A warning shot to Canon and Nikon, no one will pay for overpriced crap forever when new comers can deliver more for less. The few Japanese brands and Yongnuo are slowly killing overpriced OEMs.
Zoron: D900 better be good....or else
@KundI feel it is more Canon than Nikon that's having this dinosaurs problem. At least Nikon have D610, D750, D810 and decent f/1.8 primes that people wants to buy.
BarnET: A proper cinema camera costing less then the 5 grandIt shoots 4k and proper 1080p 50mbps.
Canon sees impossible!
Can someone tell me the reference/pun? I don't get this joke. Thanks.
Roy LaFaver: The 16-50 lens appears to be a good one, and I suppose it should be good at $1100. I wonder if the 30mm will stand up as well on 28mp as it does on 20mp. This camera is a spec beast. If everything holds up to the promise it is certainly a bargain compared to Oly, Fuji and Panasonic.
The only legit review I can find for the 16-50 f/2.0-2.8 is on PC Mag and it was rated less favorably than PC Mag's review of Olympus 12-40 Pro. The sensor used in the test are 20mp on the Samsung and 16 on the Oly. The face Oly is consider sharper is thus more impressive.
Lens is sharp edge to edge? That's the opposit of other reviews I have read/seen. Wondering if there is large sample variation.
The camera is being released this week so how can the review sample still running pre-release firmware? I am sure at least a few hundred units are already in retail boxes on the way to the US if not in back room of B&H and Adorama already. I think this is just marketing talk in case opinion on the sample images are not favorable.
High ISO image doesn't seem very impressive but I have only been checking out FF and Fuji cameras lately.
I'd go with a RX1.
Olympus makes beautiful lenses but why not making it f/2.0? The new Samsung 16-50 f2.0-2.8 looks ugly but is more intriguing as it is faster and covers a bigger sensor.
Holladay: The whole point of this camera is that it's small and pocketable.Why would I want to make it bigger?
If I wanted a grip with a battery I would take my DSLR.
@deluk. The SONY grip fits the earlier models perfectly. I have it on my mk1.
The SONY branded grip is $12 on Amazon and have textured rubber feel.
Seems like Samsung's NX1 needs one of these cards. How else are you going to store 15fps?
RX100 mk3 seems to be a bar at both low and high ISO.
Ahh, I hate the new studio setup so much. The old chart I always know which points to check because those were the original POI from 10 years ago. I can see how camera advances by checking how much cleaner the label on bottle is and shadow noise from the fur-balls. The new one just looks flat.
Back to topic. Seems like 7D2 isn't more noisy than A6000 in RAW but JPEG is a lost.
Powered by Android? One joke to another?
Love that white tree at beach photo. Still outside Seattle?
SergioBR: Note 4 for me is better ! Better camera, s-pen, better low light peformance etc
Where can I see image comparison of Note 4's SONY sensor?
Felix E Klee: Lars Rehm lives in Landau? ;-)
Xanadu in English.
Amazing performance especially in low light. I think 8MP might be the break even point for daytime resolutions and low-light performance. Some phones have high resolution image in daylight but the low-light performance are laughable because of the super tiny cells.
MattLangley: Good review. I have to question this statement though:
"Thanks to a well-balanced approach to noise reduction and sharpening it is even very close to the 16MP Samsung Galaxy S5. "
In looking at your iPhone 6 Plus vs S5 image comparison tool I see a significant amount more detail in the S5's picture than the iPhone 6 Plus. There are a few areas where they are close but many areas where much more detail comes through.
For example the bearded man picture... no comparison really, the S5's picture has loads more detail. When you go to the bottle things are a bit closer, but still plenty of areas where there's an obvious detail advantage.
That's Samsung's sharpening you are seeing. S5 is capturing more detail but the biggest difference is the high sharpening applied to the image that Apple and Nokia won't do to their image. Once you turn off the light, S5 don't have enough actual detail to survive Samsung's heavy processing.
Anyone tested the Mini 3 to see if the screen is still the old one or they changed it?