tkbslc: I'm getting more and more interested in the GX9 the more I see it. Truly a compact camera.
The controls, though....
For about 100 (?) more you get a better lens (at least specs-wise) and better controls in the form of a G7X.
Am I missing the part where they test the buffer depth?
Also, are you sure there's no exposure compensation on Manual mode? The device has a touchscreen, are you sure you can't change the ex.comp there?
How come the reviews aren't standardized, with a checklist of the things that **must** be in the review? The reviewer can add their own personal touch here and there, but those standardized items must be there.
Richard Franiec: I still hope that at last day of the show Canon will unveil EOS MX with their own sensor and put the competition in mirrorless segment to shame. Or am I hoping for too much?
There is one: the EOS M2. Search youtube for side by side comparison with the EOS M. Blazing. Fast.
Not too sure about the "much lower price" though :/
beavertown: Nikon 1 will definitely go to hell.
While I do think 60fps is excessive, the big buffer that a Nikon 1 has is very useful for a street photographer. 7fps for 3-5 seconds? Decisive moment, make way for spray and pray.
gmke: I am growing very tired of the repetitious and misleading reminder that there is only one equivalence to remember and one (full frame) standard that matters. That is Nikon speak. The relation between shutter speed and aperture counts for as much or more, and it is NOT different than full frame. Have you ever noticed that praise for edge to edge sharpness in a lens puts a finger in the eye of the idea that depth of field is the last word on cool? If depth of field was the only thing that mattered, nobody would care about edge or corner sharpness, nor would they be frothing to spend boku bucks on professional lenses.
I don't know what you're so riled up about. Depth of field is useful in *some* scenarios and some people would like to know how a camera performs and compares in that department. Edge to edge sharpness is also useful in *some* scenarios and thus people discuss it.
Ditto with the "I don't know why people discuss low light performance everywhere, it's not like people shoot in low light all the time" crowd.
It's an aspect of camera performance and *some* people would like to know. That's all.
That being said, I agree that 35mm doesn't have to be *the* standard.. But then again we do need *a* standard.. and since it works, why not stick with it. As long as we remember (and remind people) it's not *the* standard.
edotgm: Does it allow in body usb-charging like the nex-f3?I would be surprised of the absence of such a useful feature :-(
I wouldn't say useful. I despise that.
One: It exposes the camera unnecessarily to the fluctuations in electricity current. Your country may or may not have stable electricity, but one thing for sure: it is unnecessary. Same principle as using the data cable vs. pulling the SD card out to copy pictures.
Two: You can't use the camera while charging. More of a nuisance when you have a backup battery (because then your camera would be out of service -not to mention being exposed to electricity directly- for twice as long, when charging).
Nope, the in-camera charging, IMO, is a baaad idea.