the traditional optical companies, like Nikon and Olympus, make their own processors, or other electronic components. For example, Chipworks writes this about the Nikon EXPEED 3 processor in D5200:
"The big chip of note is Nikon EXPEED 3. It is a package-on-package configuration featuring Samsung K4B4G3146 4 Gb DDR3 DRAM on top. The EXPEED device is fabricated by Fujitsu and is a big piece of silicon at 8.7 mm x 9.4 mm."
It also has a microprocessor and image sensor by Toshiba, and other components by other companies.Sony, Panasonic, Epson, Texas Instruments and others also supply components for other companies, so I hardly think the optical companies are limited with respect to the hardware available to them.
arhmatic: We all remember the Hasselblad Lunar and Adobe Creative Cloud.The articles were ok... I almost passed them.
Then the comments... Hours and hours of fresh, original entertainment.Priceless!
And let us not forget about the "white orbs".
Ronie-AAA: Get out of town... if you don't want to disclose the manufacturer of the card than the whole thing is pointless, the picture is nothing to write home about.
Or perhaps he didn't want to be accused of already having made a deal with the manufacturer. There are always a lot of sceptics, who would think that this whole story was just an advertisement in disguise.
Sam Carriere: Give me a break.Is there absolutely NO photography equipment for you to cover or review?
I'm completely unimpressed with this camera as well, but give DPR a break. Canon sent them a press release and they published it, just like they always do when new cameras are announced. I don't think any review has been delayed because of this.
Photato: Nokia has a 41MP sensor. Canon decides 12MP is best for enthusiast Cameras.Wonder who is right in regards to pixel density?
For me, "enthusiast" means more physical controls, better build quality, a fast and sharp lens, manual exposure modes, the option to shoot raw and use accessories like flashes, filters and converters. I'd rather see an improvement of lens sharpness than more megapixels.
At last! I've been holding off switching to digital for 20 years, but now Canon has made the camera for me.
Sergeg: It's almost inconceivable how some of those designs got past the drawing board in terms of ergonomics and aesthetics. Technological advances aside, when you consider the form factor of the typical smart phone today, and it's still camera and HD video camera capabilities, then product design is obviously subject to the same evolutionary processes as all art forms.After all, the ancient Egyptians only portrayed their world in 2D.
My first DSLR 10 years ago, was the Fuji S2Pro, which I still have, relatively little has changed in DSLR design in the last decade by comparison.
Sometimes people in forums like this complain about the form factor and ergonomics of modern cameras, saying that the manufacturers should try other types of design, like making cameras that handle like rifles or hair dryers or whatever.Someone even fantasized about a ball-shaped sensor on a stick; just hold it up in the air and let it record light from all directions, and do all the rest (including zooming and focusing) in post-processing.These people seem to forget that the manufacturers already have tried and rejected lots of different designs. Sure, nothing wrong with being inventive and visionary, but why change something that works (for most people,anyway)?
Edit: I was just struck by the possible consequences of people walking around pointing gun-shaped objects at each other. Cause for rejection right there, I think. :D
clicstudio: Gorgeous and amazing photos! They almost look recent.Makes u realize the "real" photographers were those, 70 to 80 years ago, who shot manual and film and without an LCD screen to help and no photoshop.I really admire them and the glimpse of Americana their photos show. Color makes the whole difference. Thanx for sharing!
No, they were not B&W originals; they were shot in colour.
yabokkie: to my eyes, GX7 doesn't have better noise than Pana's previous sensor in E-M5, though Oly may cook raw files more than Pana.
Panasonic still use their own sensors in some cameras, so they haven't "gone Sony" completely. Canon make their own sensors, but they also have used Sony sensors in some compact cameras.Sure, the GH3 is their "flagship" model, but I see no problem with Panasonic using a Sony sensor in it. There is some evidence suggesting Olympus use a Sony sensor, and since GH3 has practically identical image quality in raw, it's most likely the same sensor.
And just because Nikon use sensors from Toshiba and Aptina, it doesn't necessarily mean that they have turned away from Sony completely. Nikon also designs their own sensors, which are manufactured by Renesas, and they have done so for many years, so they've never used exclusively Sony sensors.
We simply don't know the reasoning behind the choice of sensor maker; there could be both technological and business-related factors influencing the choice of one source over another. That goes for all camera components, by the way, not just the sensor.