Fogsprig: I've got E-M10. Of course, I gave it my vote BUT the real best product of 2014 is A7S (absent in polls, to my surprise). P.S. You guys are weird in that A7II craze.
The A7S in practical stills photography terms is no better, and in many cases worse than an A7R. Obviously for video its quite a beast.
quezra: I'm still surprised the A7ii beat the D750. It is far more of an incremental upgrade to its predecessor (A7) than D750 is (to D700).
And this condensed all-in-one vote doesn't make much sense since all these products are good, yet each suited to completely different tasks or types of photographer.
IBIS is nice, but Nikon's lens library is extensive compared to Sony and they offer plenty of lenses with IS in them.
Mind boggled that the A7 II wins over the D750. Even though I have fully converted to mirrorless, if I had to buy a high end ILC, i'd get the one that actually has an amazing native lens library. Taken as a system, the D750 is leagues better.
tbcass: I'm disappointed that the 7Dii review came out before the Sony A77ii review seeing the A77ii came out about 6 months ago.
Likely because dpreview needs more eyes on their site to actually make money. What brings more eyes, a new canon DSLR or a Sony DSLR?
qwertyasdf: After reading this review, I want to buy the Nikon D7000.
I can confirm that my D7000's focusing is only "OK" and not likely in the realm of this new Canon.
Great video review here... one of the best really as I found the Salmon Run story just as interesting as that camera. Samsung has really done a remarkable job here on this camera, and those two zooms look like they can compete with the best of them. Now its time for Samsung to put out some good primes. The GH4 just got one hell of a competitor.
GoneMirrorless: IMHO, IBIS is more for crop cameras where focal lengths are longer. @ 24mm IS is not a big deal. @300mm it is. That's why most long zooms and many long primes already come with IS.
@vscdThat really depends on the IBIS you are talking about vs. what optical stabilization you are talking about. For example, I find it infinitely easier to get a sharp photo at low shutter speeds using my EM-10's IBIS with the Panasonic 100-300 lens, instead of using the mega OIS available on the lens.
My god... This makes Leica prices look like a downright bargain. At least with Leica, you normally get a unique camera (sans the LX100 facelift one) instead of old, $500 Sony tech.
SirLataxe: Very nice - but lacking in two essentials: no articulating screen and no facility to mount a wide angle conversion lens.
An articulated screen would make the camera so much more useful, especially for close-ups, street photography and video, where taking the pictures from waist or lower level makes such a difference.
A high quality add-on WA lens would make the camera an ideal tool for landscapes taken during longer walks in difficult terrain, where the weight of a larger camera and lenses would be tedious.
I'd argue that not having a touchscreen is the most essential feature lacking in this camera.
surelythisnameisfree: This does seem a remarkable camera. The only problem I have is that I see the tearing/rainbows in the EVF to such an extent that I can't use it. It's hard to believe that an OLED VF would have added that much more to the production cost. Clearly the testers aren't members of the group that do see these rainbows as it doesn't seem to have impacted the score at all
Yep, seems to have the same problem as the GX7. I couldn't stand that viewfinder. They should have used the EVF from the G6 which isn't prone to that rainbowing effect/lag that the GX7 has or, presumably the LX100 seems to have.
Kipplemaster: This size of camera seems the worst of all worlds to me although they seem enormously popular at the moment (in Japan?) It is not pocketable, so needs a strap or bag. In which case why not just take an A7R or proper M43 camera. Or even a DSLR. If you want to travel light (ie no bag/strap) you can downsize to a Canon S120 or Ricoh GR.
@Mr. OlympianYeah... the A6000 by itself will fit in a jacket pocket. You could likely get it in there with their power zoom kit lens. Too bad that lens doesn't do the A6000 justice.
Shotcents: Sorry to say that stopping at 75mm is a no-go on this otherwise neat little camera. 75mm is not all that wonderful for portraits for starters. I own the Nikon P7700 and I use the sharp results on the longer end all of the time. 75mm makes this okay for street and family, but leaves out too much to be taken seriously as an all arounder.
24mm isn't all that wide either, so what we have hear is a camera with optics that simply aren't all that exciting.
@CaneCanon's 24-70 f2.8L is anything but cheap. Its also a fantastic lens as is Nikon's version, Panasonic's and Olympus's (sorry Sony, your f4 in this range is meh).
tipple: Re: personal attacks on Richard. I f you cannot stick to photography comments then why waste your time. Did someone tick you off or are you just having a bad day or life in general?
Fast, responsive AF... IQ that equals or betters all of the other compacts with a zoom lens in this space when shooting RAW, and the only compact camera that actually offers a good, useable 4K video mode/stills capture mode. I literally see nothing outrageous about the conclusion, though I wish dpreview dinged this camera even harder for not having a touchscreen.
narddogg81: olympus would make a lot more money if they would just become a premium 3rd party lens manufacturer and made lense in all the other mounts. they make fantastic glass
@HowaboutRAWYeah, it is expensive, but Canon's closest competitor (600mm f4 L) is the price of my Hyundai ($12,000). The Canon is likely a better lens simply because of the camera you can put it on, but still... $12K for a lens is likely being sold to under a couple thousand people.
Which lenses are more expensive than the Nikon FX lenses? Are you talking about the f2.0 zooms?
snapa: Olympus is really great at producing extremely expensive lenses. To bad their sensors can not do justice to them. Hopefully the next generation m4/3 sensors will be able to keep up with there lenses. If that ever happens, the m4/3 format will be a formidable one. That is of course, if the prices come down to reasonable prices, which they are not at this time.
Honestly... did people say that about Nikon glass when the D7000 came out? Because that is basically what the IQ is in today's m43's camera.
Also, on price... you can find some very good m43's cams for prices that are quite competitive with today's budget DSLR kits. Takes a bit more hunting for sure, but then again... can't find an m43's camera in most brick and mortar stores anyways.
Donnie G: Olympus makes great lenses. It's too bad that these lenses are being made for a dying system. Micro 4/3 will be laid to rest alongside 4/3 because both Olympus and Panasonic together can't generate enough sales volume to keep the standard alive, and 3rd party lens makers are swallowing up the few chances at profit that are left. R.I.P. M4/3.
Uhh... there are 3 sigmas, 1 tamron, 3 Voigts and a couple of Samyangs for m43s... the large bulk that is left is Oly or Panasonic. Most people with m43's cameras use either Oly or Panasonic glass.
Chronis: there comes a time for any company who's been leading for years to decide whether they are willing to face the competitors head on and sustain their leadership, or keep milking the cow and become irrelevant in short period of time.....
the examples are endless....
IBM, Kodak, Nokia to name but a few...
leaders in their industry once, nowhere to be found now... I think that Canon is doing a good job printing a nice label of their logo (using canon printers :-) so that they can join this long list....
Angry and uttterly dissapointed being a canon customer. the "plastic' executive ooozes this message....
IBM is a bad example, as they are still a very successful company, just not in the consumer PC market.
This looks good for professionals that are already shooting with lots of Canon glass... to the budding professional, this price point puts it squarely against the A7S with the 4K addon. Pretty sure the A7S with that addon will absolutely mop the floor with this though. Of course, maybe the A7S has more rolling shutter and this has none. Someone that is actually a videographer, chime in as to why you would buy this other than owning Canon glass already, over the alternatives (especially the A7S with the add-on).
jagge: lol, who cares ?? this review is so desperately late that it is utterly meaningless. Every single cam site out there has made reviews I guess a year ago, its a cam widely used in productions.
Using energy on this is close to a joke. It just highlights the speed issue on this site. It seems to be very bad use of the time that so obviously is in short demand. Using the time on a current and newer release would make much more sense.
And dont get me wrong its a super relevant cam to review, but at this point in time its a waste of energy
@MPA1No really... the Nikon D7000 still takes the same great photos it did when it came out to universal acclaim. It didn't suddenly stop taking good photos because the D7100 came out. Same goes for the GH4 and whatever its successor is.