Jack Hogan: Well done. I feel however that to fairly compare noise and DR in captures taken in pixel-shift mode with others, one should first stack four captures of the others.
Are you mixing up SNR with spatial resolution? It's amazing how many people do. SNR/DR is measured in a uniform area like the one shown in the comparison above: the K-1 has no advantage there if compared apples to apples (i.e. 4 captures vs 4 captures).
As far as spatial resolution is concerned, pixel-shift provides an advantage in chromatic areas - but very little or none in neutral/hueless ones: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57727279
Kudos to Pentax, but let's not stretch it beyond what it is.
Well done. I feel however that to fairly compare noise and DR in captures taken in pixel-shift mode with others, one should first stack four captures of the others.
Andrew Elliott: If only my Q had a CCD sensor...
Colors out of CCD sensors are no more or less juicy than out of current sensors: it's just that since the days of CCDs a decade ago manufacturers have figured out that if you keep your customers on a constant sugar high their photographs all start to look like Ken Rockwell's.
Love it, great job.
I was looking forward to checking its non-Bayered resolution. Why is it so blurry at base ISO?
The give patents for stuff like this?
A good start and a good write up.
I would add a section on equivalent spatial resolution. Also, was the GH4 free? Your shareholder says that today the Panasonic/Leica 42.5/1.2 costs $1599 by itself.
Full Frame BSI sensor? OMG, that's truly incredible! But wouldn't it be nice... :-)
We look forward to seeing the relevant EM1 images in the New Studio Scene updated to reflect performance with the new mode. The current ones show it sompm' fierce.
Capture NX2 RIP:
Don't know what the complaints are about: this article is clearly not about the 'Best Laptop for a Photographer on Location' - that would have been a (more) useful article, but it's not what this one is about.
This article is about how one Apple-lovin' pro uses his new toy. However good or bad his criteria and choice is compared to what is available out there we'll have to search elsewhere.
neo_nights: While I LOVE DPReview's reviews and do not share the same amount of complaint many people here do, I still fail to understand the Dynamic Range test.
According to your tests, this 70D has more DR than Pentax K5, which, by DxO's ratings, is measured to have 14.1 EV, while the 70D has only 11.6 EV!Well, if we see more recent reviews here, even m4/3s cameras get higher DR...(which would be highly unlikely due sensor size difference)
It's a well known pet peeve that DPReview does not measure the DR of the sensor/camera but that of the 8-bit jpeg file as processed in-camera - which is pretty well arbitrarily controlled by the contrast/brightness curves applied during processing. Unrepresentative you say? N/C.
"In terms of image quality the 70D is essentially on a par with its rivals"
Who's your daddy, DPReview? Informed photographers know that the IQ of the 70D is uncompetitive today and lags a couple of generations behind that of its rivals, whether that be DR, color sensitivity or spatial resolution. Its strengths lie elsewhere.
Your readers want objective information in order to make an informed decision when buying a camera of a certain class and budget.
Q: Is this the better camera for Landscapes? A: NoQ: Is this the better camera for Portraits? A: NoQ: Is this the better camera for Wildlife/BIF? A: NoQ: Is this the better camera for Video? A: MaybeQ: if I go for a smaller/lighter system will I lose IQ? A: It depends on the kind of shooting you do
The fact is, once you start comparing it objectively to its brothers from another mother the 70D's IQ comes out looking pretty short. Sugar coat it, but this is what your readers expect from you.