DanCarrPhotography posted a X10 versus X100 image and spec comparison!
And those could be new NX200 images at SLRclub!
DanCarrPhotography posted a X10 versus X100 image and spec comparison!
And those could be new NX200 images at SLRclub!
*Please also check your spam folder if you don't get the confirmation mail. And mark the mail as "non-spam" to see the future newsletter.
7 Responses
The NX200 images look promising, but full size images with exif intact will be required before any judgements can be made about it’s IQ.
Another expensive product:-(
The X10 looks like an X100 had a baby with Nikon P7000.
Why did they have to switch the shutter speed dial with a “mode” dial?
That’s part of what makes the X100 so special – no-nonsense controls.
I wish they had kept the aperture ring too.
Also, those numbers at the base of the lens look like focal length markings, but why is there an “OFF” setting?
2/3 is about 50% more area than the typical high end P&S, so it should have noticeably better low light performance. However, it is just a quarter of the area of m4/3 so don’t expect miracles.
50% ??
No – it’s just a fraction larger than the XZ-1 sensor (1/1.63″ vs 1/1.5″ which is the same as 2/3″).
The sensor is 8.8×6.6mm and the XZ-1 sensor is ca 8x6mm.
The specs say it will have a 6mp high ISO mode through pixel binning, something previously discussed by Thom Hogan and others. It’ll probably do as well or better than 43rd/m43 (which isn’t saying much).
I do agree, however, that they should have kept the no-nonsense shutter and aperture dials from the X100. Otherwise, it’s just an overpriced point and shoot.