newfoundmass

About being overpriced, I think that a even better example is the S5 II, which have a (good) EVF, internal cooling, 24mp (better oversampling), waveforms, a mechanical shutter...for $2000.

In the group that I am that people bought ZV-E10s in troves, everybody liked the camera, but...the only ones thinking of getting one are the FX3 users, as a second body.

ZV-E10 is $700. With the $1300 difference, they could buy lenses (Viltrox is VERY popular in that group too). And to upgrade from the ZV-E10 to ZV-E1, the user will have probably to upgrade it's lenses too. ZV-E10 users are not the target of this one.

I think there are better cameras out there for what this camera is marketed for, but for those who've spent the last several years watching YouTubers gush about the A7Siii or the FX3 but couldn't afford one, I think this will be popular with them. I think we forget that the "famous" YouTubers are but a small fraction of those trying to create successful YouTube channels. There are millions of people on there trying to become the next big YouTuber but with limited resources. This is a camera that will probably appeal to them. They were probably ready to whip their credit cards out the second every reviewer said "it's like a A7Siii but for half the price."

Canon users really have a victim complex. Of course it is a flaw. As is the plasticky body, the single card slot, the insane crop needed to get usable stabilization, the overheating, etc. The difference is that Sony has more credibility with people because they haven't spent the last decade dicking people around while Canon has, so people are a lot less fervid in their criticism.
If you want to criticize Sony then their firmware upgrades are a great place to start. It's ridiculous that they don't push some of these upgrades that are available on cheaper cameras to their more expensive ones, given the hardware is capable of it. Not everything on the ZV-E1 can be carried over to older cameras, but a lot of it can be and SHOULD BE if Sony values their customers. 
Finally, can't understand the complaint of the sensor. 12 megapixels isn't a flaw because it has a purpose: better low light. If you don't need those low light capabilities or just want more megapixels then you should get the A7IV. 

This will probably do well for people producing social media content for businesses, but it'd do much better if they'd included an open gate mode so people could output video to the aspect ratios each service uses. Maybe it's a limit to the sensor size?

Shit I just pissed in my mouth made me LOL

COVID really opened my eyes about being extra thoughtful about how I spend my money and what I have my money tied up in. There were several times, even early in the pandemic when I tried to convince myself that things would be better by the summer, where I almost pulled the trigger on completely overhauling my kit. I had the money to do it, and my gear would've fetched more than it did last year when I finally did start the transition to the S5. But I'd have been in a really BAD situation if I had spent that money in 2019 or early 2020. I'd probably have had to start selling my gear, which I would need when things got back to "normal", to survive.
By waiting though I scored two S5 bodies in the last 12 months for a little over $2000 total and didn't put myself in a poor financial situation doing so. These cameras will serve me for at least the next two years, I'm sure longer if I really want them to, and will have paid for themselves over and over again by the time I decide to upgrade. By then they'll be 4 or 5 years old, but they'll still do the job just as the GH5 continues to do for me 6 years after buying it. I'll let others take the financial hit that comes with buying a new camera, because short of some MUST HAVE release, my days of buying the latest gear new are over. I'd rather keep that money in my pocket because if COVID showed me anything it's that I just don't know what the future holds and when we leave it to people to make the best decisions for the collective they often times don't.

Decide what you NEED and then go from there. What sensor size would be you satisfied with? Do you need stabilization? Do you want a bunch of codec options? Is autofocus important? Low light? All those cameras have their strengths and weaknesses. It's all about finding the one that checks the most boxes for your budget. 

Same, covid lockdown gave me a lot of time on my hands to rethink life while we couldn't work and were locked up at home. 
 Makes me reassess my spending priorities (although I certainly still have far too much money tied up on gear, and still spending too much! But I guess... less so than before??? Maybe) plus general life goals and what I'm doing with my life at the moment. 
Kinda living a mid life crisis right now (or as my sister recently kindly called it: "a quarter life crisis"), so have gone back to university to study stuff for fun that I enjoy (and still juggling working in the film industry too! A bit stressful, but that's ok, I'm enjoying all of it). 

COVID really opened my eyes about being extra thoughtful about how I spend my money and what I have my money tied up in. There were several times, even early in the pandemic when I tried to convince myself that things would be better by the summer, where I almost pulled the trigger on completely overhauling my kit. I had the money to do it, and my gear would've fetched more than it did last year when I finally did start the transition to the S5. But I'd have been in a really BAD situation if I had spent that money in 2019 or early 2020. I'd probably have had to start selling my gear, which I would need when things got back to "normal", to survive.
By waiting though I scored two S5 bodies in the last 12 months for a little over $2000 total and didn't put myself in a poor financial situation doing so. These cameras will serve me for at least the next two years, I'm sure longer if I really want them to, and will have paid for themselves over and over again by the time I decide to upgrade. By then they'll be 4 or 5 years old, but they'll still do the job just as the GH5 continues to do for me 6 years after buying it. I'll let others take the financial hit that comes with buying a new camera, because short of some MUST HAVE release, my days of buying the latest gear new are over. I'd rather keep that money in my pocket because if COVID showed me anything it's that I just don't know what the future holds and when we leave it to people to make the best decisions for the collective they often times don't.

Ditto.
I used to always upgrade to the most recent latest & greatest whether it really was or not and sometimes it was and other times it wasn’t.
Ideally, unless I absolutely need it, I hold off.
Since 2018, I have bought precisely 2 new cameras. That I have kept anyway (returned the OM-1 and XH2). These have been the S5 after I sold off all my Fuji gear knowing I was not going to stick with what I had and then recently the S5ii as I do have need for reliable AF for a % of my work.
But my S1R's, both now gone, purchased used for 1500 and 1600 euros and my current pair of S1H's, 2150 and 1850. 
For me it is the equation: need + cost + timing and I like to start any season with all the kit I am going to use and if I can, not make changes until after any season has finished.
Too many lens changes last year as I wrestled L Mount into submission but think I have it nailed down now…

I'm actually surprised that they didn't go their own way too, though they might feel more financially secure to be on the payroll somewhere. The big difference between them and the rest of the YouTubers out there is that they're older and have families, so being on payroll somewhere might be more appealing. Probably provides more stability than having to rely on YouTube ad revenue that can really fluctuate. 

It'd be fine as an a-cam for a lot of pros too. 
The biggest knock I have towards the FX3 and the FX30 is that they are supposed to be part of the cine line, but they lack most of the cine features. But still, the FX30 is a more than capable a-cam for a lot of professional work. Maybe not HIGH HIGH end work, but still.

It'd be fine as an a-cam for a lot of pros too. 
The biggest knock I have towards the FX3 and the FX30 is that they are supposed to be part of the cine line, but they lack most of the cine features. But still, the FX30 is a more than capable a-cam for a lot of professional work. Maybe not HIGH HIGH end work, but still.

All excellent points - I’m an enthusiast but wanted to discuss ideas for both pro and non pro alike so I think both views are warranted here. 

He seems to be an enthusiast that is looking to film personal videos and some stuff to put on YouTube.
There really is no reason to get the FX3 or any other expensive camera when he would be just fine filming with a more affordable one, like the A7IV. Please re-read the original post before recommending that a $4000 camera is a good investment for someone that is looking to film personal stuff that he might put on YouTube. If he has the money to blow, then I guess go for it, but he does not need a cine camera.
As far as my own personal philosophy, I want to get the most out of each and every camera investment I make. By waiting I not only will have made more money using the equipment I have, but the equipment that I want to upgrade to will have come down in price even more. In our disposable society where people need the latest and greatest that might seem goofy, but for me it makes the most financial sense and ensures that more money goes into my pocket. In the 5 years I've owned the GH5 it has paid for itself at least 50x over and continues to be a camera I can make money using over the next couple of years. That's what I'm concerned about the most as a freelancer who could one day find himself out of work for a year because of a global pandemic.

From a purely business perspective, exactly. Their sole function and existence is to make enough profit in order that the owner can one day go to Mars.
Some would say, that couldn’t happen soon enough…
On the other hand, this kind of business practice is not new. It has existed for thousands of years. 
There are of course many more ethical businesses but they tend to be the ‘corner shop’ kind that care about their customers and their customers care about them.
No one loves Amazon, only the ability to obtain stuff at a click of a button next day or even in some places, same day. 
Something like DPR has next to zero chance of long term survival if it is not owned and operated by enthusiasts. Poor leadership is the death of any and all institutions whether it be a government or a business because if the guy at the top does not give a shit, no one else has a chance.
Whether it’s simple mismanagement or plain incompetence, it’s the management who ultimately make or break any business, large or small.

Yeah. If they were 20 somethings that weren't married with kids they might've gone a different direction, but they're older guys with wives and kids so they were gonna go with whatever site offered them a steady paycheck while allowing them to continue doing what they do. They can always fall back on doing their own thing eventually if they need to. 

I'm curious if this is doable should the site really "die"... does anyone remember Geocities, the free web hosting company? There was an effort to basically crawl every Geocities site possible and preserve it, because of all the data that would be lost once Yahoo deleted all the sites. 
Those sites are still available years on at https://www.oocities.org/ and https://www.geocities.ws/
To be clear, they are incomplete archives because it relied on the same crawling tactics that Google and Yahoo use, and if a site wasn't linked elsewhere it likely would fall through the cracks.
But with DPReview I think that would be less of an issue. The primary issue would be hosting all that data, as while it might not cost a lot for Amazon it probably would cost a bit for a normal person. There also then would be the issue of whether Amazon would object and take legal action. Perhaps reaching out to the Internet Archive to see if they could take this project on with some volunteers might be worth doing?
Just an idea that I haven't seen discussed really yet. It would at least preserve and make all that data available.

I suspect they are simply going where there is another regular presenting income without having to really do any marketing themselves.
Nothing wrong with that and we all have bills to pay and being a self-employed creator has as many risks as it does potential rewards.
I get the impression they have gone from one regular paid position to another as one door closes and another opens.
 

Archive Team appear to be on the case.
There are some other individual efforts to preserve the studio shot comparison content too apparently.
https://wiki.archiveteam.org/index.php/DPReview

I'm actually surprised that they didn't go their own way too, though they might feel more financially secure to be on the payroll somewhere. The big difference between them and the rest of the YouTubers out there is that they're older and have families, so being on payroll somewhere might be more appealing. Probably provides more stability than having to rely on YouTube ad revenue that can really fluctuate. 

I'm actually surprised that they didn't go their own way too, though they might feel more financially secure to be on the payroll somewhere. The big difference between them and the rest of the YouTubers out there is that they're older and have families, so being on payroll somewhere might be more appealing. Probably provides more stability than having to rely on YouTube ad revenue that can really fluctuate. 

I know everyone wasn't a fan, but one less camera media outlet is not good. Such are the risks when you sell your site to a larger company that only cares about the bottom line, I guess. Not good news for the community as a whole, and really unfortunate for all those who are losing their jobs.

On this board no less!

Amazon told them in January, some left the very next week and got a new job.
During these last 3 months, it appears absolutely nobody in charge has made an effort to save the site or kick up a fuss, let alone sell what is a very valuable asset for certain other companies.
It's ridiculous that Amazon isn't considering a sale.
Jeff must be a bigger loser than even I imagine him to be.
Although not quite as big an idiot as that guy who wasted $44bn on Twitter, the likes of which can't seem to find even .00001% of that amount to preserve 25 years of photographic gear culture.