Brilliant initiative. Bravo, Michael Reichmann
Bsadvies0104: it is always a pleasure to read all the posts about a camera which is not on the marketing yet. Also i love the discussion about pixels ( the more the beter it seems), sensor size (bigger=better), lenses and so on. I have a camera with only 5 milj. Pixels and the same (size) sensor, with a hell of a lens. The Leica digilux 2. I think most readers do not print postersize pictures. Mostly 13x19 inches, which is pretty big. When you print in this size, really 12 milj pixels and only a tiny sensor like X10, 20 and 30 is more then enough, unless you are looking to expose the photos, professionally, in a gallery. My old D2 is still spot on, cristal clear. It could be much better, but do i need it, or want. I think a perfect photo, and i do not mean the composition, has only a small effect on the technical data of the camera. It is the combination of things. Lens is the most important one. This count for the early ages of photography as well it is for today. Look for that and nothing else!
Frank_BR: I do not know why DPR gives so much importance to the method of distortion correction. The modern trend is that the bulk of the distortion be partially corrected optically, and the remainder by software. That Leica is a mystifying photography company, we all know long ago.
Well, just point me to a source on the web where any Leica executive is saying the their T lenses do not rely on software correction... I could not find any. I only have found a Dpreview person stating that he heard it from a leica executive... Pretty brittle fact, to say the least.
Darren_Birkin: Not sure I understand the comment about the X20 having better pottential for out of focus backgrounds than a camera with a larger sensor and larger maximum aperture. How does that work? You said it's counter intuitive which it is but you don't say why it is that way.
@mosc the concept of equivalent aperture is not easily explained as the concept of equivalent focal length is. For instance, an f2 lens on the X20 has the same light gathering ability as an f2 lens on a DSLR. However, that is not true for the depth of field factor. The crop factor plays a role only on the depth of field ability of a lens, not on its light gathering power.
duartix: Why the reviewer says there is little to pick between the 5 and 4s, I totally fail to understand...I mean... look at the first picture, it's pretty obvious:
The 4s has a lot more DR. It's screaming in the highlights whilst in the shadows they are pretty much close.
The 4s has also a lot of over-sharpening halos, look at the rails. Heck, looking at the buoy I even thought it was purple fringing.
Come on, if you don't spot these issues at first sight you shouldn't be doing reviews...
Well, I for one have replaced my iPhone 4s with a Nokia 808 Pureview 2 months ago and have never looked back. I am very happy with 808's performance as a phone. Certainly way better than the iPhone 4S in some key phone aspects for me (ie call quality, signal reception, battery life, Maps and GPS). On the camera front, the 808 blows the iPhone out of the water, both for stills and hd videos. Definitely it is an acquired taste UX wise, but easy to get used to. But if apps is your thing more than mobile photography or long lasting battery to power phone functions, than an iPhone or any android device is better suited.