dosdan: I suppose some will be interested in upgrading to FF. I'm not.
Does this mean that Pentax users will soon have to chant the "You're not a serious photographer unless you're using FF" mantra?
@tkbslc, and so it starts. But the irony is lost on the unwitting.
Samuel Spencer: Just a brief note because a few people had asked, the studio test scene was updated for the NX1 after the release of FW 1.2 because of improved JPEG NR. All shots were updated.
@Trk, Samsung in that respect is special. Their JPEG engine is by far the worst, since it is optimized as if for a P&S camera: deliver passable result, regardless. IIRC past ISO 800 NR kicks in, blurring noise - and details - away. The biggest issue is (was?) that you can't turn the NR off.
Canon, Nikon, Oly, Pana, Fuji, Sony - had JPEG engines ironed out quite early in the day. But Samsung for some reason for years blatantly ignored by far the biggest complaint against their camera. I hope that they have finally make JPEG NR optional.
PerL: "But I was hoping for some live view. Instead, when shooting at the fastest frame rate you see a series of still images as you capture them, making it difficult to follow or anticipate action through the viewfinder."
So it also got "shutter stutter" despite the hype. It seems impossible to get a proper live view while shooting fast series with a mirrorless. So now we can settle that. DSLRs still rules for serious action.
Panasonic cameras had 240fps for some time now. But the black-out is longer compared to the DSLR. To me it was an easy trade off to gain all the benefits of the LiveView EVF/LCD.
Anyhow, Digital black-out is not a new issue and I'm sure all vendors are fully aware of the problem and are working on improving it.
I doubt that Samsung would go and give you any statement. They are highly unlikely to comment officially (and thus attract more attention) to something negative relative to a DSLR.
Couscousdelight: And today Samsung presents it first Organic Sensor :http://image-sensors-world.blogspot.fr/2015/02/samsung-presents-organic-on-si-cmos.html
@nerd2, now they have joined ranks of other camera/sensor manufacturers - Canon, Sony and Panasonic (TowerJazz) - who have patented similar things over the last 5+ years. And yet no camera with such sensor has materialized. I wouldn't expect much. The new tech would arrive first on the small sensor devices anyway.
tecnoworld, not so fast.
With digital cameras, there is an exposure phase and there is a read-out phase.
The DSLR's OVF becomes available as soon as exposure is finished (and mirror has moved back). The read-out phase happens asynchronously.
The mirrorless EVF (ditto LCD) has to do black out and wait for both exposure and read-out phases to finish before it can become active again. EVF uses the sensor and for as long as it is busy with something else, there is no display possible.
As read-out speed improves, it would be less of an issue. But just not yet.
Akpinxit: this is the same ISO6400 noise I'm trying to get rid of on my 7D
You do realized that the RAW was pushed by 1.5 EV in PP? And the effective ISO is well above 12800?
mpgxsvcd: I read the review so far and I simply couldn’t help thinking that I would never buy a Canon 7D MKII over this camera. There simply wasn’t anything I saw in that review that would convince me otherwise.
Sure each camera has its own benefits and drawbacks. However, the NX1's benefits far outweigh its drawbacks and the 7D MKII’s benefits.
However, I simply can't convince anyone else that this is the camera to get. When I mention the Samsung camera they say “I would be more comfortable getting something everyone else has like a Canon”.
The average photographer cares more about not getting the “wrong” camera than the “right” camera. They don’t want to take a chance buying a camera that is inferior and no one else uses because they are afraid people will say "I told you so".
With the Canon camera they can simply say “Everyone else has it so it can’t be that bad”. Convincing people that the majority of camera buyers are wrong is a next to impossible task even though I think that is true.
@nerd2, that is not wrong per se. But "wider choice of lenses" is also misleading. If one system has 100 different lenses - but lacks 1 or 2 you actually need, then it is definitely worse to the user than a system which has the lenses one needs.
Many people are blinded by the long list of Canon L glass, without realizing that there are lots of "duplicates" there, and many of the Ls are old (almost antique) lenses.
On topic. For example, Canon has nothing like the Samsung 2.0-2.8/16-50mm lens. There is no standard L zoom which provides f/2.0 at 24mm eq.
Zerg2905: Future Gold Award from DPR. No matter what.
Even without the gold, thanks to the internal 4K and the 15fps, the camera is going to turn many heads.
> the “right” camera.
There is no such thing as a "right camera". There is only "right camera for me".
As Canon users go, people who were led to believe into the "upgrade path", who bought collection of (FF) L glass but can't afford the FF camera, are simply not going to move away from the Canon: mostly because of the denial that they made a wrong decision forking off huge amount of money for the L glass. They have no choice now but to "like" Canon. They are anchored there and will not bulge. Anyway, it's not like Canon is going out of business. Their cameras are dated, but that's only what is available to the Canon shooters. So...
> Samsung's S series of lenses, such as the 10-50mm F2-2.8 S
10-50mm?? OMG, dream lens!! I'm switching systems!!! ;)
P.S. A typo obviously.
And people called GH4 "too large"...
tom1234567: £2000 and they may sell not any better than the NX1Tom G
"Adoption of this great camera by indie filmmakers and commercial shooters on a budget is definitely picking up."
The bigger point being that, now more things are possible "on a budget".
Pana GH2/3/4, Sony A7s and Sammy NX1 are slowly undoing the premium video gear market.
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.