Just posted: Canon EOS 100D / Rebel SL1 Review

Chimping the lcd is the worst thing you can do to gauge the quality of the shot. Most of the time the lcd makes the shot look much better than it really is.

Yet somehow pentax manages to churn out small lenses with great IQ.

Even canons attempt at a pancake lens is a monster compared to pentaxes.

And then there is the Panasonic "power zoom". Or just make more EF-S lenses; for most of the lineup you are paying for glass you don't use when you use a crop sensor....

The EF-S lens line is specifically designed to produce an image circle for APS-C crop sensors. There are quite a few covering a large range and many have exceptionally good image quality. The Panasonic 14-42 powered zoom lens isn't a great lens. It's small and compares well with other small lenses but it requires serious distortion correction that can seriously affect the corners, other small lenses like the G1 X still beat it, it has a limited zoom...it's a compromise, in other words, and moreso than other lenses. Most small Pentax lenses are primes. Their zooms aren't small by any means. Their 18-55 is 67.5mm long and weighs 220 grams compared to the Canon 18-55 EF-S at 75.2mm long and weighing 205 grams. Please explain how that is significantly smaller. And the EF line may be bigger, but considering the size of lenses available for every APS-C body on the planet, they aren't considerably larger. I mean, you're not going from a pocket camera to one you have to carry in a backpack.

The same thing is true for mirrorless. The blobs are still smaller, but certainly not pocket-able, unless you have giant pockets. Canikon cannot or will not make small lenses, except for the 40mm from Canon. I wish they'd just copy Pentax in that department.

Lens for APSC mirrorless are smaller,full stop! Just tell me a good reason to get this instead of nex6.Not again for the biggest lens variety which are bigger than trucks!!!

@sdribetahi - You are missing the point. You don't need the camera/lens combo to be small with EVERY lens you use. It is enough if the focal lengths you want to bring are available in a compact lens. With my Olympus OM-D, for example, there are 28mm and 40mm equivalent lenses that are very small in size and I do take it with me skiing, running, etc in a pocket:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/shuswapheroshot/8716678984/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/shuswapheroshot/8450024544/in/photostream/

Where Mirrorless is an advantage over the SL1 is that you can get a high end body in this size...

I agree. And since DPR clearly state that the awards are completely subjective, and unrelated to the more objective scoring system, there really is no point in arguing with the choice of award. You can only agree to disagree, if you don't share the reviewer's opinion.

The award is given by the reviewer, if he for some reason, whatever it might be, thinks the camera deserves it. It's his personal feelings about the camera that determines if it gets an award, and if so, if it gets gold or silver. You can't dispute someone's personal feelings; they aren't objective facts.
Of course, given this, one might question the value of such an award system for the consumers, but that's different from questioning the specific choices of awards.

T3 wrote:

"In reality, these Gold/Silver/Bronze awards are only worth as much as the paper they are printed on."

Except for the fact that camera companies themselves are now using the "DPR Gold Award" logo in their advertisements in Pop Photography and on Amazon. So these awards have a direct impact on sales.

It's funny how some people are hung up on the "more shallow grip". I think back to the days of using my old Nikon FE2 that definitely had a "more shallow grip"...oh, wait, it didn't have a grip at all! Yeah, there are a lot of classic cameras that had pretty shallow grips, or no grips, and we all got along with them just fine. These days, I actually think that a lot of today's DSLRs have overly large and overly thick grips! I think a lot of cameras have gone overboard in terms of grip and body thickness. So I see something like an SL1 as bucking that trend, going back to slimmer, more compact, less bloated SLR bodies.

@justmeMN The point is that DPR then has to be consistent and review all cameras in terms of their intended market. When they reviewed the Nikon V1/J1, which Nikon stated up front was for "P&S upgraders", DPR panned it for not having a tradition PASM mode dial.

@T3 A deeper grip is essential for larger, heavier lenses because it's less tiring for long shoots, i.e., you can get leverage with your right hand instead of supporting the weight of the lens primarily with your left. An FE2 is such a small, lightweight camera it really didn't require a grip. But using it with large teles, it would not have been particularly comfortable or secure to hold.

The SL1 with say a Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 or 70-200 f/2.8, most of the weight of the rig would be transferred to your left hand because the shallow grip doesn't give you much leverage at all. Someone with larger hands, forget it. Compare a 60D and SL1 and see which is more comfortable to hold.

There is a problem with linking judgements and awards to specific groups of users such as entry-level user (or probably in the case of the SL1 "compact user who wants to move up a stage"). The problem is that the real world isn't like that. These groups only exist as a convenience in the mind of some reviewers.

Take someone who's never used an SLR or DLSR, but has been playing around with compacts for a bit, and decides to see what all this DSLR stuff is about. Why wouldn't they go for say a 600D/T4i? Is there some deep psychological thing going on here which says that newbies will want to go for something smaller?

Don't pigeonhole people. There's a hugh variety of reasons why people buy cameras; different people of similar experience look for different things. Stick to what a camera does, and judge the camera by that; that's the thing which will help people decide what'll do for them. The SL1 is not a Gold award camera.

Of course one has to consider the target users. No one would make a buying decision between, say, a Nikon D4 and a D3200, or a Panasonic GH3 and a GF6. Sure, the same person could be interested in both cameras, but not for the same purpose. So there's no point in comparing them directly.

If all cameras were to be judged by the same criteria, then no entry-level system camera or P&S compact would be considered good, since they would fall so far short of the quality and performance of the high-end cameras. But, as many people who have bought these cheaper cameras surely can attest to, they ARE good cameras for their intended target users.

Nobody removed the mirror, but I held it and there is no comfortable grip.

2eyesee - from all these that you listed only articulating LCD makes a difference.
100d on the other hand got one enormous advantage over G6: HUGE choice of lenses.
Oh, wait, there's another one: Larger sensor, meaning more options to control depth of field (especially when matched with trio of f/1.4 primes).

The only reason I could see anyone preferring the G6 over the 100D is if you don't care about photography but rather need video with the lenses that m4/3 got (or play with adapters). But if that were the case you probably would end up better with either more serious and bigger camera (like FS100 on a cheaper end) or m4/3 that's more tailored to the video, like GH series.

"100d on the other hand got one enormous advantage over G6: HUGE choice of lenses."

Actually, first-party EF-S lens selection is tiny compared to m43 lens selection. EF lenses are mostly huge and have wrong focal lengths for APS-C (especially Canon 1.6x APS-C). For example, there are simply no AF WA primes for the format - compare to the excellent small Olympus 12 f/2 (where is EF-S 15 mm f/2?) or tiny and cheap Panasonic 14 f/2.5 pancake (where is EF-S 17mm f/2.5?). Canon EF-S 10-22 covers 16mm equivalent more or less but not as wide or as sharp as Panasonic 7-14 (14mm and 16mm are quite different). There is also no replacement for Panasonic 35-100 f/2.8.

cont...
Well, there are some third party lenses filling the voids, for example Sigma 50-150/2.8 OS, but the lens is 4 times the weight of Pana 35-100 and so huge it is unusable on SL1, and as all third-party lenses on Canon and Nikon systems, is not corrected by the camera firmware (unlike on m43, where software corrections are part of the open standard and its parameters are held by lens firmwares, so firmware updates on cameras are not needed to support new lenses).
Claims that SL1 wins because its system has $13,000 lenses which m43 does not are just funny, nobody uses such lenses with SL1 anyway.

"By Plastek (7 hours ago)
100d on the other hand got one enormous advantage over G6: HUGE choice of lenses."

Exactly how many STM lenses are there? Without the STM AF in video or live view is total garbage putting it again way behind the G6.

"Oh, wait, there's another one: Larger sensor, meaning more options to control depth of field (especially when matched with trio of f/1.4 primes)."

Small DOF is not necessailly a good thing. For example taking picture of my kids running around in the evening I want something fast with a huge DOF. Using a F1.4 lens (I have both the 50 and 30) is frustrating because if you actually use the F1.4 aperature your DOF is about as thick as a piece of paper. Having a fast lens and a bigger DOF would let me have my cake and eat it too. G6 wins again.

So canon is great if you are taking artsy pictures of flowers and want to swim in a dreamy bokeh. For real life the G6 wins...

All Panasonic camera besides the GH2 or GH3 auto exposure only in video mode. In other words, no manual exposure mode when shooting video which severely limits their usefulness for any serious video work. Also 1080p24 is only found on the GH series cameras.

Lenses, I agree that Canon EF (and Nikon F) have many more choices for lenses, more fast primes, and more telephoto lenses. m43 lenses are quite expensive and telephoto zooms are all variable aperture consumer zooms.

marike6: I think you are incorrect on both counts. The CameraLabs review of the G6 states that there is full manual control over video and 24p. Manual video control was one of the big upgrades of the G6 over the G5.

Then this camera is not for you.

It still is for him as long as he wants to have an enormous choice of lenses and accessories. If he wants one camera and one lens - than other gear might work better.

Canon won't do that. they have a strategy to make cameras not too attractive.

Actually, I like the Pentax K-5 IIs quite a lot due to its performance but the problem is the camera is not popular in many places and countries. Thus, the after sales service would not be good. They have a marketing problem.

The choice of lenses are limited. Even Zeiss which used to make some of their new DSLR lenses in K mount have discontinued doing it.

Excellent camera, bad marketing.

Probably, that's why they have to be sold to Ricoh now.

Pentax sucks. Live with it.

I think DPR would argue that the SL1 and D5200 are in different classes so their scores don't translate across class of camera. But I believe one reason that their scores are similar is because DPR doesn't weight IQ nearly enough in the final score.
If they did, the D5200, with it's class leading IQ and new 24 mp Toshiba sensor that is now the benchmark APS-C sensor (a full 22 points better on DxOMark sensor ratings, a testing site whose data DPR uses on some reviews and doesn't on others) would have surely earned a substantially higher score.

As far as size, I'm not sure who decided that small size was a "pro" for all classes of cameras, but with DSLRs small size is only an advantage for portability. When cameras are too small, ergonomics and usability suffer especially when you consider that most DSLR lenses are design for more substantial bodies.
Canon shrinking the Rebel to compete with some mirrorless cameras for size is a trend that I'm hoping ends with the SL1.

how many with negative comments here have actually tried the camera? At this level spec sheet is far less relevant than other aspects such as compactness, weight, friendliness, without penalizing performance. I only shoot full frame large bodies yet I was impress and enticed by this little one when I tried it at the store. It is a camera that has something new to say instead of the usual boring improved list of specifications already beyond 90% of the users.

DVT80111, nobody pays any writers any money. That is against everything we stand for. You are rude to suggest it.

To answer the original question from cmvsm, scoring and awards are separate. The reviewer awards them based on his or her overall impression of the product, relative to its position in the market. If you read the review, I explain repeatedly why it deserves a gold.

The system used by DP is confusing a lot of people, and understandably in my opinion: giving a percentage and then silver/gold and then saying they don't apply across almost identical categories is a recipe for failure - people obviously want to compare across classes of camera, specifically in the IQ area!

Similarly, any given rating is only valid for the release date, and clearly won't apply 10 years later.

Anybody have a solution? automatic degradation of results depending on latest result..?

BTW, I would argue that the SL1 and D5200 are in the identical class!

Shawn Barnet regarding

"If you read the review, I explain repeatedly why it deserves a gold."

I went through the entire review page by page and the word gold does not appear once.

Perhaps you use a graphic for gold that my search tool is not finding?

I'm also confused as to why this got the gold. It's simply a T2i,T3i,T4i,T5i in a smaller package. More of the same old stuff, no IQ improvements just smaller. The RAW scores reflect this and you are nodding as you read the review, then see the gold and have a "say what?" moment....

It got the gold because I, the human who used it, with past experience reviewing hundreds of other cameras, thought it deserved it. As for how scoring relates to awards, read this: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4416254604/camera-scores-ratings-explained

I believe this market, the one served by this camera, also served by mirrorless cameras, needs the features included in this camera. Read the other reviews to see why they didn't get a gold, I can't rehash them here, and I didn't review them all. As I've said in posts below, the reason it got gold was partly because important features - again, important for this market of mostly consumer, non-enthusiast users - actually worked. Primarily live view and movie mode AF. No, the sensor is not as fabulous numerically as others in terms of dynamic range, yet it still makes great images. For those into stats and pure performance, please beware: this camera will only please you so you can belittle it. For the rest, it makes great pics.

My point about reading the review was not to find the sentence where I say, "this deserves a gold because," but for you to get the gist of the message, which repeatedly mentions its LV AF abilities and overall suitability to its customer. Raw performance is not much of a factor in a consumer camera, since most consumers don't know what it is, and won't benefit from its use. The bonus with this camera for enthusiasts is that it has all the essential photographic controls and raw capture in a small package; one that, even with a pancake lens attached, will fit into the space of most medium-size EF lenses. To reiterate for those who missed it: Awards are not based on numerical scoring, but on perceived value in the category. This camera, though its image quality is essentially the same as the T5i, works noticeably better in ways that users in its target market will appreciate, hence it gets a gold. It is my opinion of the camera.

Quote from Shawn Barnett dpreview staff, "nobody pays any writers any money. That is against everything we stand for. You are rude to suggest it."
However when a good review is given by dpreview, that should translate to higher sales of reviewed product through dpr's own GearShop which, well you get what I'm saying.

i wish people would decide how our payola system works. Is it direct cash payments to the reviewer, more advertising for DPR or higher sales for GS?

also, if someone decides to buy a camera because we rate it highly, surely they were in the market for a camera anyway? And if we rated it poorly then surely they'd choose a different one? And if we rated it highly and it was demonstrably poor/flawed do you not think someone would notice, eventually?

You could care less or you COULDN'T care less.....just saying.

I agreed with Shawn here. I was in the market for a family camera. I assessed many other cameras with very high rating from Nikon, Fuji, Sony, and even tried them at the shop. None of those cameras meet my need. Then comes the SL1 with the features that I like, reasonabley lightweight that can carry around, fast performance for taking kid motion, good low light for parties, good live view / video for taking my kid performance. It does not do all those thing best vs others, but it strives a perfect compromise for me. So I did make the purchase and happy with it. Just wish they have 22mm pancake. Maybe we should have a category as Family Dslr cameras, this deserves Gold in that category IMO. Regards

"is deserves a gold because," but for you to get the gist of the message, which repeatedly mentions its LV AF abilities "

But the LV AF abilities are only realized when we buy all new STM lenses? And that selection is limited to 3 lenses at this point?

And even though the AF is improved, and may be useable, according to most reviewers it lags way behind the competition.

So we have a slightly smaller T5i with a slightly less horrible LV AF (if we buy all new lenses) = gold? Still don't get it Shawn and reading these comments, I'm not the only one.

I don't believe the payola stuff, but I've handled the Sl1 (it's not that much smaller than my 350d) so we are all fairly confused as to how such minor improvements (with severe STM restrictions) and practically no IQ improvement and a 5 year old sensor that is way behind the competition ranked a Gold.

The "it's a gold because I liked it" really sort of degrades the whole rating scheme.

The image quality from this new lens is so much better, quite unlike the older lens. If you are a novice, this is more than sufficient.

I have tested the camera with the manual focus Zeiss 35mm f/2.0 and its a nice combo to walk around with. Superb image quality in a small package.

However, I don't expect a novice to use the Zeiss lens. Its like asking a kid to go for gourmet food. Probably, the new Canon 35mm f/2.0 would do at a slightly lower price.

@marike6: I appreciate what you are saying, but if you compare the STM to the new Panasonic 14-42mm II lens (not the PZ) the Panasonic is around half the weight and volume of Canon's lens.

If you're looking for a fully featured camera in a compact size, I can't see any reason to prefer the Canon 100D over the much more fully featured Panasonic G6, for example. Advantages of the G6 include WiFi, NFC, 60p video (100D is only 30p), internal mic is stereo (100D only mono!), fully articulating screen. The G6 is also significantly lighter - not by much in the body but once you add the kit lens it's significant.

STM lens I believe is quieter and smoother for video use.

@marike6

The IQ of the G6 holds up very well to the Canon 18MP sensor. The CameraLabs review of the G6 did a direct comparison with the 100D and found there was very little in it. DXO results confirm this - 63 for the 100D vs 61 for the G6.

Also, the G6 does have full manual control over video - it was one of the big upgrades from the G5. and although DPR don't seem to list it, from what I can make out from other website the G6 does support 24p video. The G6 is a much better option for video too as it doesn't exhibit the aliasing and moire that are typical of DSLR's.

The CameraSize link you provided doesn't show a significant size difference from the front, but from the top the difference in bulk is significant - and once you start adding lenses even more so.

If Canon's answer to micro four thirds is to offer a miniaturised DSLR then I don't think it's the right approach, as a camera like the G6 offers so much more.

I find this post bizarre.

The SL1 has no advantage in low light. High ISO performance is the same as a camera with a sensor 40% smaller (OM-D). Same with AF if used in liveview.

Simon, what he means is that there are better deals out there than a brand new SL1 right now for some users, not that you should anticipate camera pricing.

That's like saying why buy a 2014 car when the 2013 is still around? It's a bit of a trollish statement honestly.

Juck is right, there are four current models. T5i replaced the almost identical T4i, but T3i is still in production. Canon usually doesn't discontinue the previous model, instead keeping it in the line-up at a lower price point.
And then we have the 1100D (I forget what it's called in the US), which is still current, since the SL1/100D is not its replacement. SL1 sits above 1100D in the line-up.

Canon USA, call them. I said the T3i and I meant the T3i you muppet. Are you slow?

I would absolutely agree with Shawn. This camera is cute and a great walk-about camera. If one already have most of the essential lenses, the price of this camera will make this a better choice if one is thinking of getting a compact camera.

I would say GOLD for cuteness and its inherent capabilty.

However, I would wish Canon can make the "MkII" version with a weather proof magnesium alloy body with the same features as the 70D. Never mind if it will be more expensive. I just want to go trekking wth it. Make it better than the Pentax K5 MkII.

He writes in the comments making fun of people who ask for DPR to review certain cameras, to be fair it may not be just him but also other writers.

What a self-serving post.