IF it came with a built-in zoom lens, it might have been something to consider. Right now, it looks like a small bar of soap with a hugh lens on it making it way too big to be carried conveniently. The lens is way too slow and there are not enough of them for the system. Lets hope the P8000 rumors are true, this camera is a joke!
skogredd: So why not in the E-M10 then if mechanical 5-axis really is superior? Why did they develop a specially made crippled version for the E-M10?
If it came with 5-axis IBIS, it would have issues with Shutter Shock, like the Pen E-P5, OMD-M1/M5. I have not read any issues with SS on the E-M10 so maybe 5-axis is not so great after all.
Just another pinhead 1/2.3", 16 MP sensor superzoom, next :/I would not trade my XZ-2 for it!Bring on a 1" sensor semi compact camera to compete with Sony and Canon!Give us a 24-120mm f2-4.0, very sharp lens, 3-axis IBIS, tilting touch screen and weather seal it. I'm looking forward to the rumored Fuji X30 or Nikon P8000.
Rod McD: I'm not a customer for this camera (so maybe I'll never understand the marketing rationale) but I have to confess to being slightly miffed as an Australian. We too are in a bit of a retail downturn. If Sony want to boost sales, why not just reduce the price of the existing model instead of reducing the specs for the regional market?
If no Australians buys the camera, maybe the marketing genious who made the decision to sell a down graded camera there would get fired and Sony would not do it again. Simply reducing the price of the a3000 would have made more sense. Does Sony think Aussies have lower IQ standards than the rest of the world :/
dual12: How many Canon fanboys will fall for this...again?
@TTMartin I guess $300 for body and lens, it's probably better than a P&S, if you don't mind it being 3 times the size/weight with lens with only a 22mm fixed lens and much less responsive. Of course a Panasonic LX-3 has a F2.0 - F2.8 lens for less $ than that and is much smaller/lighter with a 24–60 mm FOV which would make more sense to most people.
What is the reason it will not be sold in the European or US markets? Seems like that limits the sales possibilities just a bit? Does anyone know why Canon is doing this? I'm not interested in such an ugly, bland camera with so few features, just wondering why they limit sales to only one region.
I hope not, there are real cameras that have come out since this Casio that people would really be interested in. This is a camera the nobody in their right mind would be interested in, considering the competition that just came out with much better specs and prices.
Just another toy type POS P&S camera IMO with another pinhead sensor capable of taking pictures at up to ISO 400 or less, in good light and up close. The price they are asking compared to what is out there is ridiculous, are they crazy. I'll bet this will be the worst selling P&S in history. What a waste of R&D time and company resources.
Dougbm_2: This does seem overshadowed by the RX10 and even bridge zooms such as the FZ200. I wonder who will buy this?
Just saying that it would have been nice to see at least a new, more efficient 2/3" sensor instead of the small 1/1.7". I also thing the RX10 should only cost $8-850 and the Stylus 1 more like $600 in a smaller/lighter package, rear/flush mount EVF without that HUGE hump. Too expensive and too big IMHO.
@T3... unfortunately, the size and efficiency of the sensor matters more that a few centimeters of the camera size. If Oly could have designed the camera with at least a 2/3-1/1.2" sensor, it would/could have been a LOT better and a possible consideration!!! :-(
If Sony can do it with a 1", why can't Oly?! Also, that Huge hump makes it look ridiculous for a P&S. Put a flush mount one on the left side :/
solarider: It would be interesting to know what size/type is the imaging sensor, megapixels don't exactly say much.
Are you going to review this camera?
IF Panasonic claims are true: "Technology to improve color saturation by approx. 10% and a redesigned on-chip lens that enhances light condensation to achieve approx. 10% higher sensitivity. Noise generation is minimized in both pixel circuit and digital signal readout circuit for better S/N ratio by approx. 25% and detail reproduction by approx.10% compared to the LUMIX DMC-GX1". Unfortunately, I have seen those kinds of marketing claims (lies) before and they never materialized once reviewed. Now, if would be very interested if they would have said it had all those improvements over the GH3, THEN, I would be something to get really excited about.
I think DPR should do a Review on this camera as soon as it is released! It seems like it could be an alternative to the G15 and Nikon P7700 IQ is as good or better than either of them. I did not get the G15 because the IQ was just not as sharp as I expected/wanted and only 5X zoom or P7700 because of size and slow response times. The LF1 seems like it could possible overcome both of those issues. It is also smaller/lighter and could be a real contender if the IQ/sensor/lens combo delivers as it just might do. If the noise level is very low from 28-100mm in good light with very sharp detailed images, I would be interested in giving it a try. I can't wait to see it's images in the comparison tool against other small pocket-able P&S cameras.
Big deal, looks like another POS pinhead sensor with way tooooo many MP that takes noisy images. What is the point? Who whats it? What a waste of time, R&D, time, money, etc......!!!! Why don't they make something that could actually take great pictures with.
tron555: There is no fine detail in any of the cameras tested. Drag the comparison window over the watch in the lower right hand corner. Then, choose the Olympus OM-D E-M5, Pen E-PM2, or any other "Good" camera and see the difference. Not impressed one bit, especially for the price and features the GR and DP offer.
Are you saying that the JPEG engine in ALL the other cameras will not show any detail? I'm getting tired of certain cameras being able to be used in RAW only mode (like the Fuji X20), especially for the price they are asking. Did you look/compare the upper part of that watch and see how little (no) detail was shown :/ Unbelievable.
There is no fine detail in any of the cameras tested. Drag the comparison window over the watch in the lower right hand corner. Then, choose the Olympus OM-D E-M5, Pen E-PM2, or any other "Good" camera and see the difference. Not impressed one bit, especially for the price and features the GR and DP offer.
If Fuji (or any company) could/would manufacture a 1-inch (or slightly smaller) sensor with a 24–224 mm, F2.0 – F4.0, high quality lens with sharp images and great IQ, I would be all over it! If anyone could do it, Fuji might be able to since they make their own sensors and lenses. I hope it happens but not holding be breath, but that would be a perfect camera for me all my needs. So far, all bridge cameras with pinhead sensors basically suck (big time) when it comes high resolution/sharp images.
"IF" Fuji can live up to ALL of it's marketing hype/press release promises and not have any of their famous 'white orb' like issues, this just might be a possible upgrade candidate. Those are some VERY big claims, like 30% less noise and 20% more resolution, and that extremely fast AF time! Only time and reviews will tell the true story. I personally hope they are all true, BUT something tells me they will not be able to deliver :(
toomanycanons: And if you kept the scale of the above sensor size graphic, an APS sized sensor would fill the page, an FX sensor your living room. Just sayin'...
Andy, I did not confuse the 2/3" sensor with the 1/2.3" sensor. I was just saying that I think many more companies should include a 2/3" sensor in their cameras. It is 50% larger than the 1/1.7" sensor which should give much better low light capability and IQ. It seems like the perfect size to enable a fairly small fixed lens camera to get better IQ than the current 1/1.7" cameras.
Really, how many 2/3" size sensors have been introduced in the past 4 years, by how many companies. What is the percentage of 2/3" compared to 1/1.7" and 1/2.3" sensors that are on the marked now, maybe .2%?