[jsherman999]

Ha! Well thanks, but not exactly a work of art there.

Not chopped liver, either. I like the color, contrast, lens sharpness (seen in the larger version) and the OOF transition looks nicer than any forced close-up you'll see with a P&S-sized sensor. Very pleasing shot.

That was just one of my first test photos I took within an hour of unboxing my new lens. I'm going to do a motorcycle road trip this fall from NC to Nova Scotia stopping by NYC and various others spots along the way. Hopefully I can put that lens to good use on that trip, because it is fantastic. It's the first AF lens I've owned that can rival Pentax Limited's. In-fact Pentax needs to steal that manual focus lock mechanism from Olympus ASAP and produce a 28mm f/1.4 using it.

I don't see how you can go wrong there, based on that output. There also a few folks on the Nikon forums raving about that E-P3.

One of my main concerns with contrast-detect is AF lock lag - sounds like Oly may be leading the pack in this tier (from dpreview):

"...But it's inside the camera that the biggest changes have been made: the sensor is still the familiar 12MP unit but the camera's processing is greatly improved. The latest TruePic VI processor is much faster than previous designs, allowing the camera to check focus 120 times per second. This, of course, means that it can adjust focus more often and therefore confirm focus more quickly. This increased processing speed, combined with the more recent internal-focus MSC lens designs and improved camera/lens communication (installable in existing MSC lenses via firmware updates), have put Olympus in the position of claiming the world's fastest single-AF performance for a camera with 3X kit zoom. This is a radical improvement from the first PENs, which were far from snappy.

"...And it's not just the impressive AF speed that makes the E-P3 feel much more responsive than previous PENs - the dual core processor means image processing and live view can be run in parallel, decreasing the blackout time after each shot. This, combined with a responsive shutter mechanism gives an impression of immediacy every time you hit the shutter button.

In addition, the E-P3 has a 614,000 dot OLED screen that is touch-sensitive. This particular panel uses Samsung's Pentile dot layout to give VGA-equivalent resolution, coupled with capacitance-type touch technology similar to the Apple iPhone. The touch screen can be used to set the focus point and optionally fire the shutter, and can operate some of the camera's other functions too. Crucially though this is always in addition to the rest of the camera's controls, rather than attempting to replace them. If you decide such features don't have a place on such a traditional-looking camera, they can be disabled with no overall loss of functionality...."



.

[Art Vandelay II]

One of my main concerns with contrast-detect is AF lock lag

If you're a single point AF guy like me then you no longer have to worry about CDAF speed on mirrorless cameras. The E-P3 is indeed blazingly fast. Faster than any DSLR I've owned in-fact (K-7, K10D, Nikon D200, Canon 50D, etc, etc.). The upcoming Sony NEX-7 is also rumored to be in that speed ballpark.

I can't speak about continuous AF, because that is simply something I never use; but I suspect a bird photographer would probably still be happier with something like a D300 with it's 51 point array.

[gazonk]

If a Leica 35mm Summilux is a 10 on the bokeh scale, and and iPhone is a 1

Hey, iPhone bokeh is actually OK if you only get close enough :-)

[Art Vandelay II]

Hey, iPhone bokeh is actually OK if you only get close enough :-)

Ha, yeah, it is fun to see what you can do with it. Sadly this pic I snapped of my LX one day when hiking is about as soft as I've managed with a non-macro pic:



It had just enough softness to separate the camera from the background...but yeah, I would love to see Apple go up to even a 1/2.3 size sensor for the next iPhone.

[Christine Tham]

I can clearly see the bokeh filter smudge

Actually, the "filter" (technically, it's not a "filter" - it's actually called background defocus mode) wasn't even used on some of those shots, so perhaps you need to re-evaluate your ability to "clearly see.".

[Art Vandelay II]

Actually, the "filter" (technically, it's not a "filter" - it's actually called background defocus mode) wasn't even used on some of those shots, so perhaps you need to re-evaluate your ability to "clearly see.".

Even at a web size something very unpleasant is going on in the three areas I circled. On the statue it could just simply be the alignment of a twig paralleling the shape of the statue, causing it to have a halo look, but either way, something is not so good. On top of that, the blur itself looks like a simple gaussian blur created in Photoshop, it has no depth to it what so ever. Of course there is also the tiny little issue of if you want to use background defocus the subject can't be moving...

I also assume those are taken at telephoto focal lengths...which is not what we were originally discussing after I posted a 24mm eqv shot.

[Christine Tham]

This one *was* taken with the background defocus mode - yes, it's not realistic, but it creates a very interesting artistic effect that I liked:

[Christine Tham]

On the statue it could just simply be the alignment of a twig paralleling the shape of the statue, causing it to have a halo look, but either way, something is not so good.

Bingo.

I carefully aligned the framing because I noticed the twig almost exactly traced the outline of part of the stone, to achieve the blurry look. It looks much nicer at full resolution - the extreme compression Facebook applies to photos destroys most of the effect.

You may not think it's good - I really like it.

PS - your assumption that these photos are taken at telephoto length - wrong.

[VladimirYo]

What are talking about? Wait a little for a Q ver.1.0 and tonns of pic. AND THAN post here your pic from Oly or Sony to make decigions =)

[zxaar]

That's the m4/3's example you chose to "prove" how un-pocketable m4/3's cameras are? Why not just choose a photo of a GH2 with a a Sigma Bigma adapted?

If you use cameras without lenses then yes, NEX is smaller than m43 cams and much more pocketable than m43 cams.

You can rule out zooms, because not even the Q is a pocket camera with a zoom attached, so that leaves us with pancake primes as the only option if you want a pocket camera. Perhaps it's not the case for everyone, but I simply don't require a camera any smaller than a GF3 + 14mm prime. It will fit in my pocket without issue. As far as the 90% of lenses that make a camera unpockatable...who cares? So long as a system has a few lenses that are pocketable that's all I care about. I don't make a habit of carrying 10 different lenses with me on photo walks; do you?

Compare these things with similar zooms attached. The photo I posted was not serious comparison with any other camera. I was just poking fun at people who buy m43 for the reasons that it is compact.

Other than pancakes, can you attach any other zoom and put camera and lens into your pockets. If you can not then there is not much advantages of m43s over dslrs.

If you want a standard zoom that means you're going to have to put any of these cameras in something like a messenger pack. After you do that you'll have a hard time telling the difference in size on any of the three cameras above. Even the NEX-C3 with 18-55mm isn't exactly a 2lb DSRL pounding against your spine.

I am sorry but with zooms attached Q is considerably smaller than other two. One could tell the size differences easily. I have held a plastic replica of Q attached with its zoom and it is very small. It could be put into jacket pocket even with zoom attached.

As far as your IQ claims...here is a test photo I took with an E-P3 and 12mm f/2 lens (I uploaded full size if you view all sizes). I feel pretty safe in saying that Q isn't capable of anything close to that. I've never seen a small sensor camera that is. Small sensors just can't produce the depth that large sensors + fast glass can do. I haven't seen anything out of the Q so far that makes me think it will be any different then all the other small sensor cameras that have come before it. In fact I haven't even seen a sample yet that has made me think it's better than the X-Z1.

Wait for IQ tests.

As far as I am concerned m43 does not solve problem of packtablity. They are not small enough. They are only small with pancakes and pancakes are not available in every length that i would want plus lenses cost arm and leg to buy.

[falconeye]

That is why I don't understand why they didn't go with a larger sensor the size of the LX5

They don't tell us. As has been said above, the system may be made for a 1/1.6" sensor or similiar.

My personal guess is that Pentax wants to stay with Sony (and we should applaud them if this is their rationale). AFAIK, there is no recent 1/1.7" or 1/1.6" sensor from Sony. There is the Sony ICX685CQZ used in some higher end 10MP 1/1.7" cameras. But I think it is no Exmor R type.

[Blue]

If you're a single point AF guy like me then you no longer have to worry about CDAF speed on mirrorless cameras. The E-P3 is indeed blazingly fast. Faster than any DSLR I've owned in-fact (K-7, K10D, Nikon D200, Canon 50D, etc, etc.). The upcoming Sony NEX-7 is also rumored to be in that speed ballpark.

I can't speak about continuous AF, because that is simply something I never use; but I suspect a bird photographer would probably still be happier with something like a D300 with it's 51 point array.

I wonder how that stacks up to the GF2, especially with a single point.

[Blue]

They don't tell us. As has been said above, the system may be made for a 1/1.6" sensor or similiar.

My personal guess is that Pentax wants to stay with Sony (and we should applaud them if this is their rationale). AFAIK, there is no recent 1/1.7" or 1/1.6" sensor from Sony. There is the Sony ICX685CQZ used in some higher end 10MP 1/1.7" cameras. But I think it is no Exmor R type.

That makes sense. I am curious what Panny (and Leica) is doing about the replacement for the LX5 (and D-Lux-5).

[gazonk]

They don't tell us. As has been said above, the system may be made for a 1/1.6" sensor or similiar.

My personal guess is that Pentax wants to stay with Sony (and we should applaud them if this is their rationale). AFAIK, there is no recent 1/1.7" or 1/1.6" sensor from Sony. There is the Sony ICX685CQZ used in some higher end 10MP 1/1.7" cameras. But I think it is no Exmor R type.

I really wish they would put a similar sensor in their next-generation waterproof. The recent generations of the Optio W-series (and all other Pentax P&S cameras, I think) have been plagued by exceptionally bad high ISO performance (I've advised my daughter to set max auto ISO on her W80 to 100, since already 200 looks terribly noisy). Just up on dpreview is a group test of water proof cameras where the WG1 would have scored much better if it hadn't had such miserable IQ in low light.

[johnmflores]

Get in line @ B&H! Pre-order...

pentax q

The intervalometer, high-speed flash sync, HD video, image stabilization, and lens choices make this an interesting option for First-Person shooting...