Caerolle: I don't get it. If simplicity and user-friendliness are the most important things, why are P&S cameras the ones that are dying? They are small, most likely have wifi, they have automated scene modes, and all that? Yes this is the class of camera that is disappearing the most quickly?
Maybe the sensors are too small to give much better pics, even though you have more control than with a phone? Then, what about the RX100? Is it just not automated enough? (I don't know anything about them, really, other than they are a compact with a really nice sensor.).
I just don't understand all this 'they need to be simpler' stuff. Even my 6D has auto modes, and wifi. Certainly I would think that the entry-level dSLRs and mirrorless can be operated much like a phone, if they have a touch screen (and it blows my mind in 2015 that all cameras don't have them).
And if you want to do serious photography, where you are taking control of the settings, I just don't know how you make it simpler?
If you watch Hilbig's video, the sales data he shows makes it appear that ILC (DSLR and Mirrorless) sales are following a similar trend to compacts, just with a 2-3year offset. In other words, something is killing *all* camera sales.
If that's the case and we go back to only enthusiast photographers buying cameras, then we're likely to see more than one camera maker leave the industry.
larrytusaz: The one poster at that page (Andrew Freeman) is spot on. It's laziness, and people not appreciating fine craftsmanship.
WHO CARES if a Kodak Instamatic soccer mom finds a camera like my Sony A6000 "complex?" WHO CARES if they don't know what all the buttons are for? I do. Let them have their smartphones or Kodaks, but cameras like the A6000 aren't meant for them. They're meant for people who know what they're doing.
It's like the one person said, people are getting lazy with everything. You see it in grammar too, people mixing up your vs you're and it's vs its, and them saying "who cares, it doesn't matter" when you point out the proper spelling etc. That's lazy. It DOES matter. Get it right.
"The best camera is what's with you"--more excuses. Pop a Sigma 30mm 2.8 on my A5000 and it's tiny. They also make the Sony RX series, and they can upload to a smartphone for instant sharing. Soccer moms are one thing, but REAL photographers take a REAL camera with them. To not do so is lazy.
larrytusaz - it might be worth caring if your camera maker of choice is one of the ones that withdraws from the business (which is likely to happen if sales don't pick up soon).
matthiasbasler: I don't believe it is primarily the complexity of dedicated cameras that is responsible for the drop in sales. I see it as a combination of following factors:
1. Smartphone cameras meanwhile can create good-looking photos.2. Having a smartphone saves you taking a dedicated point and shoot camera with you, and if you don't care about DOF, minimizing noise or the like you don't loose much. Oh, and you don't have to care about shutter shock at all.3. Smartphones have cool tricks like filters, blurred backgrounds, sweep panoramas etc. built in, so no need to go through a complicated software workflow in post. -> Time saver.4. People who still like a dedicated camera often already have a capable one, and few see the need to spend money every two years to get some new features.
Maybe dedicated cameras will become again what they had been before the digital era: A tool for real photographers, not a gadget everyone has. And there's imho nothing wrong with that.
Hilbig addresses several of these points in his video.
Artpt: part of the attraction is connectivity. If an next camera maker were to integrate a browser within the camera itself rather than an app based system, I think that would really excite a broader audience. To me the added step of finding my phone and connecting it to the camera is really turn off. Rather, why not just go into the camera with a touch screen system, find a hotspot, browse and upload.
Since I already have a browser (and, increasingly, dedicated apps that side-step the need for a browser) on my phone, why would I want to duplicate that? **And** then have to find a public hotspot?
However, it needs to be made *much* easier (maybe automatic?) to transfer images from camera to phone.
Deliverator: So, the green auto setting on consumer DSLRs isn't simple enough? I know more than a few people with consumer DSLRs who use this setting almost exclusively to their complete satisfaction. A few of them might stray off into the scene modes, but that's it. They have no desire or need for anything else, and that's just fine with them.
In my experience, there are plenty of people are too intimidated by all the buttons and dials to want to pick up a DSLR, even if there's a mode where you can ignore them all. And there's no chance they'll ever buy one.
Worse still, the way cameras are currently designed means they almost *have to* have a profusion of buttons and dials, if you want to take any meaningful control.
I really do think there's potential for money to be made by a company willing to throw everything away and work out just what settings you need access to, and how you design an interface to just offer those.
Hilbig's porposals reach a long way beyond just the shooting experience. Watch the end of his video and he talks about making the sharing, printing and entire photographic ecosystem simpler and more engaging.
Mike FL: So that's why Olympus got rid of Micheal Heath (a former Head of Communications and Marketing at Olympus Europe) b/c "he argues that it's the fun-factor and easy operation that the iPhone brought that have made cameras seem less attractive"?
In shot, Micheal Heath; the head of the Olympus pitchman argues "cameras seem less attractive".
Did he got a pitchman job offer from Apple after Olympus got rid of him?
To Micheal Heath;
A pitchman's job is to believe your products (Olympus in this case), marketing study and feedback to HQ for product improvement, and able to sell it, not mention Olympus cameras are not that bad/hard to sell.
Do you agree?
Heath isn't anything to do with Olympus. Hilbig *used to* work for Olympus.
It's not Hilbig's job to pitch for anyone at this point: he runs an independent consultancy firm.
captura: This is a very short review. Is it really meant to be a "Preview" and the real Review will follow after?
Mike FL - we'll try to look into it in more detail when we get a moment, but something that open-ended can take time (which is something we don't have much of, at present). It's unlikely we'll publish anything extensive - more likely update the review to clarify things.
We're fully aware of the DxO findings and the inherent unlikeliness of it being *that* good: hence us flagging it as questionable.
JeanPierre Thibaudeau. For some cameras (probably by class, certainly not by brand), yes.
Though we're trying to maintain quality *and* boost quantity. The Panasonic G7 review isn't radically different, in this respect.
captura: it's a full review. It involves all the testing that would go into any review, but presented in a more concise and accessible form.
tom1234567: I must have upset the SONY FANBOYSsaying it needs a 24meg aps-c sensor,
so they say it can not be done it would have to be bigger,they could do it and make it smaller technologies are already here to do this,
yes they built the first computer in a room almost the size of a room.now they can put more power in an iPhone.Now Hear This don't say it can't be done your just being silly.
RX10ii IS A VIDEO CAMERA NOT A photographers camerasorry to all the Sony Fan boys
the FZ 1000 IS BETTER VALUE FOR MONEY AT £499
a friend of mine bought the Sony RX10ii camera used it for 3days, now on its way back to shop, photos to much noise at 200iso never mind going higher with the iso.Have a nice day
@yahoo2u - As has been pointed out, the LX100 effectively only has a ~180mm sq sensor, rather than the 224mm sq of a full Four Thirds sensor. This is almost precisely 1/2 the size of an APS-C sensor, so you'd expect it to perform 1 stop less well, assuming similar technology in both sensors.
It's little consolation knowing that the rest of the sensor is in there, unused, if you don't get the benefit of it.
Mike FL: So, in terms of SNR, the old and small SONY sensor beats the newer and larger SONY sensor.
Per DPR, "but the fact that the E-M10 II is holding up this well to a class-leading APS-C is interesting. The E-M10 II fairs remarkably well against the Sony a6000, which we find to be a bit of an under-performer with respect to low light image quality." based on DPR's lab test.
By looking DPR's lab test results, it is.
Also, the E-M10 II makes the old sensor beating down all the Oly with same sensors.
Of course, E-M10 II beats all Panasonic as it almost matches the SNR of Nikon D5500.
Is it true? Yes. by just looking E-M10 II's test results in DPR's Comparison tool.
Yes. It's E-M5, so I was omitting the 'E-' for brevity.
Given Olympus provided retrospective firmware to add 0sec anti-shock to its other models, I have to assume they would also have done so for the M5, if they could have.
I'm not sure I understand your point (re: the M5)
marc petzold: The A3000 from 2013 is still into the Studio Scene for comparsion, but there was never a separate Review..the DSLM must have been too cheap...but the Sensor is still great.
You should be able to. I'll look into it.
Mike FL - there are many complicating factors when looking at X-Trans cameras that are more significant than shutter accuracy.
Just in terms of capability (the original M5 doesn't appear to be able to offer electronic first curtain or greater than 1080/30p video), the sensors appear to be different, even if the performance remains essentially unchanged.
Mike FL - there's plenty to suggest the E-M5 (Mark I) does not have the same sensor as the Mark II and E-M10 II.
The shot in our test scene are compared at a common output size (though there's a small amount of inconsistency, since they're framed based on height, not diagonal).
Most in-depth analyses of the E-M5 II sensor suggest it's more efficient than the a6000's sensor, I believe, but these results do seem slightly too good to be true. There's a possibility that shutter inaccuracy is playing a role here, so that's one of the things we're going to investigate.
Sadly we don't get time to review every single model.
We have written-up a [summary of the camera](http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4901816163/entry-level-mirrorless-camera-roundup-2014/4), though.
yahoo2u: If it ain't broke don't fix it.
It may not be *broken*, but I don't think many people would complain if Fujifilm went back and designed it so that it could focus more quickly (internal focus, for instance).
BrianHB: First time I have seen a review coincide with the camera release. Wondering if Olympus paid DPReview for this privilege? If so this should be disclosed.
@Osa25: if manufacturers thought getting cameras to us earlier would result in more favourable (rather than just earlier) reviews, then I'd expect more of them to manage it on a regular basis.
MarkyM: I may have missed it but don't see any mention of the 'Live Super Control Panel'. This does have it, right?
The SCP is my favorite feature on Oly cameras. IMHO much quicker and easier to use than Panny's Quick menu. With the SCP, there is almost no reason to have to menu dive on my EM-10. When enabled, it appears on the LCD in shooting mode when the "OK" button is pressed.
In the EM-10 review it was lamented that the SCP was not enabled by default. Here it is not even mentioned!
The MkII looks like a nice upgrade to the original EM-10 and one I will consider for sure!
It certainly does have the SCP but I don't know if it's enabled by default.
They didn't. No company can pay to have its products reviewed.
The only thing Olympus did was to provide a fully working sample far enough ahead of launch that we had the time to review it. The last 'day of launch' review I can remember was the Sony NEX 3 and 5, but there may have been some since.