simon65: Death of the Dino DSLR
My old Olympus OM-2N was a full frame, (ie 35mm), with a large viewfinder, and small body.
For years I've wondered why the newer DSLRs had to be the size and weight of a Dino in comparison. And the arguments put forward by the "I like 'em Big" brigade have never added up:
- 'you need a huge body to house the mirror system''Really? Except the OM-2N mirror system didn't.
-'You need a huge body to fit all the electronics in'Unless of course you're Sony with the NEX-5N.
-'You need a huge body for the motor drive'Except of course the NEX-7 which manages 10 fps.
I'm glad that the hocus pocus around huge unwieldly DSLRs has finally been shown up for the fraud it always was. They don't need to be so big, and most users don't want them so big.
As for Canon and Nikon they will either adapt or go the way of Tyrannosaurus Kodak-is. So far they're showing alarming signs of being in denial over the direction the market has taken.
Dino DSLRs are History.
"If you open of a modern AF DSLR, you'll find that every square centimeter of the body is packed with electronics"
Yep and the NEX 3C still packs all that in, an APS-C sensor, a full auto focusing system, auto drive, and an articulated screen, and weighs just 225 g.
That's not ignorance I'm afraid, its a fact. You dinos and your clunking heavyweight Canon DSLRs are in for a really tough introduction to market-technology Darwinism.
Cy Cheze: A $130k fine for a $1.7B fraud, which management disguised by a series of fake expenditures over the course of 15+ years. $130k is barely one year's bonus for a junior CFO. Kikukawa's travel and entertainment expenses (golf membership, worldwide conferences, contributions to "corporate governance" boards) probably exceeded that.
Meanwhile, civil suits brought by the shareholders or creditors against the ex CEO and Board will be mired in a search for documents that never existed or were carefully obliterated over the years. The defendants will shake their heads and say, "Well, the CPA said the books were OK, all those years, and we always provided whatever they requested." Civil charges of "maliign incompetence" may be difficult to bring to judgment. Criminal charges, whose burden of proof is higher, may fail or result in brief sentences (which could be cheaper and shorter for the accused than to prolong the litigation).
Can there be any wonder why white collar crime thrives?
"A $130k fine for a $1.7B fraud"
Agreed, it's a joke.
Corporate boardroom crime and featherweight regulators are killing capitalism. I'm on Olympus purchase strike until I see a proper boardroom clear-out at the company.
Death of the Dino DSLR
There really is no point to this high-end camera until Sony release a decent range of E series lenses to accompany it, preferably starting with a 24-80 mm equivalent from Carl Zeiss.
simon65: Three years ago Sigma produced the first compact camera ever to be made with an DSLR-sized sensor, and then blew their competituve lead by failing to produce a version with a zoom lens, or intechangeable lens.
Their latest compact the DP2x comes with a fixed 41 mm equivalent lens. A 41 mm! Fixed! I ask you, who in the world needs or wants that? No surprises that there isn't a single user review of that camera at DPR, the camera has clearly and rightly sunk without trace.
Such basic mistakes are the reason why Sigma has failed to make its mark despite having access to some great sensors.
As for the SD1 I can only assume someone dreamed that gem up while up there sitting on a cloud. Sigma will need to come down to earth and get closer to the market if they are to make any progress going forward. This market isn't getting any easier.
It what way was the Sony R1 a "compact camera"? It weighed 995g and had the looks and dimensions of a hippo.
Three years ago Sigma produced the first compact camera ever to be made with an DSLR-sized sensor, and then blew their competituve lead by failing to produce a version with a zoom lens, or intechangeable lens.
simon65: An Inconvenient Truth?
The release of such a raft of mirrorless cameras as we have seen lately has made me look afresh at the market and consider some brands I’d previously dismissed.
When you do this it can turn up some surprising results.
Sony’s NEX range has perhaps rather quietly come of age. And the newish NEX C3 trumps Canon’s foray into this market hands down before the G1-X has even hit the shops.
Looking for a high quality, light weight, compact second camera? or just a do it all? Results below:
Canon G1-X Sensor Four Thirds 14.3 mpWeight 534g (including batteries)Dimensions 117 x 81 x 65 mmRRP USD799
Sony NEX C3 Sensor APS-C 16.2 mpWeight 421g (including 18-55 lens and batteries) Dimensions 110 x 60 x 33 mm (not including lens) Price USD549 (Amazon)
And the NEX C3 sports genuine DSLR level IQ.
As I mentioned the weight I quoted of 421g includes the NEX C3 body, batteries AND the 18-55mm kit lens.
The camera body alone weighs just 225g.
The lens is interchangeable and retails for USD299. I would expect it to be at least as equal to the lens on the G1X, and probably a whole lot better given that it is also used to front the 24 mp NEX-7.
dpeview's NEX 3 sample gallery is here. The results are excellent as is their review of both it and the NEX 5.
An Inconvenient Truth?
I'm disappointed, although perhaps I shouldn't be as Canon isn't the sort of company to go and undercut its cash generating DSLR line up.
But I see nothing special here at all and quite a lot to be worried about. I expected better from a camera deploying Canon's latest Digic 5 processor and a sensor only slightly smaller than that found in its DSLR line up.
Maybe its the lens, although more likely its the processor, the new Digic 5, which has also been launched in the new Powershot S100, and which from what I have seen isn't quite as good as the S95 it replaced. So Digic 5 may be the culprit.
I'd compare this samples are comparable to my old 400D in terms of sharpness, colour etc, although yes they have slightly more detail, maybe. Obviously high end ISO quality is also better than the old 400D, but then it is on every other camera sold today.
All in all I'll be refocusing my second camera search back in Fuji and Sony's direction.
g7star: I don't get the point. When it's the size of DSLR it should perform like DSLR and do better than smaller ILC options (for the comparable price). Otherwise it's just personal preference on styling and lens choices.
Sitting on my desk is a Contax TVS II. Its a full frame (35mm) film rangefinder with a 28-56 mm zoom on the front. The zoom works fine through a variable viewfinder without any need of an LCD screen on the back.
Whether its a 'professional' camera or not is a moot point and a rather silly one, as is your point about rangefinders and professionals. You pays your money, you take your choice, and I'll bet most camera buyers would prefer a zoom on a rangefinder, especially when the viewing system works as well as it does on my 12 year old TVS II.
I agree with what you say, however there is still commercial reality out there, and the fact is that Leica has had at least two years to stick an interchangeable lens system or even just a fixed zoom, on the front of its otherwise excellent APS-C senor Leica X1, and has failed.
The result is that Fuji are likely to steal what is meant to have been their market from right underneath Leica's nose. I admire their quality and enduring appeal but sometimes Leica's refusal to move with the market, far less lead it, is frustrating, and may ultimately be their undoing.
Even worse Fuji seem to have decided that in order for the Xpro1 to seen seen as a worthy rival of the Leica M9, it has to be the same size as the M9.
This decision blissfully ignores the fact that the Leica M9 is the size it is because it houses a full frame 35mm sensor, while the X-Pro1 only fires on an APS-C!
Instead of sticking like glue to the M9 design, Fuji should have realized that his was an opportunity to fill a yawning gap in the market - for a tradtionally styled, high-end, APS-C sensor camera with a quality zoom lens(ses), all wrapped up in a conveniently small package.
Alas sometimes companies make really bad design decisions.
The X-Pro 1 looks like a great camera, but it's far too BIG to be pratical.
"the company hinted the X-Pro1 will be accompanied by at least one less expensive model."
I'm hoping it's the X100 with interchangeable lenses rather than another brick the size of the X-Pro1, which is bigger than many DSLRs!
simon65: "In an interview with Amateur Photographer magazine, Fujifilm Digital Imaging director Adrian Clarke has said the X-Pro1 will be part of a range of X-mount cameras".
Lets hope that future members of the family will be a bit smaller and lighter than the X-Pro1 beastie.
Given that the X100 also uses an APS-C sized sensor I really don't know why the X-Pro 1 had to be any larger than it. Surely it didn't.
The extra size and weight of the X-Pro 1 dilutes what are meant to be the inherent advantages of mirrorless cameras over their DSLR rivals. Namely that mirrorless is meant to equal smaller and lighter!
Otherwise why bother?
There's no such thing as "the Fuji community", and even if there was the company should be looking to the wider market and its needs. Not many people are looking to carry around a camera as big as a brick.
"In an interview with Amateur Photographer magazine, Fujifilm Digital Imaging director Adrian Clarke has said the X-Pro1 will be part of a range of X-mount cameras".
amblepath: I don't know if she has little hands but the Xpro-1 looks rather massive.
I agree, it looks about the same as my old Mamiya 7, which felt a bit like carrying a DSLR around.
I'd like to see a shot of the X-Pro1 up against a few DSLRs for comparisons sake. Any chance guys?
Zuzullo: LOVE IT. Thank you Canon!
I own the best non-SLR in the world: Canon G6
Built-in Time lapseBuilt-in Neutral density filterf/2,0-3,0Macro 1:1 (35mm equiv.)TTL-flash100% reliable WYSIOYGBayonet lens Filter Adapter (way faster to use than SLR screw-in sys)Perfect grip and balance! (SLR-like)
...and I moved recently to M43 world :( which deeply disappoints me every day. I need to carry 3 lens to get a similar performance. Ridiculous!
Now I just have to wait that you guys tune up that lens for the same f/2,0 of the Legendary G-series ... or even faster.
Built-in Neutral density filter!!
Really?Does something flip down over the lens? It sounds like a great idea.Is it graduated? or does it just reduce the exposure across the entire frame?
simon65: One thing the G1-X appears to be inexplicably missing is a funky range of filters, which are increasingly standard in the market, particularly on cameras like this which will pick up lots of users who don't photoshop.
And underwater mode is all well and good, but how about a basic 'party mode' to capture such events?
My first digital Nikon Coolpix had one and it made a huge difference, expecially when you get bored of your flash turning the murky colourful world you see before you on a Saturday night into something resembling the bright glare of the average dentists's drill room.
Oh dear, I fear we have a camera snob or two.
Why would I be kidding? This camera is going to be used by some as a second to their DSLR, and by a whole lot more as an upgrade from a point-and-shoot, and their one and only camera.
You may not enjoy or need filters, but many do.
The PowerShot G1 X is available from late February, priced at £699.00/€799.00/$799.99 RRP.
£1 = USD 1.54
£699.00 = USD 1,076
Yep, looks like the Great British public are about to get royally screwed again.
sh10453: This is very disappointing, Canon!What a shame to mess up such a nice camera, especially that you gave it a better sensor, which deserves a camera with better features!
Several issues will make me pass on considering this camera (although I have been a Canon fan and user for over 30 years):
1- Ridiculous zoom (4X).
2- Unacceptable macro distance (20 cm, just when I hoped for 20 mm or even 10mm macro distance).
3- USB 2 is old news now. Why in the world would you do that when USB 3 has been out for a while now?
4- 1.9 frames per second, Canon? Isn't that embarrassing? Shame on you!
5- f2.8 is no longer great. It is time for f1.8, or at least a compromised f2.0.
I am really bummed and very disappointed by this news from Canon, and without a doubt I'll have to consider one of Fuji's new products for a pocket camera (perhaps the f770 EXR).
I'm about to start renaming Canon to Cannot.
In what way is 28–112 mm ridiculous? It's standard.
And F2.8 isn't bad. You know that f1.8 would have made for a far heavier overall camera.
1.9 frames per second is nigh on 2 shots a second, fine for anyone but sports or birders, and if you're into either of them you're in DSLR territory, and a tripod.