naththo: Sony sensor is now nailed in the coffin! Can't believed it! Samsung trump over Sony by miles!
... at low ISO.
> ISO Invariance
Oh my. Since I'm not much interested in the stuff, I have missed half the page #10. The most interesting half.
And - oh my freaking god - this is finally happening!
Finally, ISO starts becoming just another exposure variable, not exposure handicap!
BSI FTW! Bravo, Samsung!
gmke: A large BSI sensor is nothing to sneeze at. The open question has been hanging around for some time: Why hasn't anyone tried the BSI approach on APS-C? The question to Samsung is, How long will it take to get the rest of the situation ironed out? Rushing a cool idea to market, without polish, won't turn the right heads. You gotta have a complete story before anyone takes you seriously.
"The open question has been hanging around for some time: Why hasn't anyone tried the BSI approach on APS-C?"
BSI manufacturing process is complex and doesn't scale well to the larger sensor.
But the progress marches on. Few years back Sony was first with the 1" BSI sensor. And now Sammy is first with the APS-C BSI sensor.
Segaman: Canon is here to stay
> Canon is here to stay
But many people have already moved on.
Timur Born: "making it the first truly 'pocketable' compact high-zoom camera with a built-in electronic viewfinder"
Sorry, but no. The TZ70 may come with 5 mm more height, but in return it comes with 1.6 mm less depth. And in this general height x width size category it's depth that defines how pocketable a camera is. I guess you can put both in a jeans pocket, but the LF1 still trumps them in size (only up to 200mm in return for a bigger sensor).
For comparison, the HX90 is 36 mm deep, the LF1 is 28 mm. And while you can squeeze a RX100 into a jeans pocket the LF1 does that far more comfortably because of its lesser depth.
Still a nice offering, if only Sony would include a raw file format, which the Panasonics do.
"Sorry, but no. The TZ70 [...]"
DPR definitely needs some intelligence database/system.
Despite the contraction of camera market, they seem to forget things easily nowadays.
They already have all the data in their camera DB - they simply need a tool to catalog and search the facts and the predicates.
I did this in the university with the Prolog. It was fun.
keeponkeepingon: I think the title, "a class of it owns" just goes to show how dorked up the DPREVIEW sensor size based camera classification system is.
With the kit lens this is almost a $3000 camera. It should be compared to other $3000 cameras regardless of sensor size.
Also I don't see how any camera that has problems focusing in low light could be given a gold?
If I want a quick sunny day camera, I'll use my iPhone thank you very much.
"Sony A77M2 for $1548 on amazon"
Good point. (Though the kit is not perfectly comparable, since the Sony's 2.8/16-50 isn't particularly stellar performer. And we comparing street price of 1yo kit with just released one.)
P.S. It's kind of shame that the SLT hasn't took off.
"It should be compared to other $3000 cameras regardless of sensor size."
How many other cameras are sold in kit with a f/2.0-2.8 or constant f/2.8 zoom?
"Also I don't see how any camera that has problems focusing in low light could be given a gold?"
Two years ago, even questions about low light focusing would have been written off as unrealistic expectations.
All cameras to some extent have problems focusing in the low light.
Heck, people even have problems seeing in the low light.
MFiftysomething: This is something designed primarily not to threaten Canon DSLRs. A big ugly camera with a small sensor and a slow zoom lens -how is this the future?
Barney, I think you are missing the point. By a mile.
You have just presented a hybrid cam. And went on to tell everybody who was shooting stills/video for many years now (very often with the one (hybrid) camera) that they are not the target audience for the camera. And you keep insisting on that. And people get angry, because you basically reject years of their work.
Throwing in "not our core audience" is also a "nice" touch, since the hybrid users just started warming up to the DPR's improved reviews of the video.
Do you see now the problem with what you say?
Drop "convergence" - call it like everybody else "hybrid".
Drop "multimedia pros" - people are doing it for years now and nobody calls it that.
Do not throw frivolously at people "not target audience" - because many Pana GH*/AF* and Sony A*/FS*/AX* users who showed up here actually are the target audience. Because they already do mixed video/stills shooting for many years now.
ThePhilips: That's quite a laundry list of problems with the higher resolution sensors. Yet, DPR has in recent reviews - X100T and E-M5/2 - criticized the lower resolution (16MP) of the cameras. And in comments DPR has been defending their position, saying that there are no downsides for going to higher resolution. That seems to be inconsistent, if not even hypocritical.
IMO, the MP race is simply misguided. Few need the higher resolution - while most would rather take better pixels. Yet manufacturers, and DPR supports them, keep throwing at us more crappy pixels, instead of actually addressing the problem at the root. High MP race also guarantees that misguided expectations of photographers make it harder and harder to introduce a usable true-color sensor, since the available tech (we have seen numerous patents over the years) can't match either sensitivity or resolution of the Bayer sensors. It doesn't need to - but the misguided expectations prevent the technology from ever leaving the research labs.
> There's just more to the story, as always :)
Well, I have my own agenda too :) Though I am not as capable articulating it.
The problem as I see it is that higher resolution only addresses problems of several niches, but not the mass market.
IMO DPR is in a good position to poke manufacturers about the Foven-like, true color sensors.
Micro-blur is the icing on the "cake". And the cake stinks suspiciously.
High MP count has low ROI - if those pixels are crappy pixels.
Even with the high MP count, demosaicing of the images from Bayer sensor washes away the most of the fine details. (DPR has even implied as much in the E-M5/2's review of high-res mode.) And with monochrome sensors, one has to go much much higher in resolution to match the output of the true-color sensors. And still fail to match it, because the demosaicing still has to do the guesswork.
That's quite a laundry list of problems with the higher resolution sensors. Yet, DPR has in recent reviews - X100T and E-M5/2 - criticized the lower resolution (16MP) of the cameras. And in comments DPR has been defending their position, saying that there are no downsides for going to higher resolution. That seems to be inconsistent, if not even hypocritical.
The NX1 is their first which deserves such attention - and the award.
I'm hopeful it wouldn't be their last.
P.S. Samsung, NX500 with EVF please. Do it already. Give us the camera worth your pancakes lenses.
Donnie G: Canon creates another tool for working pros that, once again, sends armchair hobbyists stomping about madly and foaming at the mouth with rage and resentment because the product wasn't designed for them and isn't priced for them either. Boohoo! How dare Canon put pros before trolls! Let's teach Canon a lesson by running out right now and buying all the A7s, A6000s, FZ1000s, and GH4s we can find, then put our Canon lenses on them. I bet that'll show Canon who's boss. :))
nerd2: Why is it a big deal? We have 4K video on our PHONE, as well as upcoming mirrorless cameras (which has larger sensor than this and can accept multiple lenses too)
"You countered saying that no 4K capable camera does line skipping and I concurred."
No 4K camera does line skipping in 4K mode, as you have said above. Quote: "Other mirrorless cameras with bigger sensors usually have to do line skipping to sample 4k". Which is BS.
"I also said that the bigger sensors do line skipping for 1080p (which is true for the A7, A7R and A7ii)."
Which are not video-optimized or even hybdid cameras and do not belong to the discussion here, about the hybrid cameras.
"But whatever, you seem rather combative so I will end this discussion here."
It wasn't even a discussion. You have overgeneralized that MR have crappy video (line skipping is bad). Which is simply not true for all the hybrid MR cameras the XC10 is pitched against.
But not the A7s. (Not the GH4. Not the NX1.)
The other A7 cameras were not even mentioned here before. Neither do they support external recording, high bit rates or the 4K. What is the point of bringing them up now?
Dale Baskin: Since there have been a lot of questions/comments about this camera relative to cameras like the FZ1000 we've decided to put together a small addendum to add to the article that may clarify the differences between cameras. (Which is why I'm not hanging out here responding to comments.) I'll post a message as soon as it's up.
"That's your words, not DPR's."
I have just reversed the reversed words to express clearly what was only implied.
"But in terms of ergonomics and body design, they are stills cameras first and foremost [...]"
That's just ridiculous.
Around the time of Panasonic GH2 launch, there was a interview with the Panasonic reps, where they have said that video shooters *overwhelmingly* requested the DSLR-like ergonomics.
"[...] while the XC10 is designed for both stills and video."
Really? Now literally quoting from the marketing materials? Go to m43 forums and search moaning of the stills photographers, who keep complaining that Pana GH is designed for video and thus they do not want it. And now compare the GH still spec with the XC spec...
"The only exception to the excellent ergonomics are the four buttons on top of the dial that control ISO, WB, AF, and metering, which feel a bit Nikon-esque."
The condescension is truly Canon-esque.
"I stand corrected, the bigger sensors only line skip when recording 1080p."
BS again. All like one do full-sensor readout.
"Still a lot of pixel binning happening [...]"
No pixel binning, either. Just normal plain downscaling.
What rock you are living under?
MarioV: "If you're one of those people leaving comments along the lines of 'too expensive!' and 'Canon has lost its way' then rest assured - this product isn't for you."
Well said. Unfortunately, it didnt stop the moaning. A lot of people have a massive sense of entitlement and are the centre of the universe.Nice try though.
"A lot of people have a massive sense of entitlement and are the centre of the universe."
Very succinct description of the Canon proponents here!
It's unbelievable how people could stick with the products of the company, which is shafting them on every turn for many years now. Those who persist and stay, clearly develop the "center of universe" type of mentality.