Drama: No viewfinder = defect camera
There are millions and millions of cameras out there with no viewfinder that people are doing perfectly fine with. Time to join the 21st century. Saying that a camera without a viewfinder is defective is like saying that a smartphone without a physical keyboard is defective.
ThatCamFan: So basicly its for the self-obsessed, good to know.
Geez, talk about a gross generalization. People like to occasionally be in some of their own photos, and a flip-up LCD allows them to do it without handing the camera off to someone else to do it for them. So what?
aris14: No matter if this or any other camera offering an easy way for selfy pix have the best IQ ever or whatever whatsoever...Selfies is the depiction of an ill egoism and selfism thus depicting the problems of a rather significantly ill culture... Or should I say civilization..?
People like you also thought that radio, television, rock-and-roll music, video games, and the internet would rot people's minds and bring about the end of civilization. And yet, civilization just keeps chugging along.
LiSkynden: I dont believe it... again another stupid selfie LCD camera! First every camera brand ditched the good old vari-angle screen and now everyone puts on this stupid selfie LCD???
They have their smart phones for that. They dont buy bulky cameras with selfie LCD, helloo!
Geez, stop being such a drama queen. It's not as if EVERY camera has this kind of flip-up LCD. Panasonic sells several other cameras that don't have this kind of LCD, and now they sell *one* model that does. It's called offering variety.
Plus, I think it's a bit ridiculous to call the GF7 "bulky". I think it'd make the perfect little vacation camera for a lot of people, and it's great to be able to take selfies of yourself while on vacation. It'd also work great on a selfie stick, too. No need to ask strangers to take photos for you.
villagranvicent: Wow... a faux pentaprism hump. "Let´s make it bulkier just for the sake of it and try to pretend is a mini reflex" The GM1 is way more nicer, at least more honest.
How is the GM1 "way more nicer"? The GF7 is $150 less expensive than a GM1, while still adding an articulating screen. I think the GF7 is a better deal for the average casual shooter. Besides, I love the classic camera silhouette of the GF7. Not only does it look classic from afar, the hump also serves a function: it houses the flash, and is the elevated hinge-point for the flip-up LCD. I don't think the GF7 is any less "honest" than a GM1, because the GM1 with its leather-texture bottom portion and its silver top-plate is clearly trying to evoke a classic rangefinder camera just like the GF7 is trying to evoke a classic pentaprism SLR. Neither one of them is actually the type of camera that they are trying to evoke, so neither one is more "honest" than the other.
cainn24: I hate it. I don't care if it's irrational, or if six thousand million other people love it, I hate it. I feel that the encroachment of all this social media friendly nonsense somehow spells the beginning of the end of the unadulterated enthusiast camera tradition, and that bothers me deeply.
Yeah, and you probably also bemoan the fact that cell phones can access the internet, too! LOL.
samfan: This selfie craze still isn't over? Geez.
People like to occasionally have photos of themselves in them. In the past, you had to hand the camera over to someone else to take the photo for you, or stick your camera on a tripod. "Selfie" simply means that you can now do it all on your own, and without a tripod. Having a photo of you and your friends in it is not a "craze". People have been doing it since the beginning of photography. Technology has simply enabled us to do it more easily.
Beat Traveller: Specs aside, it looks absolutely ridiculous when the LCD is flipped up. Like someone taped a TV to a Nikon FM2.
Who cares? It's not like you're going to walk around with the LCD flipped up like that all the time. You're only going to flip it up for selfies and whatnot. But, frankly, I think it's a brilliant design: functional while giving a classic camera silhouette.
greypixelz: How come Fuji are not capable of creating small bodies? That thing looks chunky!
Is there any objective you're trying to reach with a smaller body? You're still not going to fit it in your pocket. If that's the case, then you might as well give it a bit of size to make it more comfortable to hold.
nerd2: Samsung has the best APS body yet (28MP BSI sensor, 240fps sensor readout, 15fps continuous shooting with AF tracking) AND they have a very solid lens lineup already, and they are not terribly overpriced like fuji or m43 offerings. See.
10mm f2.8 fisheye - $29916mm f2.4 pancake- $26920mm 2.8 pancake - $26330mm f2 pancake - $29945mm f1.8 prime - $25660mm f2.8 macro - $46985mm f1.4 prime - $763300mm f2.8 prime - coming
Oh they have enough zoom lenses too - 16-50 f2.0-2.8, 50-150 2.8, 12-24, 18-200 etc.... Why still people don't consider samsung seriously?
I've been using Samsung's NX system. I'm impressed. There's ar really nice selection of lenses, all very well priced, and the quality is excellent. I think you have to be really foolish and short-sighted to dismiss Samsung. They have the resources and ambition to play the long game and eventually be a serious force in the camera world. The current generation of aging photographers may dismiss Samsung, but I think the upcoming generation of photographers that has grown up with Samsung as a household name won't be so dismissive.
mediasorcerer: that nx1 is HUGE for a mirrorless, when samsung gets the quality of ther lenses up to fuji/ oly/sony zeiss standards then it may help there sales, but the nx1 was a poorly thought out mirrorless camera as its way too big/ its a dinosaur and way too expensive, the lenses are huge too, defeats the purpose of milc.
no firmware can change these facts/nor marketing spin, thats why its a flop of a camera.
for the money, your way better off with ff canikony or equiv.
No, the NX1 is not "huge". Eventually, mirrorless cameras will be considered to be full replacements for DSLRs, which means that some photographers will expect a larger pro body. So within a system, you're going to have large mirrorless bodies along with small mirrorless bodies, large mirrorless lenses along with small mirrorless lenses. It's simply an aspect of covering a range of user preferences, all within a single mirrorless camera system. Besides, the NX1 is a pro body capable for shooting at 15fps with tracking. Any DSLR that can come anywhere near that kind of shooting speed is going to be much larger and more expensive.
Caerolle: "Mirrorless to outsell DSLRs 'in three years'"
The worst thing is how most of the effort seems to be put into video for most mirrorless these days, rather than stills.
And finally, Samsung, like Sony, is well short of a compelling lens system. Plus, I heard their lens opening or flange distance or something really intrinsic to the mount is all wrong. Well, and being Samsung, I would guess they have a bunch of useless 'whiz-bang' features that are far more trouble than they are worth, and get in the way.
Other than that, way to go Samsung!
Oh, I imagine their menus suck, too.
And BTW, wasnt it Samsung that made those adds about cameras not needing to look like dSLRs? By putting their little cameras in a dSLR body or something?
I use a Samsung NX30. No, there lens system is quite good. A very good lens selection, very good quality, and very good prices. That's definitely one area where the Samsung system is surprisingly strong.
As for "whiz-bang" features, I love their i-Function button on their lenses. It's probably the most useful feature added to lenses since image stabilization.
As for their menus, I think they have probably the best GUI of any camera system. Their experience designing interfaces for smartphones and tablets definitely gives them an edge here. Other camera menus look like they were written in DOS. Samsung's is very graphical, and it makes other menus look very outdated.
I definitely wouldn't count Samsung out. They definitely know how to put out good products, as they've done so in so many other areas.
I think 3 years might be a bit optimistic, but I do think it's only a matter of time before mirrorless outsells DSLRs. Maybe 5 years.
marc petzold: I find it funny, that Sony does see the A7 Mark I as "Hobbists Camera", the same goes for the APS-C A77 Mk. II - but the same Sensor-equipped A7 IIis "Pro", because it does have IBIS and is much more expensive yet? Well done, Sony...way funny...
It's not unusual for cameras to be differentiated (in class or tier) solely by certain features, while retaining the same sensor. Camera companies have been doing it since the film era, where every camera had the same "sensor"...which was film.
Regardless, if you're the kind of guy who makes buying decisions solely based on how a company categorizes their products ("hobbyist" vs "pro"), then you're probably a bit gullible. I don't think these labels are worth paying attention to in the least bit. At the end of the day, these labels don't mean much. They are all just tools, and anyone can use them.
But, yeah, I can see how they can justify calling the MKII a "pro" body relative to the original "hobbyist" MKI. The MKII gets IBIS, faster AF, faster tracking, higher build quality, thicker grip, etc. Typical upgrades that you might expect with a "pro" body versus a "hobbyist" body.
Low Budget Dave: I wish Sony would make some new lenses along these lines for the A6000. Comparable ASPC lenses would be smaller, and might even be cheaper.
@Just a Photographer - that's ridiculous. Of course it's in Sony's interest to offer APS-C lenses for their APS-C bodies. Not everyone wants or can afford FF, so it's a bit futile to "force" APS-C consumers into FF. I think it's really an issue of limited resources within Sony. Sure, Sony is a big company, but cameras and lenses aren't the only thing they do. Their resources are stretched across a very large variety of products. Not every resource is being put into their camera system.
Just a Photographer: If this is what Sony produces for their A-series with e-mount then this whole system seems very unbalanced.
A small light weight camera with heavy and huge lenses. No wonder you will need IBIS to shoot with this system.
DSLRs have their own heavy and huge lenses, and we've been okay with it for years. The notion that every lens needs to "balance" with the body is simply ridiculous because lenses come in all shapes and sizes. Which is why the solution is simply to use proper hand holding technique: left hand supporting the weight of the lens at the center of balance of the whole rig, and right hand on the grip to "steer" the camera.
With this set of introductions, it looks like Canon is off to a good start for the year. But I think they confused about which year. 2005 rather than 2015?
deltaskyking: 10 frames per second - check65 point wide viewfinder filling autofocus - checkClass leading fast autofocus - checkPro level weather sealing - checkExcellent low light autofocus and image capture - checkAnother B.S. "Silver Award" for Canon cameras from dpreview - check
@deltaskyking - anyone can cherry pick five favorite features to "check", and give a camera a "Gold Award." But a real review needs to assess the totality of a camera, not just five bits and pieces.
across_mountains: I have a 7D. I was hoping for the Mark II to have an articulated screen. Unfortunately, the 7D Mark II lacks it. While most of my photography doesn't need it, I've taken enough that I wish the Mark II had an articulated screen so that I wouldn't have to engage in Hail Mary picture taking. I'm disappointed.
@kimvette - people used to say the same thing about pop-up flashes. People would say, "If you want a *fragile* built-in flash, get an XXD body. Because Canon will never put a *fragile* built-in flash into an of their *serious* DSLRs." Then Canon came out with the 7D which had a pop-up flash. And amazingly, those *fragile* built-in flashes are doing just fine. Why? Because they really aren't that fragile, because they stay closed most of the time, especially in situations where damage is most likely to occur. The same goes for a *fragile* articulating screen: it stays closed most of the time, especially in situations where damage is most likely to occur. You only take it out when you need it, but it's always there for you. Maybe you only flip the screen out only a few times a year. What's wrong with having it there for those occasions? It's not as if the articulating screen is *fragile* even when it's closed!
My guess is that we'll finally see a "flippy" screen on the 7DIII, in 5 yrs.
So if this technology becomes a reality for Olympus, does that mean that it might eventually make it to Sony sensor shift cameras as well?