hotdog321: I'm hoping DPP will improve its clunky interface enough that I can eventually stop using my standalone CS6 before it becomes too outdated. I won't use Adobe Cloud.
It's never going to be a CS6 replacement. It's not a "real" photo editor. At best a lightweight Lightroom substitute.
Dr111968: I wonder why mirrorless camera body should be small while the lenses are huge! what is the point!
Okay, so with the XM1 you have a slightly narrower yet just as deep camera combo. That's so much different.
It's not slim with a 4" lens on it, regardless of the body size. And I've owned a mirrorless camera. Found it only useful with pancake lenses for that exact reason.
limlh: With four aspherical lenses and two ED glass lenses, this zoom has some serious stuff inside its barrel. Together with 5 stops OIS and weather resistant, Fujifilm is downright serious about this.
It's OK, T3, I didn't insult your family. You can let it go. Almost every camera covers most of that zoom range, so I find it less exciting.
I really like Canon DPP a lot. This looks like the first major update in 10 years.
I was just thinking they had added support for 10-18mm lens corrections when I saw the headlines. (hope that's in there, too)
Probably should have said 5 years. I've been using it since 2008 and it's not a whole lot different.
Jan Luursema: If only they would make DPP faster. I bought a new computer just to make DPP work faster, but it's still almost as slow to use as on my old PC! Only the batch processing is faster, but making edits in the program is annoyingly slow.Maybe they need to hire someone from Adobe.
I don't have this problem. I found LR5 to be MUCH slower than DPP.
X-T1 is no smaller than a small DSLR. With this lens on, you only save the extra 20mm of mount depth and zero weight.
Now in combination with other small lenses, it's not that simple. The total kit might be significantly smaller.
ooh, a double response. Now that is exciting! Thanks for all the time you invested to put me in my place.
I still think an 18-135mm f3.5-5.6 is a boring lens, even though I own one. It's for the easy shots that literally any lens could take and the only concern is framing it right. I didn't pay $900 for mine, though.
It's not very wide, nor very long, nor very fast. Sure it's useful - I never said it wasn't. It's like a basic family sedan - pretty boring for car enthusiasts. This lens is boring. And it's got minivan specs with sports car price sticker.
It's called engineering, not physics. Tamron made a 16-300mm with similar aperture and it's the exact same length and only 50g heavier.
Agreed. And the X-T1 isn't even small.
Sadly they picked a pretty boring zoom range and aperture to implement it into.
tkbslc: uh, what? $899 for slow aperture kit zoom?
Well it's a lot like (on paper at least) the zooms that other camera makers include with their cameras. But I agree "kit" zoom is probably a poor term.
uh, what? $899 for slow aperture kit zoom?
Dimit: Nice effort but...biiiiig!!With such a volume I wouldn't choose an 1'' sensor,simple as that..
But you don't need an f2.8-4 lens if you have a larger sensor because you can get away with using a higher ISO for the same picture quality. So a slow superzoom lens on a small SLR or mirrorless truly is very comparable.
Biggstr: I wish at DPReview would stop playing with its Studio Scenes. Every new one seems a step in the wrong direction. The latest is the worst yet. One cannot find comparisons that visually highlight significant differences between cameras.
I disagree, I think the new on is great. Even includes real low light mode in most shots.
John McCormack: No built-in ND filter! Even the LX-7 has one. A pity...
It has a 62mm filter thread on the lens, use a real filter.
dpmaxwell: Just curious, at what point does DPReview stop referring to cameras as "compacts"? This camera is as big as many DSLRs.
I suggest NILC for Non-Interchangeable lens Camera.
not bad at all.
I like my Kindle Fire as a cheap web tablet, but not as a primary device. Being locked into Amazon only for apps, etc, is pretty limiting. Probably worse than MS in terms of content.