mpgxsvcd: Canon is delusional. They can’t even see that the downward trend for them is steadily increasing. Nikon has started to right its ship. However, their “perceived” quality issues are not helping them.
Sony is making great cameras but they simply don’t know how to get the word out there to the mass public. That and they simply haven’t had enough time to build up their lens lineup yet.
Samsung made a killer product with their NX1. However, it too suffers from a lack of publicity.
M4/3s is hanging in there. They have a devout following with their diehard consumers. However, compact and super-zoom cameras like the LX100 and FZ1000 actually hurt their m4/3s sales. The lenses offer them more profit but Panasonic is concentrating more on their compact cameras right now. Olympus is doing much better by producing great glass and great camera bodies to go along with that glass.
Canon's camera division hasn't been doing "well" for a couple of years now. They started with a gigantic portion of the market from when they were doing well. They still have a sizable portion of that market but I believe that market is on the brink of total collapse.
Simply put. People just are not going to buy Canon Rebel cameras or their compact cameras this year. Their customer base is pretty much saturated. They have no need to upgrade and so they simply won't upgrade.
Other camera companies have this same issue as well. Just not quite to the extent that Canon will see this year.
mailman88: It's simple Canon, build a camera noise free at 6400 ISO, fastest AF in the business and sell it under $1700....then you'll own the camera world.
Panasonic GH4 does that for under $1700Samsung NX1 claims to do that for $1500Fuji XTI claims to do that for $1200Nikon D5500 claims to do that for $900Sony A6000 claims to do that for $550
I think Canon would the one who would be “owned” if that is all they could muster in a new camera. They need to do a whole lot more than that to get the ball rolling their way again.
All I can say is that I sincerely hope Canon figures out what they are doing wrong. The camera industry was a much better place when they were at the top of their game.
No "m4/3s" is a specific system. The LX100 may have a 4/3" sensor but it is not an "m4/3s" camera.
I am sure there is some profit in the LX100. However, I have to think that there is more profit in the lenses especially when you would need multiple lenses to get the same focal ratios that the LX100 offers.
I really am glad that I am not a camera manufacturer right now. The outlook looks pretty bleak for all of them.
I have said it before and I will say it again. This is the year that Canon finally experiences a dramatic sales decrease in DSLRs and compact cameras across the board. Only time will tell if they do anything to stop that trend.
Canon is delusional. They can’t even see that the downward trend for them is steadily increasing. Nikon has started to right its ship. However, their “perceived” quality issues are not helping them.
mpgxsvcd: Let’s get one thing straight. Dpreview has never given any camera anything less than a Silver award. The only thing that the silver award says is that the camera is not good enough to warrant a Gold award.
"Hopefully our responses aren't too strong. I suppose we're just gun-shy from 5 years of having the same conversations :) thanks for your input, anyway. None of us are huge fans of our scoring system (or indeed any scoring system) and long-term we're working on a new way of doing it."
I get what you and your team have said and thank you for the clarifications. I honestly didn't know about the cameras that got no award at all. Knowing that there is actually 3 criteria does make it a little more useful now.
I really didn't want to bring it up again but I feel it needs to be said until someone does something about it. It is clear from the comments here that a number of people feel it needs to change. Maybe one day the powers that be will make that happen.
Great review by the way. As always keep up the great work.
You guys may see your Gold and Silver awards as something different. However, you can’t get around the fact that it is a binary classification. It is either Gold or Silver. The only way to interpret that is that it is either good or not so good.
I am sorry but I truly believe that it is time that you either add a few more levels to it or just do away with the awards altogether.
Your review score and conclusions are much more useful. If anything maybe you should allow each individual staff member to assign it a Gold or Silver award and tell us who gave it what. Then we would have a few more data points to determine if it was on the high or low end of Silver or Gold. For instance 2 members of the staff might give it Silver and the other 3 might give it Gold.
That would be much more useful information.
That is news to me. Can you point me to the camera that received a Bronze award?
So the GM5 with the kit lens has a 35mm equivalent depth of field like an F7.0 – F11.2 full frame camera. The LX100 has the equivalent of F3.74 – F6.16 for depth of field and the LX100 has a little more focal length reach. Even the mighty Olympus 12mm F2.0 lens has deeper depth of field on the GM5 than the LX100 does.
The GM5 with the kit lens just doesn’t makes sense over the LX100.
Let’s get one thing straight. Dpreview has never given any camera anything less than a Silver award. The only thing that the silver award says is that the camera is not good enough to warrant a Gold award.
I am just not impressed by this camera at all. Sure it is small and then you stick a lens on it and suddenly it isn’t that small anymore. The fixed lens compact cameras of today have the same or better sensors and much brighter and better lenses for less money.
I just wish they would make an interchangeable lens version of the LX100. Give me an LX100 body and then make the m4/3s equivalent LX100 lens. I know the m4/3s version of the lens will be significantly larger. I am ok with that.
Man the GM5 looks exactly like the LX100 on the specifications page. Is the GM5 just a re-badged LX100?
This would be a really cool little camera if they had never invented the LX100. I can’t fathom buying this camera for almost $100 more than the LX100 when the LX100 has a much better lens and much more intuitive controls.
I couldn’t tell the difference between the GM5 and the LX100 in the studio comparison tool. The pictures just looked to similar to pick a winner.
The LX100’s 4K video and 11 FPS burst mode really puts it ahead of the GM5.
I know. I know. But you can change the lenses on the GM5. The truth is that the LX100’s lens is so terrific that I don’t even want to change it. I would much rather deal with cropping in camera to get extra reach than trying to overcome a slow lens.
mpgxsvcd: My 8 inch diameter telescope is only 800mm! Why in the world do people think they need 16 megapixels with 1200mm? Spotting scopes for rifles don’t even have that kind of focal length.
If they can shoot people miles away with a shorter focal length then you certainly can take a picture of them with a shorter focal length.
Yes you have shown that there are circumstances where it can be useful. Those were excellent images. However, the virtually everyone that this camera is targeted to would never find themselves in those situations and still be able to get the images you got.
M4/3s baby! Is that the not yet released GF7? Would love to see some sample images from that camera in the same location.
Wow! This camera appears to pull very well in post processing.
Is this with a tripod or did you see Medusa on the trip? Hands of Stone.