Sumit Ghosal: Good to see Olympus OM D is competing in 2nd place and against 2 full frame C and N models.
Current Position - Nikon D800/E 22.8%, Olympus OM-D EM-5 15.1% and Canon EOS 5D MKIII 14.7%
Why not? For a lot of people, in their definition of "the best", size and weight (and price) of D800 and 5D3 are way beyond reasonable, and shooting video with a viewfinder and fast AF are important.Not to mention that 9 fps, even with focus locked, is often better than 4.
Schira: Panasonic G5 - not in list
Well, G5 is a good value, but the best camera? It is not even the best Panasonic, now that GH3 is out. And it barely matches what 2.5 y/o GH2 can do.
(unknown member): Considering the Nex line of mirrorless cameras is quite popular, I would suggest adding either Nex 7 or Nex 6 to the poll.
NEX 7 is a 2011 camera, not 2012. NEX-6 deserves to be on the list, maybe.
Good selection. I am surprised that there is no 1D X or D4 though, both top of their lines, and released only once in 4 years.
peevee1: You are concentrating on portrait work on 100 mm eq, with background blur etc, but who takes those boring contextless portraits on compacts? They are NOT for use in a portrait studio, they are for use on vacations and such, to take pictures of places you have been and companies of your friends. Take a look at what kind of focal lengths is used in cameras where only one focal length exists (like cellphones), and you will know which one is most important BY FAR. It is of course WIDE END, 24 to 35 mm eq. And at that by far most important wide end, there is NOTHING in this group even close to RX100. Not even remotely. You'll have to go all the way to APS-C DSLR or mirrorless with kit lens to get that kind of ability.
Again, the question is about priorities, and you are way off on priorities.People take most pictures when traveling, and in their pictures they want to preserve the place as well as the people they are with.People also take a lot of pictures on various gatherings, indoor, under electrical light. Did you try to test for those conditions, with kids and/or pets running in a typical room (or something moving at a steady rate to represent it)? Try to set the camera on auto, wide end, and see what comes out. Try "Running kids" scene mode. Then try to set it to Shutter Priority, 1/200s, and see what comes out. The cameras you recommend as equals to RX100 (S110?? Really??!) will produce blurry noisy (and possibly underexposed) mess as they hit their ISO limiters hard.By testing only static scenes on Manual you avoid testing a lot of systems and algorithms in the cameras real buyers of the cameras actually use.The contextless heads - their place is on passport photos once in 10 years.
Cliff5200: One more thing to DXO,,,, Even though this is a great metric, you guys need to do a better job explaining it. Look at the comments below, people are confused. Even the name "Perpetual Megapixel" sounds like you guys are hawking snake oil. Why not "relative megapixel" or "resolved megapixel"? Someone on your staff has been watching too much Star Trek.
After ranting on the people that commented below I tried to have an open mind and re-read your press release. You are not presenting the greatest benefit (the relative ranking across cameras with different sensor sizes) of this metric first, you are presenting techno-babble first. I guess I can understand all of the confusion below.,,,,,,,,,
1. First explain the real world benefit of the metric to the semi-technical average reader. Explain the intended usage (for the average user).
2. Second go into technical details for people that are interested.
"Perceptual", not "perpetual".
Sergi Gabriel: Very strange for me information from DXOMark that Canon lens 70-200 IS 2.8L is better then 70-200 IS 2.8L v.2. It is reason why information from DXO is only information, not more.
If the P-mpix score is taken just at one specific focal length, what about all the others?
Reading their article, I did not find the mention at what aperture do they measure the sharpness? But let's assume it is the best a given lens can do at any aperture (ignoring DoF and light requirements). But what about zoom - at what focal length this is measured?
Otherwise the scores themselves are useful just to confirm the stupidity of sensor megapixel wars of last many years, with most lenses giving only 4-6 P-Mpix of optical resolution at best.
photo nuts: Canon reached their 80 millionth milestone in Aug 2012. Why was that NOT reported in DPReview?
Well, there was this not long ago:http://www.dpreview.com/news/2011/02/07/canon60millionlens
S.A.: Photos of misery always seem to get high praise... Any dimwit with a camera phone could have gotten those. Nothing special about any of them. Just some a'hole who gets paid to capture someone else' personal tragedies. Gross. Time should have waited. I'm sure there are many pictures of the parents of children massacred in the Conn shooting available for Time magazines consideration. "Moved them the most" What a joke. Shouldn't even have a category like that.
" Any dimwit with a camera phone could have gotten those. "
And you are not a dimwit because you learned a couple simple tricks about exposure and wb? Sheesh.
harry cannoli: I have to admit I'm a little bummed that the LX7 failed to stand out in any meaningful way, despite the fact that I'm a hardcore DSLR shooter who adores this little camera. Sheesh, I am a fanboy.
I suppose the big sensor in the Sony means so much more than the beautiful, super-fast, pin sharp lens in the LX7?
The lens makes the magic, the sensor records the magic made by the lens. The Sony sensor does an absolutely fantastic job of recording images created by it's plain vanilla lens. Of course the magic created by the lens is a personal judgement, but that Panny lens stands out, heads and shoulders above the pack. How can I see this and the respected, highly competent reviewers barely acknowledge the outstanding flavor of that Panny lens?
Oh, never mind. I'm a fanboy :(
Thank you Richard for getting this done. Good job.
"Of course the magic created by the lens is a personal judgement, but that Panny lens stands out, heads and shoulders above the pack. "
Too bad that lens only illuminates the tiniest circle of them all, about 4 times smaller than RX100.
You are concentrating on portrait work on 100 mm eq, with background blur etc, but who takes those boring contextless portraits on compacts? They are NOT for use in a portrait studio, they are for use on vacations and such, to take pictures of places you have been and companies of your friends. Take a look at what kind of focal lengths is used in cameras where only one focal length exists (like cellphones), and you will know which one is most important BY FAR. It is of course WIDE END, 24 to 35 mm eq. And at that by far most important wide end, there is NOTHING in this group even close to RX100. Not even remotely. You'll have to go all the way to APS-C DSLR or mirrorless with kit lens to get that kind of ability.
GF2 and E-PL2 just now? Minoltas? MS is a LITTLE behind times...
MichaelK81: Well, it IS New York Post. They're like the tabloid version of NY Times. No moral ground, just sensationalist headlines. They'll print anything to sell a few extra copies.
No, they are not actually any version of NYT. They are a part of Republican propaganda machine - News Corp. But to keep the victims' attention, they have to provide some sensationalist material once in a while.
"Photographers tend to be interested in how well a lens can blur backgrounds when shooting portraits at full telephoto, and in this respect the G15 does very well for a compact"
Who would use a compact to shoot head-and-shoulders portraits with blurred background? Why?
Michael Dbn: It continues to astonish me that the Sony RX-100 is praised for it's image quality on this and other sites yet the Nikon 1 series, with the same size sensor, was given such a luke warm response when it first came out that you would (wrongly) that think it is a very mediocre camera!
Nikon 1 does not have a zoom with f/1.8 at the wide end (its zoom start 2 stops worse), and neither it is pocketable. And its sensor (at least the 10mpix one in J1/V1/J2), despite being the same size, is not of quite the same quality.
rondhamalam: It can happen on any camera with 1000 shots like that.You need to turn on and turn off camera to make sensor-cleaner to work.
He did turn it off after 500 shots (see his comments below). As you can see on the video, it did not help. Probably oil.
RStyga: It reminds me a certain Panasonic-Leica lens model with debris around the back of the periphery of the front element... 2-3 copies with the same issue... Nikon will lose sales out of this issue, for sure. It's what Canon would hope to allow enough time for 6D to hit the market.
Hugo808: Given that you knew from your own sample and all the other reports, why did you give this a Gold Star?
Surely the construction having been finished to a satisfactory standard ought to count towards the total points?
This has stopped me and at least one other photographer I know from buying one until it's sorted out. I don't pay two-grand to clean oil off the sensor for Gawds sake!
They don't give Gold to the best (by far) compact camera, yet give Gold to NOT THE BEST FF camera with serious issues (not only the spots, but also using APS-C AF sensor on a FF camera for cost savings). As they say, their "awards" are subjective, i.e. obviously worth nothing.