jeg-og: I wonder how many of you dumping on the DxO The One are owners or just "Riders in the Stand".I ordered one from B&H and it arrived on Monday, upgraded my iPhone 4 and installed the app in the Apple Store.I then purchased the microSD card and began to fiddle with it in the shopping centre. Of the three other people sitting in the rest area at the shopping centre, two showed interest. One an 80+ year old woman used her iPhone to photograph it(Her memory wasn't the best), another 80+ year old man went to the Apple Store to get one. He mistook my purchasing of the iPhone to mean I had purchased the camera from there Apple Store.For those who don't know, included in the purchase is a license for DxO's image software, so the only way to judge the quality of the product is to actually take photos and see the result in DxO Optics Pro.I did say more but in doing so I exceeded the char limit, so in conclusion If you don't have actual experience with the product , your comments are irrelevant
I would generally agree with you. However, there is many obvious flaws in this product - flimsy looking (especially with that delicate lightning connector), poor battery, seems awkward to handle etc. It is trying to provide a solution to a problem that does not exist.
Mirrorless cameras gives better quality and are just as pocketable, if not more. They're cheaper too considering you need both this and an iPhone. It just smacks of poor market research and implementation.
shleed: Does not appeal to me at all. For the price of this, you can get a decent entry level DSLR with kit lens.
A mirrorless would be certainly pocketable, have a much larger sensor and has the ability to change lenses. The DxO One is flimsy, expensive and pointless, where there is no niche. I have yet to see praise for it outside the people who are having a severe case of post-purchase rationalisation.
Why the fascination with it being pocketable? Frankly it's not good for the money it's demanding - falls off easily, terrible battery life, weak joint due to lightning connector, cost of smartphone and this would equal a mid range DSLR/mirrorless etc.
shleed: Give it a few years - maybe then I'll look into mirrorless. At the moment, I'll only use a mirrorless as a secondary body or for old lenses/video.
It can still be argued that film offers better IQ, especially in larger formats.
Give it a few years - maybe then I'll look into mirrorless. At the moment, I'll only use a mirrorless as a secondary body or for old lenses/video.
Does not appeal to me at all. For the price of this, you can get a decent entry level DSLR with kit lens.
Kudos to Sony actually fixing it. Sony fanboys can actually brag about DR now.
Doesn't change the fact that mirrorless is still in its infancy. When it is better developed, I'll probably go with Fujifilm.
Btw isn't it interesting? If Sony had the uncompressed option from the beginning, nobody would care. Now they got 2 articles on DPR out of it, the 2nd one bringing them even more praise.
I guess Sony continues the successful example of Blu-ray. Every time BD gained a feature HD-DVD already had from the beginning, they made a big announcement about it, gaining more attention.
Besides, them abandoning their stupid original 3-button control scheme made a big splash in the news too. Yea, Sony knows their marketing. Make a crappy thing first, then slowly upgrade it. Free attention! Fujifilm follows a similar pattern.
I'd much prefer Fuji, though.
All this talk of better DR, and yet lossy compression destroys any meaningful chance of using it without it being a detriment to image quality. GG Sony.
Nice idea, but would have been better if the plates were standardised to begin with. Still, something to look into.
Leica, the Nokia of cameras.
JimSab: Peoples comments make me laugh. Yes it's all personal opinion and now you have reason to complain because the JPEG images don't look good at 100%, because ALL of you are going to print 1m wide images from this camera in Jpeg where it will be the only time this "fault" will be visible.
The 5DmkIII's raw images were astounding at all ISO's (bar 102400 because that's stupid).... and it seems that the 6D's images might ALMOST be slightly better at high ISO.. which is fantastic! In Raw that is, I don't care about jpeg.
I still cannot WAIT till I buy this camera. I don't need the "Extra features" of the Nikon, I like Canon and always will. Besides, if the main thing is the lack of focus points - it makes little difference if both cameras' focus points are in a similarly small area of the frame.
I enjoy people's winging though, it makes me laugh, you should go study optimism or something :)
We're going back to newcomers and such then. Haven't heard of a lot of people use FF cameras though, and personally I think your statement is false. I'd speculate the majority of photographers with a DSLR are using crop sensors. FF cameras are only now becoming cheap enough to be more widely used, but only gearheads and more serious photographers only ever seem to use them.
Personally people who use DSLRs to just take snapshots disappoint me. No thought process involved, and generally a gigantic waste of money. I was under the naive impression that people buy DSLRs with the intention to be more serious with photography, rather than use it as an overpriced compact.
As for the 6D, at the moment I've no intention of buying it. I will however probably get a FF DSLR someday so I can use inexpensive circular fisheye lenses and such.
showmetheprime: I think the word I'm looking for is "meh".............
He has still yet to answer if he used any of these cameras to hold any authority to what he says. I'll take it he hasn't.
Keep webexpertin', prime.
Unless you're a press/sports photographer, I fail to see how JPEG quality is a factor.
Same reason why auto is included with DSLRs, to appeal to newcomers. Auto is terrible on DSLRs yet you don't see photographers selling their cameras over it.
For most photography purposes, JPEG isn't a good idea. Only 8-bit, so a lot of dynamic range is lost. Most serious photographers usually shoot in RAW.
cgarrard: The only problem I have worth mentioning with Canon's image quality on their DSLRS is banding. Looks like the 6D is yet another camera with this issue.
Canon and Panasonic are notorious for it, and to me, it's nearly a complete deal breaker for Canon. Luckily their Powershot Camera division got the message and can produce ISO 12,800 images from the G15 that are actually pretty decent with zero banding.
It's odd to me to watch Canon lose their grip as a market leader. Not sending DPR a review sample (been an issue for a while now and not just with DPR), not catching up in sensor technology, and not being as competitive as Nikon on DSLR's.... one has to wonder who's calling the shots over there at Canon (both USA and Japan that is).
It's pretty clear to see from the outside that Canon seems to be losing ground on reality, even though they continue to post profits. That won't last long and I dare say next year they might get a big dose of reality.
Does it HONESTLY bloody matter which company is better? Really?
Talk about your cameras all you want, you're just going to take crap at the end of the day.
my username was already taken: Wow, my old D700 smokes this toy! Clearly, if you're moving up to full frame and have a limited investment in glass or if you're just starting out, buying a D600 over the 6D is the only smart thing to do.
Photos talk. Not gear.
showmetheprime: Dear oh dear. Well we can see why you won't be buying it for its high ISO performance. Total lack of detail anywhere, Canon's trademark in camera mushy noise reduction strikes again. And of course we know the sensor's already a fail because Canon will not trump the performance of any camera higher in the pricing tree under any circumstances. With a feature set that most low grade point and shoots can match the question is why would anyone buy this at all? Is this the beginning of the end of Canon? Or are we already well along that road?
Prime, have you used any of those cameras to make judgement on them? Be honest.
ML_Digital_nYc: Just look at the image with the thing on the right side, just totally hideous color, clarity, noise reduction, sharpness... NIKON fixes all that so don't worry.
Okay, you're either trolling or being incredibly stupid. I'm hoping it's the former.