Skipper494: Full frame sensors in compact cameras are long overdue. 1" and m4/3 are band aids. We had 35mm film in little cameras like my Chinon Bon Ami. Miniaturisation is not a problem. Having space for human sized controls is. 1" and m4/3 are just a way for the industry to gradually introduce larger sensors and milk as much money along the way.
Nor is it very flexible (a fixed lens would not offer the mass-market such a clear advantage over existing cellphones), nor terribly affordable.
Essentially a 1"-based RX1 could be considerably smaller.
deniz erdem: i dont thing average consumer is really fixated on sensor size. its a matter of convenience. smartphone camera is just there and its good enough for facebook photos.
That's why he's saying the market would be smaller - he's suggesting a breed of small(ish) cameras with significantly better image quality.
shaocaholica: Funny how the RX100 would have blown peoples minds just 4 years ago. All I remember hearing was arguing how you can't make a camera that small with a sensor that large. The market leaders at the time were as small as it could ever be.
It's worth considering the cost and AF speed implications of a larger sensor - larger sensors tend to mean larger (heavier, slower to focus) lenses and greater cost.
rfsIII: It's not the sensor size that matters to me. It's how fast can I get the image onto my social media platforms. Life is too short and the speed of business is too fast for me to go home, fire up my computer, launch Lightroom, edit the RAW files, export them for posting, and then....finally.... post.
What the world really needs is an iPhone that will fully autofocus and power the image stabilization of Nikkor or Canon lenses. Ability to control speedlights would be nice too.
In which case, a good smartphone will be perfect.
Saying you're not interested in sensor size is essentially the same as saying you're not interested in image quality, since one dictates the other (to a very high degree).
Not that I'm criticising that balance of IQ and convenience but this article is about providing an option for people wanting a different balance, with more emphasis on image quality.
HubertChen: Questions not mentioned in the Article, please help: 1) Battery Life impact on Camera batteries?In case I keep the connection open from camera to tablet, say for 5 hours, what is the drain on battery life going to be ? Do I need to change batteries every hour or is it only a slight impact? Say I shoot 400 pictures in 5 hours, transfer only the JPEGs each 8 MB. 2) Continuous upload of latest pictures during shoot?Can I keep shooting and then the latest picture will be transferred to the tablet automatically and with no delay?
Background:I intend to use the EyeFi Card during the shooting and have an Android tablet in my photo bag all the while. In the rare but not too infrequent cases I can not judge the success of a picture on the on camera screen display, I want to pull out of the tablet and review / explore the latest pictures on the bigger screen without hassle nor delay. Can this be done ?
Not without delay - no.
The options increase considerably if you have access to a Wi-Fi network, as the card will happily auto-upload over that, but that's still not without delay.
HubertChen: Questions not mentioned in the Article, please help:3) Method of copying the files?There seems to be some confusion about the method of copying. Reading some posts it seems you need to launch an app on the tablet that pulls the images, reading some Other Articles it appears the card push the images to the tablet. Or is it you can configure the app to keep pulling the pictures from a selected folder on the SD card and place them into another folder on the tablet ? However it is done, is it possible to set up the process that images are copied from a designated folder on the SD card to a designated folder on tablet. If so, then all other handling of the workflow can be done without further use of a dedicated EyeFy app but rather any tool the photographer chooses for his workflow.
On the cameras there's a mixture of pushing and pulling possible (usually both).
Neither SD cards gives you the option to auto-transfer to a phone or tablet, though the Eye-Fi has a range of options for uploading to your home computer or the cloud.
HeyItsJoel: I really don't see the big deal people make of GPS in cameras. Will it give you turn by turn directions on how to get somewhere? I mean really, who cares where the exact pinpoint location you took a particular shot? Are you going to come back to that exact same spot again in the future to take the exact same shot 5 years later? No.
When well implemented, it's an extra piece of metadata that makes it easier to arrange and retrieve your image, without manual intervention.
technic: Will be interesting to know if any of the new quality compacts use this sensor. Doesn't seem likely given the time it takes to develop/produce a new camera, and looking at the specs of these cameras. LX-8, XZ-3, P7800 maybe?
"Sony stresses how well the sensor can receive light from oblique angles, thanks to its large pixel size" This comment is a bit weird though, some of the older 1/1.7"sensors must have even bigger pixel size ...
Nokia and Toshiba said they worked together on the 808's sensor. It's a relatively large 1/1.2" sensor. The surprise is that it doesn't outperform the Canon S100's sensor, according to DxO figures, despite being larger.
OldArrow: Without having tried it yet, I wonder how the WiFi card works out of all-metal camera casing, since EM waves can't pass through it. At a first glance, it would work as expected only in plastic cameras, and even then, there are sometimes metal-shielded card slots...
The article is about using Wi-Fi to communicate with smartphones and tablets, so that you can upload or share when you're away from your computer.
keeponkeepingon: Great subject!
However this article is missing any sort of metric to objectively compare the devices. What we are left with is basically a survey of the companies marketing material and technical specs but we are missing what makes dpreview great: Objective measurements of performance!
For example how long does it take each device to transfer 100 pictures to an iphone? To face book? To my computer?
Also under connectivity you are omitting connectivity to a computer: Do all of these devices allow transfer of full size raw and video files to a computer?
Actually I don't think you mention if all of the devices support transfer of videos? Do they?
I used all these devices and never relied on marketing materials. Oddly enough, I don't think any of the companies try to promote the frustrations and lack-of-reliability that I mentioned.
wildwilly: But, how do these devices, cameras and/or wi-fi cards work with tablets? I have no interest in "sending" photos from my cameras to my phone but I do use my tablet as a viewer and storage device while traveling.
Android or iOS tablets should be exactly the same as the experiences I describe with the equivalent smartphones.
kff: Let add Canon 6D and its liveview via Wi-Fi ... :)
It's mentioned in the article twice. Sadly we've not been able to get one yet, so it couldn't be covered in more depth.
Roland Karlsson: Why do DPReview even bother to mention this redundant software?
Because lots of our readers use Lightroom and it might be useful to them.
logbi77: Interesting to see how the XZ-2/P7700/EX2F compares to the old XZ-1/P7100/EX1.
I've just started shooting with the XZ-2 and it'simpressive how much of a step forward it represents (Not just the sensor - the camera's rather promising, too).
Renzokuken: dpreview seems to be on a decline these days.
first critiques were aplenty for iPhone reviews, followed by the integration of dxO's very debatable database into their lens review, and now...
using photo prints in a camera test scene.
I find all these critiques/feedback as valid. I hope dpreview can take all these comments positively and do consider modifying a few decisions.
#1Photos prints fade overtime#2camera used to capture the photo in the prints has its own version and method of rendering color, does not give accurate color impression to viewers#3 print quality might affect camera test, a blurred line can be both be due to bad print quality or the camera used to take the test scene itself
please use lesser photo prints
The D600 review is in progress, but it's a big, complex camera, so there's plenty still to be done. We're not waiting for the 6D, though.
tommy leong: oh yes
you forgot to create some shadow areas in the scene wherehigh ISO testing would need to show how dark areas ( under-exposed )are handled.
That's definitely something we'll address. The low light mode will mean there will be much more information about shadow, noise and noise-reduction behaviour.
B-rad: Is this chip actually in the P7700?
Unless Chipworks does a strip-down, we probably won't ever know for certain. It's extremely likely, however.
The Canon G15 and S110 both sport a 12MP 1/1.7"-type sensor, are they using the same chip too?
Canon have made an unusually strong point of saying that they're using their own sensors in the S110 and G15.
mu55: Did Sony specifically ask you not to take any photos at 10mm of a subject where people would expect to see sharp corners?
No. We never publish galleries in which we're told what we can and can't publish.
Dimitri Khoz: I also see that new testscene has 4:3 format.How will it affect testing 3:2 format sensors? It may not show soft corners/CA for lenses mounted on them.
This is a 4:3 crop of the full scene. It's actually 16:9.