TN Args: I won't be looking, thanks, the whole idea of websites delivering a sequential information flow that is controlled by the presenter not the viewer who has to wait for it as it comes, is like a TV paradigm that, for me, the whole point of the internet is to circumvent.
I do find it very annoying to see all the DPR staff happily popping in for comments in the comments section of this article. Annoying because they are so rarely seen in the comments sections of articles generally, even when the content of articles is under strong discussion. Pick up your game, boys and girls, and put your time into ALL the articles and their follow up, not just this one.
Sure, I'll bite. It's a review. It's not a math problem. The scores add up to what they do. Then we assign an award based on the experience. That you didn't like the outcome is not a surprise. It's what we thought of the camera. We had it here, and we've handled hundreds of cameras. If you don't value that opinion, that's okay. There are other review sites that will glow about every camera they encounter with impressive specs. Go check them out. That we didn't score it highly as you like does not mean it's not a great or usable camera; we just didn't like it as much as you'd like. It's our job to be honest about what we think. It is not our job to please every reader.
John Rettie: Jolly good show chaps!
Thanks John! T'was a lot of fun.
TLD: For goodness sake lift your heads up and talk to the camera!!!
Those weren't our instructions, but it's also important to remember we're writers by choice, so some of us are taking a big risk just walking on stage. When you're used to being behind the lens as a photographer and being able to carefully choose your word as a writer, speaking glibly in front of the lens and lights is a challenge, to say the least. Thanks for the feedback though. We'll learn.
DC Akowua: Great Idea.Will this be achieved for some of us who would miss it to check it out later?
Archived, yes, I believe that's the plan.
technicallyTony: I would give points to cameras using buttons and deduct points for a touch screen. How can you adjust from shot to shot if you need to take your eye off the viewfinder? According to the DP review, the low end Nikon produces better RAW images, works better in low light, and has a better build than the Canon, however the Canon with the clunky touch screen handles better. If playing with a touch screen is what you want in photography, use a phone. If spending some extra $$, I'd probably take the D5300, if saving, I'd take the SLT-A58. Yes the A58's EVF is worse in bright light but far better in dim light. Also for beginners, the EVF gives you "what you see is what you get", you know your exposure is close when looking at the scene in the viewfinder, some a graph in the corner of the viewfinder.
You can do plenty with buttons on the Canon. That's one of the good parts of the Canon touchscreen design. It's available, but not required. They removed no buttons when they added the touchscreen, as others have done. So it's either or both. Where it comes in handy is when you're accessing the things that no camera has a button for. White Balance, for example, is available via a button press, but you're going to want to look at the screen to select the setting you want. You can use the arrows if you like, pressing the button up to six times, or just tap the desired icon on the screen, taking the move from several button presses down to one tap on the screen. I'm no fan of touchscreens either, but this design changed my mind.
SteveNunez: I really like the look of this Nikon but am somewhat disappointed in the image quality as posted by the sample studio image for comparison. My Oly OMD EM5 easily beats it and as such I can't justify the expense of the DF (even though I truly like the look of the camera itself)......I truly hope the sample picture is out of focus as it looks too soft......big let down .......I think the Sony A7 & &r will be the cameras to beat this year pending the new GH4 (or whatever it's called)....interesting times ahead.
It's not soft, it's lower resolution than the other cameras. 16MP looks different because it resolves less detail.
Holistry: DPR's comparison chart indicates that the S120 has "remote control" capability "via smartphone." Apparently that is incorrect. I've read the manual, spoken with Canon tech support, and asked a major camera retailer's canon maven, and all say you cannot remotely trigger the S-120's shutter via a smartphone. Or by any other means, for that matter. It will transfer photos via wi-fi, but that's not remote "control." DPR, what say you? And, Canon, you almost lost the sale over this. The S120 is still in contention, but if it had this feature (as, say, the less expensive Samsung does), I would have bought it two hours ago.
You are correct, surprisingly remote control is not a component of the S120's Wi-Fi. It was an error in our spec sheet, likely entered on the day of announcement when details can be vague or just wrong. We've fixed it. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.
JohnEwing: Suggest another category: "Best cameras to buy second hand". Might put manufacturers' noses out of joint.
I think it's a great idea. Knowing them as well as I do, I very often buy older models, which are no less good today than when I reviewed them originally, to save money.
FrancescoC: Ridicolous, you advice all the DSRL cameras in this category! For a true advice you must be more selective. This article is useless and is only marketing for the brands.
We were selective on the conclusion page. We picked the Canon SL1, Nikon D5300, and Pentax K-50. Having them in the roundup is not necessarily a recommendation, but to make that clear we put in that conclusion page, which we called, "Which consumer SLR should I buy?" If you can suggest a more clear title, we will consider it next time.
NCB: The SLT-A58 isn't a DSLR and shouldn't be on the list. My choice would be the Nikon D3100, not on your list but still available at a truly bargain price. Great image quality and handles like a dream. The kit lens is quite good, better than you imply, and alternatives like the cracking 16-85 are reasonably priced.
It's quite true that the A58 isn't a DSLR, but it is designed to compete directly with them, so we included it. Since no other company produces SLT cameras, it would make for a very short roundup whose winner would also be the only contender.
completelyrandomstuff: I have to agree with everyone else. The K-50 is an outstanding bargain, can be bought for $500 with a lens if you look hard enough. It has a lot better IQ than the canon, very good consumer grade lenses that are pretty cheap, is weather resistant (18-55 WR, 55-300), screw-drive AF (cheaper third party lenses), has a lot better viewfinder (!) and a proper mirror lockup (!)... Not to mention the image stabilization in body. These are the things that are very important and which beginners wouldn't know to look for.
Given it is some $250 cheaper than D5300 at the moment, you could get yourself a very nice 35mm of 50mm prime for free, or upgrade to a kit with two zooms. Ricoh/Pentax really hit a jackpot with this series of consumer dslrs and I think DPreview should note that, just like most of their readers did.
If you read the conclusion, we also recommend the K-50.
drummercam: I am guessing that Pentax K-30 was not on this list because, yes, it is identical to K-50 except for the outward form and a couple of minor updates in the K-5, but also because DPR lists only currently produced models (I assume).
That said, the K-50 and K-500 should switch positions on this list.
BUT, if price point is a factor (after all, we're talking about "Consumer" models), Pentax K-5, K-5II, and K-5IIs should be 1, 2, 3 -- even if they are no longer being made. Hands down, there is no better, more capable "consumer value" camera in the DSLR camera market at the moment than a Pentax K-5.
This was a roundup of 2013 models, hence the absence of the cameras you mention. The K-500 has no AF points in the viewfinder, so it is not something we'd recommend to most users, as even the cheapest point and shoot camera will tell you where it's focused.
Katier: "The Pentax can't match the Nikon for lens choice (particularly when it comes to the more affordable, third-party options), but it's an awful lot of camera for the money and one that may well be more satisfying to shoot with, if you've owned a DSLR before." You what?
There is over 40 years worth of lenses to choose from, and a fantastic range of lenses to choose from. The only area Pentax lacks a bit is for f2.8 professional long zooms - hardly the types of lenses that a consumer SLR user would be looking at.
I'm frankly staggered that the K50 wasn't the recomended Camera, it out-features the 5300 in so many areas.
Not only that but the 5300 competes with the K5 II for price, therefore either the K5 II should be in the round-up OR the 5300 not be there.
Not only that but the K50 is only £50 more (comparing Kit's) than the Canon 100..
Very poor round-up, very poor.
The roundup is of models announced this year. Yes, there are many other bargains to be had in older models. Welcome to them. We recommended the K-50 also. Read the conclusion.
LeVerm: Oh!… Ca-n-ikon… as usually… Why not Pentax K 50? I can't see any real "plus" of these two cameras over the K 50…Well, Iill still keep my hopes!
Consider that I've been shooting with both the Pentax and Nikon, and preferred the Nikon experience overall. And also note that we recommended the K-50 as well in the conclusion.
onlooker: dual12 wrote:"A gold award means nothing."
Barney Britton responded:"@ dual12 - really?"
I also agree with dual12. Barney, DPR produces great reviews with a lot of data points. One needs to read them carefully and make up his mind based on how the camera fits his needs. I remember long time ago Olympus 3040Z did not get "Highly Recommended" (equivalent of "Gold" back in those days). Yet, based on the info in the review I bought it, and it was the best compact I ever had, period - for me.
Plastek, that's not what I said. As a reviewer over these past 15 plus years, I've given plenty of awards to cameras I don't own and wouldn't own, and thumbs down on brands I do. We review cameras on their merits. My body of work speaks for itself. The constant accusations that we're biased simply aren't backed up by the facts that are freely available to anyone who can google.
A Gold award means the reviewer liked it as much as you liked your 3040Z. It allows us a separate assessment of the camera that doesn't rely so much on raw data. Why? Because sometimes a camera is more than the sum of its parts. If it's a joy to use, that's good to be able to express, and sometimes more important than its raw dynamic range, for example.
Vfdtyler: Solid review. Should I go for this over the T3i? I've been seriously considering that camera based off some things I read on http://canonrebelt3ibundle.com/Which camera is better?
I own a T3i, and I like the SL1/100D a little better, primarily for the Hybrid AF II, the quieter shutter sound, and the extreme portability, especially with the 40mm STM lens. You'll probably be happy with either, though.
Najinsky: I love it when DPR engages in the rumour mill. The one thing it tells us for certain is you don't have one yet, or it would likely be covered by your NDA.
Probably just a white SL1 for the Asian market.
Now you're splitting hairs. You shouldn't admit it's a fair point, then act like you didn't mean it 'that way.'
If anything, this post - if on point - takes the air out of their attempt to tease. That was not its purpose; its purpose was to illustrate what we saw and share it with the larger audience. I prefer camera companies tease rather than leak. One approach honestly takes advantage of the interest surrounding digital camera introductions; the other gives away everything, killing the interest on announcement day.
sh10453: It sounds like Canon is planning to release a pro series camera in white color.Perhaps to match the white (cream) color L line of lenses?
Since the release is in November, my guess is that DPR already has a copy for "first impression" and sample photos, and they probably are laughing at all our blabbing.
No, we don't have a copy, have never seen anything but this website.
AndreyT: At first one wonders what was the point of reposting these images again, after we have seen them hundreds of times already (they were making rounds around the Net for a few years now). But then one notices that there's an obvious political bias in the selection of these images: out of all those well-known Lego photo recreation pictures only the ones were cherry picked that fit certain propaganda-censorship agenda. And then a few "neutral" pictures were added to masquerade the original intent. Apparently someone at "dpreview staff" saw this veiled trolling opportunity and took it.
Wow. What on Earth are you talking about?