tabloid: Real world..Personally as a full time professional photographer i would never go back to a SLR….its morrorless all the way for me.
I dont do sports, or fast moving objects….I photograph people.
Just a couple of reasons why mirror less is great : Focusing via the mirror/pentaprtism in a SLR doesn't mean that its in focus on the film/sensor plane.For me a digital SLR (with mirror) can't be used for view-back in bright sunlight.(please don't say put a hood on it).
SLR (with mirror): Constant overheating in video mode.
Ive set my Sony A65 so that when i take a picture, the image stays in my viewfinder for about 4 seconds so that i can see if what I've taken is acceptable, or if the person has blinked. Great for group shots, where one person has always blinked.Can do videos via the viewfinder. Can play back videos and stills via the viewfinder….great stuff.I could go on, but i won't, as people who own mirror less cameras know exactly what I'm talking about.
Your Sony A65 has a mirror and dedicated focusing sensors. This is not the sort camera being discussed here. I doubt if Samsung are going to go the SLT route.
The odd thing is with my NEX system I much prefer to use the 55-210 lens on my dslr shaped and sized A3000 which is inferior to the NEX6 in nearly every respect. This is because it is so much more balanced and pleasant to hold and compensates for the basic evf and focusing speed.I would think people before switching should try out the and make sure for longer focal lengths they enjoy the beer can on a credit card feel of mirrorless or I suspect in the case of full frame ale keg on a paperback experience.
Merel: It's amazing that most of top rated camera's (of course at higher price) do not include GPS. Almost everybody shoots extremely high amount of pictures during vacations, at locations often far away from home.
Eventually we all end up with those unavoidable questions" Darling where was this picture taken ? And this one ? Where was that again? "
So why is this GPS feature so neglected ? The DMC-GM5 (and others) would have been so much nicer camera in my list ! For that price, most people would expect GPS to be a standard feature or at least an option. Everybody might have it's own reasons, but on the subject I guess anybody will agree.
When showing your best pictures, what is the most common question you will get to answer ? .... " Waaow ! WHERE was this ? "
My Panasonic TZ60 with its GPS is great for holidays. I always carry a spare battery so battery life has never been an issue. It is really great to be able to look at the map in Lightroom and see all the travels of the holiday outlined.
Just been outside with my now fairly venerable Garmin 60CSx and this got a lock within 45 seconds. It has not has had any contact with anything but the satellites for years. Probably would take longer if the location is switched and it always helps if you tell it that it is a new location.My Nokia Lumia 1020 massively outperforms it though getting locks in trains where the Garmin gives up plus with Windows you can download the maps so no problem abroad with roaming charges. Probably it is helped by using the phone transmitters but the technology has moved ahead.
Why is the lack of built in flash a particular problem meriting a con with the Samsung NX3000 but not with the Olympus E-PL7?
photog4u: Nikon makes some pretty good stuff. And Canon,yes. But Sony is on FIRE! Fast AF with reliable tracking, well implemented focus peaking with magnification, legacy glass, smoking good EVF, FULL FRAME and now with FIVE AXIS IS! All for under $2k! "Despite the emergence of mirrorless cameras, the market is still dominated by conventional DSLRs" I doubt very much if you will be able extol that statement for very much longer.
Interesting that this is a discussion on consumer cameras and you are talking about a $2K camera. The big problem with mirrorless is that it costs a lot of money to get a model with a viewfinder. Putting an EVF in to a mirrorless seems to be a lot more expensive than the mirror OVF system.Entry level DSLR is just more affordable than mirrorless unless you are prepared to drop the viewfinder and of course DSLR comes with a vast affordable lens supply. I cannot see in these still struggling economic times a big rush in to a luxury goods sector which is where mirrorless is at the moment.
Greynerd: It is a pity that Casio have given up on the West with their cameras. It would be nice if at some time in the future if we could actually make such affordable high tech consumer products ourselves in the future but I cannot see this happening. The fact we cannot get away from these old imperial multiple number base measurement systems gives a hint why we struggle in the UK and the US for that matter.
@photoshackNot easy to buy in the West as far as I am aware. If you know an easy way to buy them in UK please tell. There just seems to be a trend starting where that the Far East have local markets for their products and are starting to find sufficient sales within their own markets and leaving us out. I do not think it is just labour costs as so much production is automated now. Not sure this system where we can live on credit to buy these luxury goods supplied from abroad will continue for ever. We may actually need to make stuff ourselves though we do lecture the Far East on these forums on how to do it.
It is a pity that Casio have given up on the West with their cameras. It would be nice if at some time in the future if we could actually make such affordable high tech consumer products ourselves in the future but I cannot see this happening. The fact we cannot get away from these old imperial multiple number base measurement systems gives a hint why we struggle in the UK and the US for that matter.
SeeRoy: Solution seeks problem.
Like most innovation.
prossi: How about DPreview focus on some of the cameras people want to see reviewed like the GM5, a5100, EPL7, d750? Why would anyone want to get this thing when the rx100III is out there? I don't know what's up with Canon but I gave up on it since 2010.
@Joseph BlackIt would not be quick as a transatlantic flight would be necessary :) I have never seen a Best Buy this side of the pond. In the UK they would have to call it the 'Least Worst Buy'. Over here Canon always tends to be shown as the camera on any general Christmas promotion, ironically the the total power failure if you video zoom SX280 is often pictured. This is why I get the overall feeling that they are just not under the same pressure as the competition to perform. At an air show virtually every camera is a Canon SLR with the odd Nikon.
@Joseph BlackHow many owners of the G7X have used many other cameras for comparison. Do not forget that a large percentage of Western buyers are not aware that anyone but Canon make cameras. Probably this is why Canon cameras are so unrefined as the market is there whatever so why would they need to bother.
Mike FL: For Zoom = F2.8 all the way with small sensor/body, you can get Panasonic FZ200 @$379 as today's price (10-31-2014) while Stylus 1 is about $600 from respectable sellers.
Other than huge price difference, there are PROs and CONs, but FZ200 has much wide (24mm vs 28mm) and longer (600mm vs 300mm) zoom, and SHARPER lens.
Link for FZ200 @$379:http://www.abesofmaine.com/item.do?item=PSDMCFZ200K&id=PSDMCFZ200K&l=PLA&gclid=Cj0KEQjw5syiBRCwxPbE6o_MsK4BEiQAUowjppy6E61JOlFAx2gUAglH5L2E7U00PHEkDHpkHabxgUYaAlGC8P8HAQ
Why FZ200 is better choice:http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Olympus_STYLUS_1/verdict.shtml
Not sure how you come to the conclusion that I own the camera. Just a detached observer a bit mystified by your comparison. Your post does not really merit any other comment.
The FZ200 is double the thickness of the Stylus 1 and weighs 46% more. The FZ200 is certainly not a small camera and given its limited zoom is rather oversized nowadays which is why it is so cheap given that compact travel zooms are 30x nowadays. Just a completely different sort of camera with only the f2.8 as a matching feature and really irrelevant to this thread.
straylightrun: Absolutely disgusting. With such minor software changes, why not just make it a firmware update?
So you know for a fact that all the changes in the camera will run on the current hardware? You can run any software on any processing platform coupled to any physical camera components.
Sirandar: I also checked out the similar legacy lenses from the 70s and 80s. They were beautiful creations but the images were nothing special .....
They were not sharp as the midrange m43 lenses I had and the contrast was sometimes good sometimes poor and the colours were mostly washed out. It is very hard to fix washed out colours convincingly in Photoshop.
They were dirt cheap and I still didn't buy them.
Nothing even cane close to my 45mm Oly Prime in any aspect let alone all three.
I also found a new respect for my cheap Oly 40-150. My copy is pretty darned good for any price. If only it was faster .....
You can't judge a lens much by how it looks or what is made of, or a red dot.
You judge it by the images and how easy it is to use.
My money would be on that it isn't worth 359$ as that is about what I paid for my Oly 45mm prime but we will see.
Possibly there has been some development in materials and optical design since the 70's and 80's. These lenses will be deigned for your digital m43 camera and the legacy lenses were not.You contradict yourself by saying that you cannot judge a lens on what it looks like then assume this lens will be same as a 1980 lens because it looks like one.It is going to be a useful addition to e-mount as this focal length and the aperture is very appealing.
I suppose it is just a case of trying to make these old technology electro-mechanical machines look modern and up to date.
AV Janus: Its cute how these filter makers still hang on to the pre-post processing technologies for photography. They are down right retro!They should sell their brand while its still worth something.
Is that a fact that post processing can match everything single thing in a normal image that this at the moment modification can do and as easily for that matter? Even a RAW image has a degree of commitment that cannot necessarily be undone later.
I would like a sensor half way between 1/1.7" and 1". This would create a pretty high performance zoom compact without creating the gigantic beasts that have appeared with equivalent focal length 200mm+. They have tripled the area of the sensor when doubling it would probably suffice for compact purposes.
Astrotripper: Looks promising. A bit mushy, which I guess is typical for in-camera jpegs. However, I'd say:- those look much better than jpegs from any of Samsung's mirrorless offerings (now, that is one lousy jpeg engine), including NX1- it seems to handle lens flare pretty well- CA must be pretty well controlled, since the in-camera corrections have left very little traces of it, no obvious purple fringing as well- a little bit of softness in the corners on the wide end (probably resulting from distortion corrections), totally expectable, still much better than some DSLR zooms- no extreme vignetting, but that's most likely corrected in software, so hard to tell how the lens perform in this regard- ISO 1600 looks to be perfectly usable
Can't wait for in-depth review. This looks like it may be a perfect walk-around camera for more advanced users.
These glib assertions that such and such a make has a lousy JPEG engine always amuse me. Especially as I have read it for just about every make and the NX1 probably is not yet in to its production firmware and we have it trundled out here. The fact is that for a lot of post processors any camera jpeg which did not show a clear sky as bright turquoise and every colour super saturated is going to be a fail.
Zeisschen: The fact that Panasonic uses the same sensor size as in their other cameras is a bit strange. I think they just wanted to surpass the Sony RX100 in sensor size again after their LX series fell back behind and for sure the sales dropped due to the Sony. Now it's a big ugly transformer monster camera that is not really compact anymore, somewhat missing the point imho. I'd also go with a M43 camera with interchangeable lenses instead of I can't fit it in my jeans pocket, the RX100 can. Canon GX series has the same problem.If course the LX100 will be great camera, it just doesn't make much sense for me. As the one and only camera beside a smartphone it would make sense, but not for M43 owners. At Sony the difference between a A7 and the RX100 is much bigger so it makes senses to own both cameras.
Where did all this nonsense start where any camera that does not fit in a jeans pocket is classified as not compact? It seems a pretty trivial way and irrelevant way of categorising portability of cameras. Putting a camera in a jeans pocket is only really applicable to people who can afford to trash their expensive equipment on a casual basis.