buybuybuy: Some Do's and Don'ts:
Do remember that the samples:(1) are just for eye-candy. (2) contain no important discriminatory/distinguishing attributes that may be used as indicators of the performance of a given camera/sensor format.(3) come with more caveats, asterisks, and footnotes than a typical tax document(4) are for people to say "Wow, how great the horse is," "Wow, how great Puerto Rico is," and "Wow, how great the D750 is."
Don't:(1) use your own mind to form opinions about the camera, including but not limited to high ISO performance and performance in different lighting conditions.
Do:(1) remember that when DPR wants you to have an opinion about a camera, they will tell you your opinion (that's the same thing Nikon told them)
Hope that helps!
What a bunch of sh.. I do never listen to what DPR says, i note there objections and finds, then I look the samples, that I often criticize, since some people there have a bad taste and often the shots are of focus. I get a camera, rent one, and then test it myself and make up my mind. I see then if DPR's criticism is justified, and in more than 95% of all critics it is. After that I shoot my galleries, that are then most much more sharp, show the subject that fits me, and I rework Raw my way. After that, I can say if a camera fits me or not, despite all what just any site or magazine can say aboput it. I shoot MF only, that is why I use Sony's mirroless bodies and a Fuji S5 with a split prism matte in it. Some of those pictures are quiet stunning. Rishi has a way to shoot from very unusual angles of view, probably part of his shooting style. But after, all, good work and tks for the excellent rewiew of the D750.
WHY is a question that will never find a correct answer. We all are just Humans, initally lettered by H. Now where do we come from, follow the ray of creation that way, YHWH. We all are here on the end of the chain, and none of us can go the way back. Look at it, you are H and the way back is this WHY, you can't go that way, so, do never ask that question as well, WHY is impossible and never gets a sactisfactory answer. We all know much of the world, we know how things work, how they act, but there are not many from which we know WHY they work that way, and if we do, it's just a part of the whole, we will never know the whole. So, consider this question as useless. The effect we live is coming from us, call it "will", and the cause of it is our own personality. We "ARE" thus we think, and 7 billions of people think different, they are individuals, indivisible in their opinion, where for each of them the only one that counts is his own. So, ask then once more, WHY should we care ?
2 more of them and it will have retractable EVf, I presume.
lcf80: Eugene232: Current generation of u43 sensors (2013 and newer) provide great image quality, with fully usable ISO 1600 and acceptable ISO 3200 - so I don't think you have anything to worry about in that regard. Also mind that LX100 comes with very fast lens, so you're about 2 EV ahead vs A5100 kit lens. You could use ISO 800 F/1.8 on LX100 where you would need ISO 3200 and F/3.6 on Sony. Remember that when you'll be comparing test images.
What is the real killer feature of LX100 is the DFD AF, which is the fastest AF technology available on the mirror-less market today. Then add ability to record high-quality 4K videos to get the full image.
Sony will give you some more details due to 24 MP output, but do we really need that? In most cases images are scaled down to 2 MP or less to be viewed on the web, or printed on A4 at most - and 12 MP on LX100 is more than enough to handle that.
Only thing some people might find lacking on the LX100 is missing articulated screen.
Why? you can run in in electronic shutter up to 1/16000 th
Artistico: If image quality is on par with the specifications, this is going to be an amazing little camera. I'd also be interested to see whether lowering the megapixels from the MFT "standard" of 16 will affect noise and dynamic range. Makes me tempted to trade in my GM1 and get this one. It hinges a bit on image quality too, of course.
It can't, you change the amount of pixels just by cropping the full size of the sensor to 12 mpix, the pitch remains the same and thus noise and dynamic range. The pixel pitch is equal to Sony's 24 mpix aps-c sensor. What will give it a boost, is progression in rework engines inside the camera.
Jogger: No 4k recording?
Butler, 100$ penalty, hahahaha
bar1: Can someone confirm this:
The LX100 post has the following information:
"The LX100 integrates Wi-Fi® connectivity (IEEE 802.11 b/g/n) with NFC (Near Field Communication) technology camera to offer more flexible shooting experience and instant image sharing with easy operation."
There is NO mention of remote control functionality.
This Leica post states:
"The Leica D-Lux’s integrated Wi-Fi module allows remote control from a smartphone or tablet to wirelessly transfer still images and videos using a Wi-Fi connection."
So, does only the Leica version allow remote control? What I'm trying to determine is if the *camera settings* can be changed remotely (shutter speed, aperture, perhaps zoom, etc.).
The LX100 has wireless direct image transmission and remote control. You can use it similar to a GOPRO camera, control all functions from your tablet or cellphone. The only difference Leica has is the DNG format and a different conversion to jpeg engine what makes the Leica image look different. One has first to compare it to original LX100. It is for sure higher priced, but on the end, even if this is ridiculous, we must consider the 3 year warranty and Lightroom included in the price. Add to this the better resale price after a few years, it is just a question if you want to pay the price or not. If you add a 3 year warranty to the LX100 (if there is that option) you are also good for 200$. I have bought all my cameras with extended warranty, my NEX-7 has the second LCD screen replacement done by Sony within 24hours for free, So, one can then not complain to have paid the higher price.
Ok, I will by red dot stickers on e-bay right now and sell you the same 200$ down in price. Leica sucks.
abortabort: DPR, could you please provide the max mechanical shutter speed as well as electronic on these cameras that support both? The max here of 1/16000th and 1/32000th of the X100T would be good to know what the mechanical shutter speed is as electronic is only usable in certain scenarios and has quite number of drawbacks. Is this the same max 1/500th mechanical shutter as the GM1?
it has electronic shutter up to 1/16000, mechanical up to 1/500th
D1N0: I am not going to say that you can buy perfectly good 55 1.8 lenses at yard sales for $5,-
I bought a 24-2.8 Minolta AF lens and use it manually with EA1 adapter. Never had a better lens, and I doubt that any Zeiss lens will come and teach it anything better.
RStyga: There are so many cheaper and excellent MF lens choices, I wonder why one would pay the Zeiss price...
Why does anyone needs a LV bag to carry his trash around, or why do you need a golden Rolex to see time. Questions are never stupid, answers can be. I will not buy a Zeiss for that price, with an adapter and MF, I can get a better lens for less money.
miles green: Looks nice. Very nice actually.But interesting choice of name: "Loxia" in Greek means: not straight, crooked...
At the price they sell, they should be called Luxia.
Unexpresivecanvas: where are the Art Sigmas?
I use an old 30/1.4 on the NEX-7, the results are quiet stunning, a bit of CA, but within limits that can be corrected with ease on PS.
Philthetasmanian: Now we just need a digital Zeiss Ikon with E mount :)
It is planed, possible shown on photokina already. Will it have e or M mount, no one knows yet. It would be nice to have an interchangeable mount, e and m.
BarnET2: Why on earth does Zeiss want $949,- on a simple 1920 based designhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-Gauss_lens#mediaviewer/File:DoubleGauss1text.svg
The OPIC from taylor and obson from 1920 looks very similar.So no R&D in lens design nor in mechanics since it has no AF nor IS.
I just can't fathom where the money has gone too here.
450$ for the lens and the rest for the blue square, you should know that by now. This blue square policy sucks.
Calvin Chann: Removable click, nice. 35 and 50 primes, nice. No AF, sorry, that is a deal breaker for me at this price point. They're not even that small.
those specs are made for video and this is what Zeiss targets, MF is normal on video recording and step-less diaphragm selection too, all actuated by special mounts and stepper motors. It would not surprise me to see gear crown attachments on the market soon for those lenses.
Black Box: This is the first time I hear that autofocus makes lenses less compact. Zeiss just can't make a good autofocus system.
Bob Marley would have been right
Jogger: $950 is a lot of monies for a 50/2.. the excellent Nikkor 50/1.8 can be had for less than $200.
My old manual, full metal Nikon 50/1.4 was 150$ on e-bay. And I doubt at no moment that this Loxia has absolutely nothing it can teach to my "old" Nikon. I do MF only and no video, so I do not care about Loxia's video ability. I wait for a set of manual lenses from Sony that are not tagged with blue squares and that is affordable for just anyone. If you operate Sony, unless you use old manual glass with adapters, your are condemned to buy cameras at dumping prices and lenses where you need to be a millionaire to afford them. This Zeiss mania sucks.
GodSpeaks: What is the point in these cameras, especially the QX-1? Why would I want to use such a camera?
Cell phones have enough power issues, without adding constantly on WiFi and screen to actually be able to use the QX 'cameras'.
Get a quad copter, you'll see
quezra: I finally figured it all out. Critics kept complaining about more bodies than lenses so Sony literally put out an extra body just to troll them.
There are enough lenses in the Sony program, only problem is that there just a few affordable ones.