The picture of the victorious racer in the boat is labelled ISO25,600, but EXIF says ISO100.
dojoklo: Your example video showing "the differences between the FlexiZone single-point phase-detect AF and Face-detect/Tracking autofocus" is a little weird at best, and misleading at worst. First, one really wouldn't consider Face Detect to be the "default" AF mode - it is simply one of the 4 modes that the user can choose from, and it just happens to be the first one listed. The user is expected to select the mode that best fits the scene, and so that being said...
Why do you keep trying to use Face Detect to focus on a scene clearly without a face, and then commenting how there is a lag? Yes, there is a lag as the camera ponders why the user left it set on the Face Detect mode when there are no faces to be found! And then the camera switches automatically to FlexiZone-Multi as designed. The lag can be easily avoided by setting the camera in the appropriate AF Mode before shooting, and thus could basically be considered user error.
The example is pro-reader, not anti-Canon.
meanwhile: Why is there no rugged XZ-1? Why is there no rugged S110? Why no rugged LX7, or GR or anything with decent image quality? I really don't understand this camera not existing. Surely there are enough photographers looking for something they can take somewhere there is water around, or their camera might get knocked, or the environment is otherwise not camera friendly but where they want to be able to get quality shots?
Is a quality lens inherently and inevitably breakable? And if yes, why doesn't someone just come out and SAY THAT?
Is it just because it would tick too many boxes, and last too long? Not enough built-in obsolescence?
"All the cameras you mentioned have lenses that extend from the body when powered on."
Yep, I realise that, it was more for an indication of IQ level than body style. I could have said X100 (as it's lens doesn't extend, well a tiny bit), but that's a class up. Or RX100 (who's lens extends, I know). Thinking enthusiast+ level sensor size (1/1.6, 1"), RAW, manual control, sensible size, quality lens, decent corner to corner, good colour, etc.
My question is more along the lines of - can you not do quality folding optics? Is it just not possible? No-one has as yet, so maybe it's just not doable?
Why is there no rugged XZ-1? Why is there no rugged S110? Why no rugged LX7, or GR or anything with decent image quality? I really don't understand this camera not existing. Surely there are enough photographers looking for something they can take somewhere there is water around, or their camera might get knocked, or the environment is otherwise not camera friendly but where they want to be able to get quality shots?
ogl: Smaller sensor compared to other interchangeable lens systems.DPREVIEW! It's P&S camera with interchangeable lenses. Please, compare with P&S cameras ONLY. I see that RAW result is very good for P&S camera.
You can change the compared cameras to any you like though, just choose another from the popups.
seanpon: Frankly, I prefer good photography to mediocre Photoshop work. I believe that this young photographer would be better served honing his photography skills. He probably has talent but his composite images are just cliches to me.
"Frankly, I prefer good photography to mediocre Photoshop work"
Agreed, but given this isn't mediocre, how does that statement apply here?
absentaneous: I am amazed people still fall for such tricks. when I was a teenager my favorite artist was dali. I thought his surreal art was pure genius. when I grew up I changed my mind. now I find his art childish, empty and boring.
It's nothing to do with what I think of you. You see not appreciating Dali as some kind of growth, but perhaps you have lost what you once had, rather than become more.
To quote someone about art "this is art, not math. there is no 2+2=4 formula. there is no doing it right or doing it wrong."
"now I find his art childish, empty and boring."
Perhaps that says more about you and less about Dali. You are now an empty and boring adult, and have lost the wonder of youth. It's sad when that happens.
Three things I notice from these samples are well exposed shots, clean shadows, and lots of detail in the highlights. As someone who often uses a compact camera, that isn't a common combination. RAW would presumably give you another stop or two of latitude (though that is a guess) either way, and the high ISO looks pretty clean too. Impressive.
I'd love it if we could get to - as an example - the rugged X100.
Peiasdf: At some point, I think street photography went from creepy to stupid.
Wow, you turned into a singularly rude piece of work pretty quick Manuel, you must of been practising for years.
Kirppu: I share the dpreview opinion."This makes for a pretty mouth-watering package that looks very close to the Olympus PEN E-P5 at a distinctly lower price point"
Obviously I mean X-M1 rather than E-M1. Oops.
@marike6 http://camerasize.com/compare/#466,285 (look at the top views and compare the size/volume/weight - lack of a viewfinder is more forgivable in the E-M1). The K-01 also did not have a flip screen, and had a lower quality and resolution screen than the E-M1. Means you can often get that extra point of contact and stability you described, bright sunlight shooting isn't as big an issue as with the K-01 and the disadvantages have been cancelled out by the features of the E-M1 that the K-01 doesn't have.
meanwhile: I understand all the CC/cloud/Death to Adobe hoohaa, but ... how well does the Camera Shake Reduction feature work?
Why do people who understand what something is for, and understand why something occasionally happens (and likely has happened to them multiple times), constantly feel the need to crap on anyone who might find something useful? It's just unnecessary, and poor behaviour.
Yeah, I was kind of hoping to hear from one of those real people.
I understand all the CC/cloud/Death to Adobe hoohaa, but ... how well does the Camera Shake Reduction feature work?
RobertSigmund: My utter respect. Where can I still get this camera?
Juck, it's too heavy!
Just a Photographer: The same can be done in Paintshop Pro - No need to use Photoshop for this.
While DPreview is a large community mainly focussing upon amateur photographers (and single professionals) I would like to ask DPReview's editors to start focussing upon different software now Adobe doesn't want to serve the amateur photographer or smaller professionals anymore!.
Meaby this question is good for another poll
"And no, I don't need to write an article in order to properly demonstrate that or to put my opinion into words."
But you do need to if you want to put your money where your mouth is. Want to facilitate change? Then help.