 |
simon65
Lives in
Stockholm, Sweden
Works as a
Journalist
Joined on
Sep 18, 2006
|
   |
|
Connect with dpreview
|
The samples look great. I can't see any problems there at all.
The million dollar question is, are Canon going to launch some smaller lenses to go with this new pocket DSLR? Just three would do. But without them the pocket DSLR concept lacks coherence.
Henry M. Hertz: i wonder why dpreview promotes al crap acdsee software that has not even full working color managment support and ignores other (better) software completely? even when you inform them about new releases.
@Sati32
Maybe that's the reason no one has heard of your software.
You need to be more proactive. What are you doing telling DPR to contact YOU for a press release? It's your job to contact the media and network them.
You need to get out more and get active, but most of all you need to get real.
Yes I work in media.
Join the army instead...
This device isn't for photographers, it's for self obsessed hipsters bedevilled by the twin ills of a surfeit of free time and a lack of purpose in their lives.
People considering buying this product should go out and do something meaningful, such as join the army instead.
The Swedish army for example.
Sweden being the home of Memoto and of Martin Kallstrom knows all about vacant idle hipsters pretending to be artists. So much so that the Swedish army has made an recruitment ad aimed directly at them.
I advise all those tempted by this device to view it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3h_sOPUWc8
JackM: 201 questions?? You are out of your mind! For that kind of time I expect to be paid a consulting fee.
Oh come on, it takes 15 minutes, how long do you spend at the computer everyday? or indeed reading DPR?
Note to DPR:
There's a flaw in the questionnaire. Question 60 asks:
Do you use any photo-related apps on your device? {Check all that apply}
(Select all that apply)
Photo editing (Photoshop, Camera+, etc.)
Art filters (Lo-Mob, Hipstamatic, etc.)
Photography tools (Sunset/Sunrise, DOF calculator apps, etc.)
Social (Instagram, Flickr, etc.)
I don't use any, so what am I meant to tick? Trying to ignore the question only resulted in me being prevented from filing the entire questionnaire. The system insisted that I tick at least one box at Q.60.
So I lied and ticked, Art Filters.
This is not the way to get decent research results.
It would have been nice to see a picture of the P330 alongside the Canon S-110 to get an idea of their respective size comparisons.
xinn3r: "the 3N misses out on the faster on-sensor phase-detection autofocus seen on the 5N"
I assume you mean the 5R, as the 5N does not have on-sensor phase-detection.
"It also continues to offer the screen that flips up by 180 degrees. Unlike the more expensive 5N, the 3N's screen isn't touch sensitive."
Again, here I assume you mean the 5R, because the 5N does not have a flip screen.
Good grief as soon as Phil Askey leaves the whole place goes to pieces.
I disagree with DPR on the use of the top control dial. The reviewer who wrote that it would be better to use if for exposure compensation rather than aperture control clearly never shoots with the viewfinder.
If you have a viewfinder to your eye you need an aperture control dial that you can use in that position. Not one that requires you to pause, look down at the camera and play with a rear dial, then recompose the shot.
6 years ago Pentax managed to make a small compact DSLR with a large optical pentaprism viewfinder sporting a 0.95 x magnification.
Neither they nor anyone else has ever managed to repeat that feat.
Why I ask?
For I will never understand the mindset of a company like Sony that makes a 'DSLR' camera and then sticks an electronic viewfinder in it.
The whole USP of a DSLR is meant to be its viewfinder, an optical viewfinder, and the larger the better. If you can stick all that in an compact body like Pentax managed back in 2005/6, so much the better.
Alas we appear to be regressing. I dare say this Sony has a great sensor, but I won't haul a DSLR around all day unless I also get the reward of an decent sized optical viewfinder (which rules out the Nikon D3200 and D5200), and even then I won't go above a body 550g.
It the same old story. So many cameras, so little genuine choice.
simon65: The images look soft throughout and are surprisingly noisy above 2000 ISO. On top of this there are some strange colour renditions - the orange autumn leaves in slide 22/35.
In the 'compared to' section the D600 is consistently soft against a range of competitors.
Frankly this camera surprises on the downside, something that comes as a bit of a shock to me. I thought it would be a belter. It's not.
By marike6 (9 hours ago)
Let me guess, you're a Canon shooter?
Wrong, I'm currently without a DSLR and had plans to join the Nikon camp, not least for the excellent lenses. However I've been disappointed with both the viewfinder (and lack of rear screen on off sensor) on the new D5200, and with the output of the D600. Factor in reports of oil and focus problems with the latter, and I'm just plan disappointed, my cash remaining parked in my bank account.
Ref D600 Have you looked at the "compared to" page at DPR? Try it and then come back and seriously try and tell me that the D600 is better than the Canon 5DIII, or indeed a range of other cameras...
The images look soft throughout and are surprisingly noisy above 2000 ISO. On top of this there are some strange colour renditions - the orange autumn leaves in slide 22/35.
In the 'compared to' section the D600 is consistently soft against a range of competitors.
Frankly this camera surprises on the downside, something that comes as a bit of a shock to me. I thought it would be a belter. It's not.
This is without doubt the ugliest looking camera since Olympus inflicted the
AZ-330 super zoom on an unsuspecting world in 1990.
What are Nikon smoking?
http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Olympus_AZ-330_Super_Zoom/Infinity_Zoom_330/IZM330_(QD)
An Olympus OM-2N with a FF digital sensor inside it. No ifs or buts.
Film/Sensor 35 mm or Full Frame as its now called
Large optical viewfinder
Dimensions 136 x 83 x 50 mm
Weight 510 g
They say it can't be done. So what did the designer of the Olympus OM 2 know in 1975 that the wizz boys of the second decade of the 21 st century don't?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Olympus_OM-2_SP.jpg
I'm slightly puzzled at the use of another cameras photographs in a test scene.
If the test shot isn't sharp, how will readers know if that's due to a fault in the camera/lens being tested or is inherent to the photograph in the scene?
Surely its better to stick with items that everyones knows have an intrinsic and unvarying (over time) colour and sharpness?
Great news! Congratulations.
"We do find some questionable decisions, the most obvious being the lack of a touchscreen"
I ask you to consider that touchscreens may be more popular in the DPR office than in the market generally. I would far rather find easily accessible external controls (like the new top dial) and lens rings that can change apertures than I would touchscreen.
But then I also have no interest in wifi. I have no use for it, and its certainly not something I wish to pay extra for. My usb cable works just fine and doesn't clutter up the household environment with yet more needless EMF radiation.
All in all I upgrade when a camera offers a discernible increase in IQ, build quality and external controls, and new breakthroughs in sensor/weight/size ratios (ie bigger sensors in smaller cameras). Sony is definitely moving in the right direction in all these areas, which is why I am now in the Sony rather than the Canon camp, but touchscreens, wifi, and assorted gizmoes move me not.
Version 11 looks good, but my main problem with Photoshop Elements has always been the number of broken files it produces.
There are few worse editing experiences than spending a considerable time on a picture only for its Photoshop file to 'break', leaving you with nothing but your SD card original.
I'd need to hear evidence that Adobe have cracked this problem before I buy back into Photoshp Elements. At the moment I'm in market and considering my options. Upgrading to Apple is one.
To boldly go - questions and answers
Sony DSC-RX100 versus Olympus XZ-2 iHS
The Weight incl batteries: DSC-RX100 - 240 g, XZ-2 iHS - 346 g
The Dimensions: DSC-RX100 - 102 x 59 x 36 mm, XZ-2 iHS - 113 x 65 x 48 mm
The Sensor: DSC-RX100 1 inch, 20.2 mp, XZ-2iHS 1/1.7" 12 mp
The price: DSC-RX100 $648, XZ-2iHS $600
The Question: What are Olympus on?
The Answer: Planet Zarg
Beam me up Scotty....
What the market really needs is a high end, compact, well built, lightweight, DSLR with a large optical viewfinder!
Currently, no one, absolutely no one, offers such a machine.
And its not even as if its technologically impossible because it was all done years ago. Take this baby, a full frame camera with a large, ok very large optical viewfinder, an alloy body and weighing in at just 520 g and with the diminutive dimensions of just 136 x 83 x 50 mm...
http://www.olympus-global.com/en/corc/history/camera/popup/om_om2n.html
Yep the year was 1979 and the camera was the OM2N.Why is it that 33 years later the industry considers putting a FF sensor in such a camera is impossible. Clearly it is not.
lemon_juice: How wonderful it would be if Apple gadgets didn't take up space at dpreview and instead we could read more about real photographic equipment...
Please tell me which aspect of news about 'real photographic equipment' you feel you're missing here at dpreview?
Your resentment and that of some readers of this site against all photographic devices containing a mobile phone is irrational. Attend any open air event and you'll rapidly realize that the majority of people there are relying on a mobile phone as their sole photographic tool.
And many more people (like me) who do have several 'real photographic' cameras, still end up relying on their iPhone for a number of impromptu photographic opportunities.
As such I find dpreview's coverage of the new iPhone both appropriate and welcome.