"I kno0w that shot of Aunt Edna is on this card somewhere".
Spectro: no real issues with the photos, but the UK don't seem to have much wildlife to photograph. sad photo of the puffin.
Just wait until the pubs empty out.
nick66davis: mmm.....mainly birds, fish and seals....bit limited in scope. The best picture is the silhouette of the gnat.....my numble opinion.....but tbh...none of them make me go...wow!!
Be careful or the usual DPR suspects will label you a "hater".Expect the following:1. a lecture on art from one of the forum's experts.2. a request from someone along the lines of "why don't you show us one of YOUR shots of a shark!"
I agree with you on the "limited in scope" and non wow factor. To me these are just okay.
I will enjoy the discussion here. I must admit I don't shoot wildlife often. I appreciate seeing exceptional shots of this type. Living near the ocean I have seen many great shots taken by friends of sea life so perhaps I am biased.
photofan1986: Very honest performance from such a small sensor.For those looking for a high quality all-in-one camera with excellent ergonomics, it may fit the bill. However, it's just that: a small-sensored compact camera. Don't expect miracles.
Great post that I am in full agreement with. While checking these out it occured to me that Fuji can get the most out of a small sensor. I feel the same way about the Pentax Q. The images are good but in the end I would go for a camera along the lines of the RX100 or GM1. Others will be happy with the X30 and good for them.
mcshan: Not another rebadged Panasonic !
Thank you Waimak for having a sense of humor and being smart enough to get the joke.
The just kidding (jk) is right there! Geez.
Not another rebadged Panasonic !
chj: I have to quality my earlier glowing review of the GM1. At night with the 20mm/f1.7, it's a great camera. But with the kit lens in daylight/low light, my Canon S100 totally outperforms it. Faster shutter speed at lower iso with better zoom and more portability. To make the GM1 competitive, you'd have to buy a faster zoom, which puts the price of the GM1 well into the 1000+ range, and it would no longer be portable at all.
I have an S90 and 95 and the first RX100. We have been shooting with a new GM1 for two weeks and it beat the other three in image quality. The biggest surprise? The quality of lowlight indoor shots at 3200. A very pleasant surprise.
Glad Greg is safe. Gear can be replaced.
Maybe somewhere there are animal or sea creature websites seeking weather photos for a social media contest.
Cars rust in part due to weather so perhaps car show photos would work.
Where is his cigar?
No doubt the monkey used the LCD for chimping.
Zvonimir Tosic: I still have the original Q and I think it is an amazing camera; I have used it to publish photographs and for documentary and research work.I find it more user friendly than a smartphone, and with handling that exceeds many DSLRs. There are many excellent photographers who sell large prints made from images taken with an iPhone. So what is wrong with a Q and its 1/1.7" sensor and an array of very good lenses? Sensor size only matters in DPR forums brawl — nowhere else.
halfway, I won't even bother trying to have a serious discussion with the Q fanboys. If they are happy good for them but the GM1 is by far the better camera and system.
iAPX: Where is the point for a 1/1.7" sensor, when there is offer with 1"™ sensors (that are largely under 1 inch), and APS-C sensors.
hi iAPX, The Q has a certain following and if the small sensor meets their needs fine. The small (tiny) GM1 has a much larger sensor and some great lenses to go along with it and is a better camera but I won't try and convince the Q fans (fanboys?) that. As we all know the shooting experience is a big part of photography and if the Q makes them happy good for them.
Revenant: The naming scheme really makes sense. First the Q, then the Q10, then the Q7, and now the Q-S1. Anyone dare to guess what they'll call the next one?
I don't mind the concept but there is no way I would take Q over the Panasonic GM1 which has a much larger sensor and some terrific lenses available.The GM1 is also very small.
iAPX: I know some crew of dpreview thought that I am a troll while criticizing some cameras (ie a mirorless full-frame camera that just works well with a BIG tripod and big lens for landscape photography, and seems to be a fail for any other usage, reading the full review! lol).
I think the Leica T is not a camera. Being a camera is a side-effect. It's a luxury statement, the one I will take with me, with a Summicron or Noctilux (and M adapter ring), if I where wealthy, really wealthy.
The same way that wealthy people wear interesting watches, they might give time, but it's a side-effect.
PS: I owned 2 Leica compact camera, a D-Lux3 and now a Leica C (type 122), that are Panasonic cameras, conceived (lens+sensor) by Leica, the second one being Audi-designed. And I like them.
Hi iAPX, I didn't clearly or unclearly state that. By "if it IS (new emphasis by me) a good performer" I'm leaving it open ended. The camera is new and the jury is still out. I personally don't know if the camera is or isn't any good. Leica can still surprise. The X Vario has exceeded my expectations. If the T's IQ matches or exceeds the X Vario that would make it appealing but I really don't need another system camera as the Fuji XE1/various lenses is my most recent combo setup. The RX1R is simply amazing when a fixed lens will do.
I simply can't agree or even relate to your "to be seen with" thing. I wasn't trendy 60 years ago so why start now if that is what you mean.
Take care. Thanks for the reply.
I am not "..wealthy, really wealthy" and have owned several Leica camera and lenses over the years. It is all about choices. I don't care about expensive watches.
I know there is a worldwide slow economy but I really do believe it is about choices. A friend of mine asked me why I buy so many cameras. This same friend smokes a carton of butts a day (what does that cost?) and he drops about $40 a night drinking beer most nights with a group of guys. He has season tickets to the New Eng Patriots (American football). I don't smoke, drink or take in many sporting events. I DO like shooting with various cameras. Had I not purchased a Leica X Vario and a Sony RX1R I might have considered the T if it is a good performer. I love the images I get from the most recent Sony and the X Vario.
Anyway I believe it is about choices rather than being wealthy.
Calvin Chann: I find the comments on here hilarious. People who have not held or used the camera are pontificating on it and stating that their current choice is better. If it wasn't so sad, it'd be funny.
Hi Calvin, Good post!
I have to laugh at all the "wealthy" and "rich" comments. While it isn't cheap one does not have to either rich or wealthy to buy one. Many posters here will not agree with the judgement of some that this is a worthy purchase but can we please stop with the "wealthy" comments?
mcshan: My local library is huge and very old. It looks like a castle. Years ago due to cut backs they did away with "book runners" and gave the public access to the shelves. It is very intricate with winding metal stairs etc. They also have an elevator and do their best to make it handicap accessible. Library staff will still help anyone who asks.
"Runners" are a neat concept. Whenever they couldn't find what I wanted I always thought "I bet I could find it". Human nature I guess. Yes, as noted above many stores has runners. In some ways the good old days.
Hi JABB66, I don't have any photos on hand BUT please Google Pollard Memorial Library (Lowell, Mass) and select " images". It is an amazing building. The homepage says it opened in 1844.
Hope this is helpful and thank you for the reply. New construction has it's place but I love the old majestic buildings.