RichRMA: A graphic display of why mirrors should be...going away.
> it lags,
Lag time one most modern cameras is below 10ms. Which is about twice as fast as the fastests human eye refresh rate.
> the viewfinder blackout time for the best is 5 times as long as on a modern DSLR
That simply is untrue. The black out is only a problem with long exposure. Because that's the time when sensor cannot be used for EVF.
But if you are into a long exposure, things like Live Composite (see your long exposure developing on your LCD/EVF as it develops) are simply impossible with OVF.
> you can't see your subject properly (dynamic range of the mini displays is woefully inadequate)
Nonsense. Some cameras have blinkies, which can show you the highlights/shadows. Something you can never have in OVF.
> EVF are a crutch
Your previous comments could be attributed to lack of information, but that's just silly. The whole digital photography is a poor crutch for those who failed to learn to photograph with the film.
OVF is junk for way more things than EVF.
In real life, EVF is much much more useful than OVF.
Zdman: Nice comment bait DP. The competitions results won't be out till early Feb but I expect to see similar performance (in cameras). Nice use of "failed to meet analyst expectations" which is a dramatization of "That was slightly less than analysts' average forecast" in the source article. It a pretty healthy set of results and the outlook is positive with the weaker yen. It also has pretty healthy cash reserves. Canon still makes plenty of money from areas other than cameras so its not all doom and gloom.
> Nice use of "failed to meet analyst expectations"
Canon is large publicly traded company. Lots of people and organizations keep money in their stock. "Failed to meet expectations" effectively means that stock price is volatile, unpredictable, making Canon stocks bad destination for investments.
The analysts do not give a hoot about imaging business. They care about stocks with which can be traded for profit, the stocks which are predictable.
As daily business goes, in itself, the message isn't as dramatic as it sounds. Unless the investors go into a panic mode and decide to change something. But, as you say, Canon still makes a profit, so there is no reason for stockholders to undertake anything.
> It a pretty healthy set of results and the outlook is positive with the weaker yen.
You missed the news about falling oil prices.
Falling oil prices are expected to help Japan's industry and exports, what would strengthen the yen. Fancy that.
nekrosoft13: good, hope it keeps going down, Canon needs to get off their lazy asses.
License Sony sensor tech. Feature parity with Nikons in entry-level APS-C cameras. Built-in GPS. 70D AF and video in xxxD and xxxxD cameras. Built-in time lapse. Weather-sealing on xxxD and xxxxD cameras. More APS-C lenses. More weather-sealed APS-C lenses. A mirrorless camera worth buying. Small EF-M lenses. (All weather-sealed, of course.) Micro-USB connector. Charging over USB. And so on.
And of course: rename Av and Tv to A and S. :)
KInfinity: I'm interested. Can it be a pocketable replacement for my mk1 RX100?
> The RX100 is my go-to concert, bar camera.
One can't beat the size of a built-in lens. RX100 are revolutionary and IMO still largely up-to-date. Some claim that LX100 has better IQ, but IMO RX100, thanks to the higher resolution sensor, holds the ground. In a nutshell, RX100 is smaller and slower, LX100 is faster but larger.
> [...] use a bigger sensor'd X-M1/X100T.
I wish Fuji would do more smaller lenses. Even if relying a lot on software correction. 23mm alone is not enough. There is no compact 50mm eq lens or compact WA zoom (18-35mm eq) or compact WA prime (24mm eq). That would make the cameras like X-M1 immensely more attractive.
Marty4650: The real star of these tiny cameras is the kit lens. That 12-32mm lens is a lot better than you would expect a kit lens to be.
In addition to the 14mm, 12-34mm, and 35-100mm lenses, I think the 17mm f/1.7 should be added as a "lens well suited for a GM camera." In fact, that lens was designed with the GM1 in mind, and was sold bundled with it in some markets.
I really think Panasonic is onto something with these high quality mini cameras. They make ideal street shooters, travel cams, or second cameras to a DSLR or high end MILC model.
> I think the 17mm f/1.7 should be added
Surely you mean 1.7/15mm PanaLeica.
Not to be confused with the Oly 1.8/17mm.
ThePhilips: "but its 16MP sensor struggles to compete with high-res APS-C chips"
DPR bias: there is no similar remark in the Canon 7D2 review.
> You know that you linked jpegs?
Of course. Because DPR's RAWs are too JPEGs. Because you can't see RAW. Because it is RAW. And if one looks at a developed image anyway, why not look at the best possible developed image? Precisely what DPR's JPEG mean.
> my point is made nicely.
And what was your point is? That if you look at under-developed RAWs, all you can see the the messy noise, but you like the noise of 7D2 better? compared to the noise of A6000 and GM5?
And that's precisely my point. When you develop the RAWs to DPR's high standards, 7D2 IQ is worse when compared to the A6000 and is comparable to GM5.
I too understand that if DPR openly wrote that Canon IQ sucks compared to the modern Sony and Nikon, the Canon fans would have tore the site apart and the flame wars on the forums would have ensued for months. I understand that, yet it is also unfair to other cameras to be criticized where Canon gets a slack.
"The Canon 7DII is a somewhat better high ISO camera than the A6000."
Where?? I've been over the DPR's IQ comparator couple of times when review was published. There is not a single place in the chart which 7D2 renders better than the A6000. 7D2 consistently lags behind the A6000 by about 1/2 stop. In fact, the 7D2 is pretty close to my GX7, ditto GM5 and GM1.
mpgxsvcd: Man the GM5 looks exactly like the LX100 on the specifications page. Is the GM5 just a re-badged LX100?
DPR has finally fixed it.
Graham Gibson: FYI--page 3 (specs) has a picture of the LX100, not the GM5.
@Plastek, but the IQ of 7D2 is NOT better than the same Sony A6000. Quite the opposite.
While GM5 gets the negative remark about its sensor, 7D2 conclusions fail to mention that IQ of modern APS-C Sonys and Nikons is more than noticeably better.
ThePhilips: "Panasonic's JPEG high ISO noise reduction continues to disappoint us."
Hehe. A trait typical to female writing: "I like it" but "it disappoints us". For positive or neutral opinion - "I", but for the (esp strong) negative one - "we". :)
Considering that it is your only slip on the whole "Shooting Experience" page, I think it highlights the biggest disappointment with the little camera you had.
@NAwlins, heard it from professional writers. More I cannot tell you.
Anyway, the comment which was intended to be humorous, was totally blown out of proportion.
P.S. Random Googling result:
"but its 16MP sensor struggles to compete with high-res APS-C chips"
"Jesus, what century do you live in mate."
This is actually a statistical fact. As good as any other statistical fact. And writers are actually aware of it.
@DPR stuff, delete the comment if you wish. No offense (or hidden whatever-feminism) was intended. It was just a comic moment for me, while reading the review. (After encountering the unexpected "us", checked who wrote the review, and there it was.)
P.S. Just in case: Sorry for the English. Non-native speaker. And 3 bottles of beer. The trait isn't unique to English, anyway.
mpgxsvcd: Let’s get one thing straight. Dpreview has never given any camera anything less than a Silver award. The only thing that the silver award says is that the camera is not good enough to warrant a Gold award.
Curios fact: Oly 50mm, after so many years, remains the highest rated lens DPR has ever reviewed.
GM1 and GM5 body - without lens mounted - have about the same size as the RX100 cameras (with the lens collapsed). Give or take few mm.
bluevellet: Why does DPR keep on using the 45mm f1.8 for the studio scene? Not so long ago, they used the old 50mm f2 macro for earlier m43 cameras and it is sharper.
Also, the high-grade Oly 50mm is much more consistent in IQ than the plastic fantastic 45mm.
The idea of using a native m43 lens for studio tests isn't bad.
But why among the three 85mm-ish lenses available on m43 DRP had to pick the cheapest one, is really really strange.
Both Pana 2.8/45mm and Pana 1.2/42.5mm have better IQ than the Oly 1.8/45mm.
"Panasonic's JPEG high ISO noise reduction continues to disappoint us."
trulandphoto: Please get this article off the front page. Every time I look and see "Selfie" prominently displayed on DPReview I wonder why I bother.
Worse - show them to others - just for fun!
D1N0: So this firmware passed the testing phase? What do they do? Take three shots and then conclude it's fine.
The Sigma is already 2 years on the market - two years!! - and nobody has complained before! That alleviates my first (sarcastic) comment from "sarcastic" to "sad truth".