ManuelVilardeMacedo: "Aside from it's questionable build quality""Its", not "it's".Illiteracy is taking over. Maybe most don't care, or maybe I'm just being picky, but where will it end?Grammar aside, the Benro and Induro ball heads seem to be little more than OEM, made in China products that can be purchased under other brands for less with only slight differences between them. One of those brands is Triopo, which appears to be a polish-chinese venture. Worth checking out for its good price-quality ratio.
"Its" is a peculiar exception to a rule about possessives: It's the one word I can think of that doesn't get an apostrophe-s, unlike all other possessives, probably so it's not confused with the contraction for "it is." As a result, it's a very common mistake, and doesn't mark one as illiterate. I have to check myself often on a re-read, using the reminder that the 's' belongs to 'it,' so no apostrophe is needed.
Discounting a carefully written article over what is literally a tittle seems a shame, and hardly warrants concern that the sky is falling on literacy.
JDThomas: "JK doesn't have a booth at the show, but we visited them in a hotel suite..."
Pssst. Hey kid, wanna see some top quality camera gear? Meet me in the back alley behind the Rio Hotel. I'll cut you in on a good deal.
Elaborate booths can cost in the hundreds of thousands just to build, let alone transport, set up, and store. A great many companies do this, many of them recognized brands.
DC Akowua: 'is this a half-price D4 or a D610 with a 50% markup?' The reviewer ask....This camera is clearly a D610 with a 50% mark up. I don't know why some people refer to it as a mini D4....nonsenseThe D700 was a mini D3 because the D700 shared more than just the sensor.The Df look nice though...especially the black one.
Could be because the Df uses the same 16.2MP sensor as the D4, while the D610 uses a 24.3MP design.
LarryLatchkey: Rather many cons for a gold award... Don't get it.
Cons are there not only to talk about things we didn't like, but also things people should consider that might make the otherwise good camera not fit for them. There is no formula for how many line items we include.
abluesky: I don't understand how the percentage translates to a gold (or silver) award...?
The award is not based on the number. It is an award given to indicate how well the reviewer liked the camera overall. (I'm going to save this as a snippet so I can copy it in as needed.)
superstar905: Conclusion - Cons■Poor noise reduction■JPEG rendering of yellows a bit washed out■Electronic shutter can produce banding under artificial light■Video resolution tops out at 1080 30p■Default dynamic range settings produce slight highlight clipping■Slow 1/50 flash sync speed
Don't know about you, but the cons I highlighted above should have carried enough weight to knock the award to silver. I removed the battery con but thats another one, you need 2 - 3 batteries to run this thing for an event at best.
Awards aren't 'knocked,' as they're not statistical.
cam2013: Canon is making people fool for using same sensor year after year after year and then gives name from t2i to future t36i.the only change is name and the only unchanged part is sesnor.same is true for power shot s95 to powershot s120.no change in sensor.nice way to fool people by selling same crap over and over with high price.
Oh, I thought you were talking about the subject of this thread, which is the Canon SL1, also known as the 100D. When you said the T2i was no different from the future T36i, that's what I meant to respond to: that the SL1's sensor is indeed different in at least one significant way. By the way, if you look back to today's 1/1.7" sensors compared to the same size sensors five years ago, well, there has been noticeable improvement.
sh10453: Hey Shawn ... Was nice to see you and the team during the live event ...
Question for you?What is the difference between the CMOS and the Hybrid CMOS technology?
Sorry, that brings up more confusion. When I said Panny and Oly had faster AF systems, I meant compared to Canon's Hybrid CMOS AF II. Since your 5D only has traditional phase-detect, I wouldn't venture to guess which is faster between the two, as they're probably similar.
ericsan: At first i was reluctant to get this EOS 100D when i got rid off my "old EOS 550D" as i was tempted by MFT but mainly 2 things made the choice back to Canon : attractive price against MFT which is overpriced generally speaking (new bodies & good primes) & the possibility to keep my Canon & Sigma lenses lineup for a couple of years more !I choose the basic kit (18-55 mm STM) which is truly sharp and i was happily surprised by the Hybrid AF II which works perfectly well.So if you can cope with the small body ergonomics, this is the ideal combo that delivers very good IQ (new sensor Hybrid AF II Generation despite remaining at 18mpix),access to the widest lenses choices (Canon + Sigma + Tamron) & Canon clear menu layout.So from now, what is missing ? : more primes than the 40mm STM to make this system fully enjoyable !!No regret at all to remain within the APSC System so far ! MFT will start to attract me when brands will stop considering that it's a "niche market"...
... for you. Not the best choice for you. There are others in the world who have different needs and uses for a camera.
BTW, though you asked the difference between CMOS and Hybrid CMOS, I assumed you were asking a different question. The question I answered was what's the difference between contrast-detect and hybrid AF. It's even more complicated than that, because cameras like the SL1 have two AF systems: the traditional phase-detect system which relies on a system of mirrors and lenses and a dedicated AF sensor, and the phase-detect system embedded into the imaging sensor.
I also wanted to mention that the SL1's Hybrid CMOS AF II, while greatly improved, does not fare as well against Panasonic and Olympus's contrast-detect systems. Why Canon couldn't use their methods is unclear at this point, but surely someone knows.
To quickly answer the question literally posed: there is no difference between CMOS and Hybrid CMOS. CMOS stands for Complimentary Metal Oxide Semiconductor, which is the name for the sensor technology whether it has PDAF or not.
If my memory serves me, Hybrid AF II uses a combination of dedicated phase-detect pixels and more traditional contrast-detect AF methods to achieve focus a little more quickly. First, the phase-detect system determines in which direction to move the lens, and by approximately how much. This works similarly to the phase-detect system in most SLRs, but the underlying technology is built into the imaging sensor itself. Contrast-detect AF then fine-tunes or verifies focus. I don't think Canon ever told us how they achieved the phase portion of Hybrid AF or Hybrid AF II, but we imagine its through use of pixel masking methods employed by other companies. With pure contrast-detect systems, the camera can more frequently guess wrong on which direction to move the lens, which causes more delays.
Interestingly, though, companies like Olympus and Panasonic have done remarkable work to make their pure contrast-detect systems compete directly with SLR phase systems, often surpassing them.
Actually, for a change, that's not true, cam2013. This camera has dramatically improved phase-detect autofocus on the sensor, and this time it actually makes a significant difference.
You're incorrect, peevee1. You ignored the improved autofocus system in live view and movie modes. If that's important to a user, it's the difference between being able to use your camera how you like and not using it for video at all.
forpetessake: It stands out among entry level DSLRs, it's lighter, smaller -- some like it, some don't. But nobody really likes the outdated Canon sensor, which is a generation behind the Sony sensors used in many other cameras.
That's certainly what I would argue. When I look back at the photos from past digital cameras I've used and owned, it's clear we've come a long way. But I'm still quite happy with some of the shots I took with 2MP cameras that had far less DR, more noise, hyper-saturated color, and pixelation. It's relative. It's like arguing you'd only shoot ISO 25 film back in the film days because ISO 400 was too grainy. Or worse, that you prefer color negative film over slide film because of its greater dynamic range. You'd be right on the DR point, but you'd also miss out on the wonders of Kodakchrome.
Photography, distilled to its basic elements, is about a set of decisions you make when choosing to freeze a fraction of a second and save it. You decide the duration, the amount of light, the subject, framing and orientation, the optics you'll use, the film or picture style, and just how much data you want to save for manipulation after capture. This camera captured enough data for my needs.
Iskender: I've always really liked Pentax cameras, but after reading the frothing-at-the-mouth Pentax comments below I'm now considering hating the brand. Just to spite the fanboys, you know? :P
Some of you almost sound worse than the whiners in Olympus SLR Talk back in the day.
Wow, nice to see some sane comments. Sometimes I wonder why I bother responding. Your clear remarks show that I'm not alone in some strange alternative universe where everything I say is twisted into evidence against me, in a court where I'm presumed guilty because I dared express an opinion. Thank you.
forpetessake: A lot of criticism comes from the fact that the article comes under "Gear of the Year" title. Had it been entitled "Our Staff's Personal Pick" people wouldn't be misled thinking that it was an objective evaluation and ranking of the 2013 gear.
Perhaps. It's certainly not a bad thought. However, if more would read the text where we spell out our intent and think before commenting, as you have, more would understand and fewer would take offense.
WilliamJ: For my part, I would have thought the "gear of the year" could have been the Pentax K-3 that offers a lot to very-demanding-but-not-so-rich photographers. Even if I mainly use Canon and Fujifilm, I like a lot Pentax while I feel this brand is a little bit underrated on websites as well as in stores. Am I wrong ?
Gear of the year is a feature where we reviewers declare which cameras we liked the most. It's not a statistical tally and it's not a contest. It's about camera appeal. After all, the fastest car doesn't always win our hearts; sometimes it comes down to heart and soul.
TN Args: This "Gear of the Year" rating comes from a man who says the Panasonic GX7 deserves a second-rate rating from dpreview.
Even more hilarious this rating, when you consider his only clear reason for picking this camera is that he already has multiple Canon lenses. That is such a personal factor that it is irrelevant to so many readers.
Let' compare the two cameras.
The "Not Worth a Gold Award" GX7 has:- better sensor performance (check DXOMark or the dpreview widget)- faster focusing- more accurate and consistent focusing- silent mode option- bigger viewfinder- better viewfinder information- smaller body- better looks- many compact fast lenses- better manual focusing, and focus peaking- in-body image stabilization- better videography 1080p x 60p, with videoactive viewfinder
Gee, that GX7 is obviously second-rate, Shawn.
Whereas the "Gear of the Year" 100D has:- poor choice of compact lenses (lacks the very lens Shawn says he would most like)
WAY. TO. GO.
Oops, I had nothing to do with the GX7 review. I did write the First Impressions Review with Richard Butler, and our initial impressions were positive. You should really check your bylines. Sorry to derail your detailed argument.
I'm not sure how a detailed argument refutes the fact that I liked the SL1. Your results may vary, but I'm pretty sure about what I like.
pacnwhobbyist: My main problem with this camera is that I find it uncomfortable to shoot with due to the grip up front. I don't see how anyone with larger hands would find the grip on this camera comfortable. Canon's other entry-level model, the T3, may have a smooth plastic surface on the grip but it's much deeper and easier to hold onto.
That's something I put in the cons for this camera, because the grip is indeed small. I don't generally have trouble adapting no matter how small cameras get (so far), I just change how I hold it. But if that's an issue for you, steer clear.
Naveed Akhtar: Considering all what you have considered, it's really a very good camera!!
otherwise you have many better smaller cameras and many bigger, considering many other considerations!!!
I recon these small quick reviews sometimes gives a better picture into a user scenarios and help selecting a gear than the general full review, as more geared towards one's need and circumstances. Also few points in highlights bring your attention to points, you otherwise overlooked. for instance, somehow I didn't knew this little canon got good af performance in live view mode...
If you read my review, I go into detail on both the stills page and video page. Start here, then move to the vide page: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-100d-rebel-sl1/9