peevee1: DPR, I think you have a small error in you equivalent aperture table. Although Canon G1X II does have 1.5" type sensor, the lens does not cover it completely (it is used in MAR mode). I suppose it should make the apertures something like F3.9-7.7 rather than F3.8-7.5, but it is hard to calculate precisely.No that it changes anything much.
The F3.8-7.5 figure we gave is based on the G1 X II's 1.92x crop factor, rather than the 1.85x crop factor that using the full area of the 1.5" type would give.
Mirfak: "First and foremost, the RX10 uses the entire sensor to capture video, resulting in 1080/60p video quality that is right up there with the best digital cameras"
It's good to know that you didn't experience the flaws in video quality and codec that Andrew Reid bitterly complained about in his review of the RX10. Obviously, these issues have been fixed in the production model, which is a good thing!
We go on to say that it's limited by its adherence to the AVCHD standard - something Reid is better qualified to discuss than us, since his video needs are considerably more demanding.
Just another Canon shooter: "... with its 24-200mm F2.8 lens". No, it has an 8.8-73.3mm, f/2.8 lens, as it can be seen from the picture. If you want to convert the FL into 35mm equivalent (but not the f-stop?), this should be made clear. The casual visitor to this site would be very confused.
In the news story, do you mean? I've clarified it.
Cheng Bao: "The high resolution sensor on the RX10 can compensate for the 200mm zoom. The shot above is a crop of the original and still has about 3.5 megapixels left to work with. ISO 200, 1/200 sec, f/2.8, 199mm equiv., brightened."
I assume you crop the picture from 200mm end, so, doesn't the cropped picture has longer equivalent focus length than 199mm?
It means that the original image was shot at 199mm equiv. I'll clarify the text.
KerryBE: When I go to image quality compared the Stylus 1 shows but it says Please Select a Camera instead of automatically bringing up the RX10. If I go to select the RX10 it is not in the list. Running IE 8.0.
That should now be fixed. Sorry about that.
droplet: X-sync (external flash) for E-M5 should be 1/250s in your comparison table.
Not according to [Olympus's specifications](http://www.getolympus.com/us/en/digitalcameras/omd/e-m5.html):
Synchronization speed: 1/250sec. or less* (using the bundled flash)* It depends on flash models or flash modeFL-50R: 1/180 sec.Exept FL-50R: 1/200 sec.Super FP: 1/125-1/4000 sec.
peevee1: "E-M10 Video ModesImage comparison tool"
How to access actual comparison, between different cameras that is?
Reload the page and you'll now find a link to a standalone page that lets you select the cameras you want to compare.
BarnET: While i agree about the ridiculous lack of the k3 review.Let's complain about that somewhere else.
The em10 is a very good value mirrorless. So let's continue our discussion on topic.
@mauritsvw - we've always promised that it *will* happen (and it will), but we've only recently been able to spend a concentrated period of time working on it. There should be several pages of review added to the preview this week.
At the moment, you can either select the E-M10 from widgets in other reviews, or compare the different modes of the same camera in this widget. We'd not fully expected this usage of the comparison tool, so we're still working out how to adapt its function.
.Sam.: Typo: Page 10, under "image stabilization" should say "E-M10"
Argh. Fixed now. Sorry about that.
cruz031: Nice review, but on page 7, wrong full size image is linked above section that reads: "Created using Live Composite, converted Raw file from ACR with tweaks to noise reduction. " :)
That should now be fixed - sorry about that.
MrChristopher: Could someone elaborate on the inability to use a flash remotely (wireless) as claimed in this review? My x100 can fire a Fuji or YN-560II flash in "commander" mode, does the XE-2 not have this ability?
@MrChristopher - the X-E2 can't 'control' an external flash (setting its output), it can only trigger it. Nikon, Olympus and Canon all have systems that allow you to remotely control the output of external flashguns - that's what the X-E2 (and Fujifilm in general) is missing.
drummercam: Huh? Why does the "review" link from the K-3 camera thumbnail bring me here and not DIRECTLY to DPR's own K-3 First Impressions Review?
Where are you finding a link marked 'Review'? It should always make clear that it's part of a roundup.
AKH: Interesting comments Butler and of course you are confused and I also really love your patronizing "soccer mom" comments :-)
"and the lenses don't yet exist to let it work to its full potential" - this is simply utter nonsense, what more do you need than the 10mm f/2.8, 18.5mm f/1.8 which is a really great lens for a modest price and even the 10-30mm and 30-110mm which are really good lenses.
"Yes, you can put a mount adapter on a 1 System camera and shoot full F-mount Nikkor lenses, but it rarely makes sense to do so" - you are really not up to date are you? - the Ft1 adapter is what a lot of enthusiasts are using.
I'm sorry Butler, but I know you can do better than this. This just sounds like the usual negative stuff that was all around when the Nikon 1 was first launched.
I certainly didn't intend to be patronizing about 'Soccer Moms' - it's not an ideal piece of shorthand, but it should be pretty obvious to everyone what I mean. It's not my intention to be dismissive of that demographic.
The 10mm F2.8 prime doesn't give you any advantage over an F1.8 lens on a 1/1.7" sensor camera - so not really giving you the full advantage of the larger sensor. Only the 18.5mm and the 32mm give you any more light (per image) than the zoom lens on, say, the Olympus XZ-2. The rest of the time the Nikon is at a disadvantage.
The FT1 is great if you want telephoto lenses, but that's not very flexible if you want wide or standard lengths. Or sensibly-sized combinations. A bright 50mm on the FT1 would be nice for portraits, but a fast portrait lens is one of the two fast primes Nikon actually makes for the 1 system.
dpmaxwell: "I'd be even more interested if the lens remained a bit brighter, even if it did mean the camera got a little larger and more expensive"
Ever heard of the RX10?
Actually, [I have](http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx10/), but that's not quite what I meant.
*Personally*, I'd like to see something more like the Olympus XZ-2 with a bigger sensor, rather than the RX100's 'Canon S-series with a bigger sensor.' I wouldn't expect the lens to be quite so bright, but a slightly more consistent balance of speed/range/size/price would be *my* ideal. I was trying to (perhaps clumsily) hint at this with the word 'remained': the RX10 is never as bright as the RX100's F1.8 maximum aperture.
abortabort: Not a 1 Series shooter, but there is also the 18.5mm f1.8 (50mm equiv) which isn't anywhere near as expensive as the 85mm equiv 32mm f1.2 which would probably appeal to enthusiasts. Also, unlike Sony, Olympus, Panasonic etc, this now has the longest lens available (in equiv) to any other mirrorless system, tied with arguably the fastest focussing, best tracking body means this 'could' be interesting to the telephoto birding/sports crowd.
Also they have developed the AW1 which is obviously the only naked underwater ILC on the market.
So I think to some extent they are gunning for the niches where their system of being really fast but also a small sensor, actually have some advantages... Which is not so much in competing directly with other 'enthusiast' mirrorless.
Just a thought anyway.
I've amended the article to include reference to the 18.5mm - thanks for pointing it out.
I hope my piece made clear that I think there's some really capable stuff going on in the 1 system - it's a real shame that Nikon doesn't seem to have reached the 'Soccer Mom' audience, because I think the combination of fast focus, good IQ and capabilities way beyond any compact should endear it to that market.
Which is not to say it couldn't offer something to the enthusiast market too - I just don't see that in what I've seen of the V3 (which could still surprise me).
You make some fair points and ask some good questions. Just one correction: you forgot the 18.5mm f1.8 lens (equiv around 55mm FX), which is a gem in itself. For the rest, it is a matter of opinion indeed. For very many applications the 1" sensor size makes perfect sense. The Nikon 1 users are usually very enthusiastic about the reactivity and speed of the system, the video features and the quality of the stills output. I know I love the V1 and keep going back to it after having failed to enjoy the more trendy but sluggish mirrorless offers (Nex 7, Fuji xe1). The sarcastic comments that pop up every time the Nikon 1 is mentioned do no good to anyone and are usually completely off the mark. Nikon has produced a great system, with many highlights, and quite a few odd gaps, baffling user interface details and bizarre marketing choices. I will buy the V3, if the 18MP output is as good as the V1's 10MP. And the new long zoom. And the 32mm f1.2. And keep my DSLR outfit.
You're right about the 18.5mm F1.8 - I didn't spot it when I checked the Nikon website while writing this piece. I've amended the article to include it.
I hope I made clear during the article that I think the 1 system does have real potential - just that I'm not sure Nikon knows which directions to take it in.
turvyT: Unbelievable. I am just stating this from a neutral point of view, and after a huge waiting exercise. Will Dpreview explain some day why, after all this time, there is still no Pentax k3 review? Of course Dpreview has all the right to review whatever they want, but the lack of a review of a camera in which many people are or have been interested shows signs of the existence of some agenda which is all but transparent. Does Dpreview favor some brands over others? Not a nice thought, at least for me.
@PicOne - Actually my last review was the [Fujifilm X-E2](http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilm-x-e2/) published last week.
I spend a lot of time thinking about timing vs thoroughness and am trying to prepare a K-3 review that's both through and as prompt as possible.
MiraShootsNikon: Count me among the (hopefully many) readers who find it absurd to see this review appear before one for the Pentax K3.
What's more: a full 13-page write-up on the D610 provokes the wonders of hindsight, reminding us to see DPReview's high score and "Gold Award" for the D600 through the lens of Nikon's recent "sensor dust" acknowledgement, service recall, and various legal class actions pursuing the company's behavior following the D600 launch.
I get that Amazon owns DPReview, and that you log into the "Gear Shop" to participate. But at the same time, the folks who write these reviews respond to comments like mine with defenses of "editorial credibility."
Well DPReview, if you want "editorial credibility," don't give "gold awards" to $2K cameras with recall-worthy quality flaws. And instead of 13-page write ups for high-volume incremental warm-overs, let's hear about lower-volume but truly new stuff, like the K3. Stop telling us you aren't ruled by the Amazon "Gear Shop." Show us.
There are two issues here and I'd like to address both:
We were one of the first sites to report the dust/oil issue in the D600 review. But weren't able to fully assess its severity because you can't test the long-term impact in the short term. Our understanding was that it was something that got better with use (and a clean), so wouldn't be a long-term problem - we can only review based on our experience. Without knowing more about how significant the problem has been for typical users, I can't be sure whether we should have given the D600 a Gold, but it seemed reasonable at the time.
The second is that we wanted someone familiar with the Pentax system to review the K-3, given its complexity.
The point is that we have only a limited number of reviewers and a limited amount of time. I am in the process of reviewing the K-3 but without a time machine, we can't retrospectively prioritise it over other cameras.
Simon and I [have tried to explain](http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53010324) why it's taken so long: we can't review all cameras at the same time, so inevitably some will get reviewed before others. That decision is based on a number of factors, including levels of reader interest, how quickly we can write the review, but not which brand it is.
Several reviews have taken longer than planned (something we're trying to avoid, in future), but that has delayed the K-3. I am currently working on the camera.