I like what Samsung is doing with their cameras. However - I have seen lots of samples from Samsung cameras and the default processing, especially of skin tones, always seems to bluish and not attractive. I know different cameras have their "look", but to my eyes, Samsung does not have a good look SOOC.
Could not help but notice many more external control points (wheels buttons) on GH4. Looks like a really nice body.
mpgxsvcd: I just think this is a weird comparison. I really am struggling to see what they have in common? One records 4K to the camera and has a much smaller sensor for a lot less money. The other one only records 4K to an external device which pretty much eliminates it from the majority of non-Professional shooters. It just seems like Dpreview said “Let’s kill two birds with one stone even if we can only eat one of them”.
I think you are majoring in the minors. These are two ILCs with a VERY nice set of video features - better than any other ILC. That is what they have in common.
beavertown: This Samsung sensor puts the Nikon V3 1" sensor to shame.
You don't get what you pay for nowadays from Nikon.
The limits of tech is not my problem. I, as a consumer, only want to maximize my dollar value. And to me - it looks like the NX mini is a much better deal than the Nikon V3. Makes me wonder how Nikon is coming up with pricing.Yes, prices can change. We saw it with the V1. But no such fire sale has happened with the V2. And I don't suspect it will happen with the V3 either.I wonder how many V3's Nikon will really move.
HowaboutRaw - how can you not include price in discussions about IQ? I would expect a camera that costs 3X as much as the NX mini to have better IQ. If it doesn't - what are you paying for? Yes, the V3 has faster focus and burst - but in the end - why would it also not have better IQ? Nikon pricing makes little sense. For the price of the V3, I expect better IQ.
Nordstjernen: No real tracking AF test photos? Why don't Dpreview and other test sites put the autofocus under exreme high temperature pressure? Give us some though action sitation photos with a pretty long telephoto lens wide open, like the GII 70-200 mm f:2.8 at the long end! That would be of interest!
Great observation. I too have wondered why no test house really does AF testing properly. We mostly just get qualitative analysis (i.e. "tracking is pretty good") rather than a real scientific test that is quantifiable. With sensors now becoming so good - the next frontier to sort out is the AF systems. I think some testing house should devise a quantifiable scientific test.
Mike FL: Canon seems forget its EOS-M users in the US, and have not released any UW lens in US for its few EOS-M users.
I think Canon will re-launch the EOS M line at Photonica this year (fingers crossed). I think they will have a new, much better body and maybe they will announce that they are bringing more lenses to the US market.
brownie314: wow - exciting times for Canon. Another DOA product. Good work.
I agree- the manufacturers only have one duty - to make money. And if these little things sell - then that is what they will make. I just find it hard to believe, in an ever increasingly well informed population, that these things can really sell all that well.
crashpc - you assume WAY too much knowledge from the average person. They don't even know what a sensor is. How would they be aware of what sensor size does to IQ? All they know is they are cruising through Best Buy and they see a little camera that looks like the same shape as the big DSLRs - so they assume...you see where this is going.
Yup - these cameras do sell well. I have lots of family members who have purchased similar cameras in the past. They typically get used for a few weeks, then (after they realize that they get images just as good with a cell phone) they collect dust for a few years in a drawer.
wow - exciting times for Canon. Another DOA product. Good work.
JWest: For a moment I misread that as "Canon launches $55 flash trigger". I nearly had a heart attack.
Maybe a $55 lens cap.
CameraLabTester: One of the greatest manifestation of a superbly designed gear is the beauty of the front lens.
The 10-30mm used as marketing release image is a CAD disaster.
The epitome of design laziness.
Ask any CAD operator.
I hope the back lens looks better.
1" is getting very interesting. Now where is my RX1 equivalent with a 1" sensor that I can put on my keychain? Sony - get to work on that and send me the prototype for testing.
Geekapoo: When looking for a 24/7 carry camera, I initially tried the Canon S100, which I sold to purchase an Olympus XZ-1. Neither camera gave me the type of performance I wanted. Was only when I purchased a Sony RX100 that I felt I was were I wanted to be re image quality...a compromise versus my APC and m43 cameras but much better than the standard P+S. Would have purchased a Sony RX10, but felt I had most of the range covered with my Olympus OMD EM5 with the f2.8 12-40 (Oly) and 35-100 (Panny) and going to 200mm was not where I wanted to be.
I see the FZ1000 as transformative, in the same way the RX100 (and the RX10)...but at a focal range up to 400mm and more with lower MP images/cropping. Much better than the $$$ and weight (the latter being more of a critical issue to me) to do something similar with a m43, APC or FF. I'll stongly assume be happy overall, given my experiences to date with cameras (unless Panny pulls a Fuji-like x10 disaster by capturing blobs LOL).
Jogger - I agree. Supertele is sort of a specialty. Wide to short tele is much more important for what most people do most of the time. Would love to have seen something like 20 - 100 equivalent f/2.8.
beavertown: The V1 and J1 produce better IQ than this 1200 bucks wannabe Leica toy.
rpm40 - I thought so too, but I don't have the technical numbers handy to back up what I am seeing.
Aspenz: As with its predecessors it's one of those cameras that really has something compelling going on despite all the negativity from the naysayers. I've used all 3 of them and will gladly get a V4 again when it comes out next time, together with the lenses there's nothing quite as fun as shooting with an N1.
Most people are quick to bash it for its IQ but then again many don't even venture out of JPEG or know how to get the best of out their bigger-sensor cameras anyway. With a consistent workflow, I've managed to get the IQ at exactly where I want it, sometimes up to ISO6400.
It's priced somewhat high per se but 1200 for the ultimate camera in a compact, complete system (18-810mm, 2kg in a small bag and that's with the 85f/1.4) seems about fair.
I agree - it has unique features not available in any other system of its size. BUT for me (I had 2 N1 bodies for a year) it was too much of a pain in post to get images I like, so I dumped it and went back to carry DSLR everywhere (and now, APS-C sized mirrorless).
ryan2007: The Cons to the review make this a deal breaker. A proprietary Hot Shoe, that was what the Minolta Film cameras used to be like and the selling point for Nikon Over Canon and Minolta at the time was how backwards compatible Nikon is.
With Fuji X, Sony, micro four thirds out there I think Nikon is banking on current Nikon users or just name recognition in the name Nikon that people will buy it just because of the name and being brand loyal is a #1 mistake and hand in hand with being emotionally attached to gear.
I also think just because others have a mirrorless camera they want a piece of that pie.
HowaboutRAW - I hope they also figured out what color profiles work with this sensor.
HowaboutRAW - yup, always shot raw.Well, I was shooting in conditions that I didnt really consider low light until I got the N1 system. It was indoors, but day time with light streaming in through several windows. But still, if ISO had to be higher than 800 to maintain shutter speed - it was trouble. Also, my 2 N1 bodies had this weird color to them that was hard to get rid of. Kinda yellowish. I tried hard as h@ll with grey cards and hours dorking around with colors in post - but it was a nagging problem. Ended up a lot of times just converting to B&W.