CuriousExistence: I have a Sony RX100, and I use the built-in flash in two cases: for a very effective bounce flash for indoor portraits, and a fill flash at the beach. In both scenarios it works wonderfully.
I'm big into target demographics for devices, and I'm confused on Panasonic's approach to the LX100. The audience for a compact all-in-one camera like this are people who don't want to carry around extra gear that they would have to with an ILC. Are they even going to use a hot shoe? Will they want to carry around a detachable flash?
It seems like Panasonic determined that the only way they could stand apart from Sony in this market segment was to have a larger sensor and brighter lens, but they were forced to leave out features that are important to compact users - a flash and potentially an ND filter.
The G7X seems like it has more of the features that single-camera compact users want integrated.
I think you're right in a sense. This is a serious camera for serious photographers. The "selfie" crowd will no doubt be up in arms over the lack of in-built flash, but this little beauty wasn't really aimed at them anyway.
Thankfully Pana listened to the enthusiasts and went with the EVF instead, and I think the vast majority of us are greatly relieved they did.
Serious Sam: IMO the design is still base on m43 sensor, and seriously even the latest M43 sensor on EM1 and em10 isn't doing so well in high iso.
It is well designed and priced ok. Good for people who want a pro point and shoot. if you need good low light/high ISO performance, you are still better with Fuji or if your budget stretch, get the A7S.
Which is irrational considering the size/weight differential.
Put the 24-70mm on the A7s and it weighs 1kg. The LX100 is 393g. A size comparison on Camerasize: http://j.mp/ZAQp6R
"The RX10 doesn't shoot 4K, but it does have full sensor readout, which means that no lines are skipped."
DPR you're aware that the FZ1000 also does a full-sensor readout for 1080p? Because the above wording in the comparison makes it sound as though this is a unique feature of the Sony that the Panasonic lacks.
Looks like a highly desirable travel camera. If I wasn't so heavily invested elsewhere I'd be all over this thing like a seagull on a hot chip.
"Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 compared to Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10"
That's the funniest headline I've ever seen here!
I've owned several Panasonic cameras, and I own the Rx10.The only Panasonic product I have ever liked was a cordless telephone.Saying a Panasonic anything could even remotely compare to a Sony anything is the most ridiculous thing I've ever read here, and I've read a lot of nonsense.
The only reason I would even take this seriously is if I owned a Panasonic and didn't know any better.
Brand cultists huh. They're an interesting breed.
I tried using the filter control but 'advertising' wasn't listed as an option. Is there any way to stop these types of articles from displaying in the news feed?
Edit: Ok it's listed under "Other News". Unchecking the box in Advanced Mode did the trick.
Jeff: Um, bad news guys: Canon's new enthusiast flagship is being obliterated in sensor performance by the similarly sized m43 cameras.
Richard: Again? *Sigh* Ok lets compare it against the comparatively paltry 1 inch sensor of the RX100 instead.
Jeff: Um, bad news guys: The RX100 is obliterating Canon's new enthusiast flagship in sensor performance.
Barney: No. The RX100 is cramming 20mp onto that thing, the G1X II is only 12mp on a much larger surface area. You've fluffed your tests again Jeff. Go back and do it again mate.
Jeff: I ran them twenty-three times Barney. I requested 7 replacement units from Canon.
Richard: Well there's only one thing for it. We pretend it never existed. You know, like we did for the EOSM. No one will notice if we don't put out a review.
Barney: Wait! I've got it! Why don't we cut and paste "Very good image quality" from one of the previous Canon reviews and just plonk it in the "Pros"?
Richard: Our archives go back that far?
Demon Cleaner: Judging video quality based on static scenes? You guys sure know how to test the encoder...
The quality of a camera's video performance is entirely predicated on how it renders 'movement'. The raft of tests you perform make it appear as though you are completely oblivious to this.
No elements moving through the scene? Not even a single pan? *sigh*
Please (sincerely) get someone who has a basic understanding of video to undertake the video component of the reviews. Outsource if you need to (and you need to).
@ 2eyeseeCon: "bit rates not competitive"Conclusion: "arguably has the best video quality that we've seen."
Talk about a logical fallacy. It really is amateur stuff.
Judging video quality based on static scenes? You guys sure know how to test the encoder...
Ha! This is hilarious. DPR turning the tables and trolling their members with an unboxing video. And everyone fell for it!
Nice to see the DPR crew have a sense of humor :)
BarnET: Where is yabokie the x-trans thrasher.I expected the usual "x-trans is an stupis cost saving piece crap " comment.Maybe he finally found his she-troll.
What an invaluable pearl of wisdom. Thanks ever so much for your wonderful contribution. Now if you would be ever so kind as to delete your account and never post again we'd all be much obliged.
mailman88: Where's the lens selection for this camera? Can't find any 300-400mm lens
Don't forget you can use almost any lens from any system with adapter.
Also the Ex. Tele mode in video, which adds a further 2.6x crop with almost no degradation in image quality (small increase in noise.) So that 100-300mm lens becomes a 260mm - 780mm at the press of an Fn button.
Jogger: Although there is a lot of hype on this forum for this camera, the fact is that m43 is a non-player in the cine market. Others such as Sony and Canon have long released dedicated S35 and FF cine cameras (C100, FS700, F55, F65, etc). This market is dominated by S35 cameras. Whereas, the only m43 cine camera, the Pana AG100 never took off. The m43 mount BMP is even more of a compromise, and after the hype, its fading away.
So the reason you dont see these specs on Sony/Canons is that they dont need to... they are already catering to this market, but, you wont see the F55, F5, etc mentioned on here.
Of course there is a market for a true hybrid stills/video camera that has pro level features/performance and retails for under $2k (likely).
There are many confusing elements to your post, but the one I find most perplexing is that you're referencing dedicated video cameras which retail into the tens of thousands of dollars.
Demon Cleaner: It looks a beautiful camera, certainly much more aesthetically pleasing than the E-M1. However the ISO lock issue and the convoluted & antiquated means of moving the focus point completely detracts from the purity of the shooting experience (for mine).
After initially being a non-believer, the wheel has well and truly turned, and I simply refuse to purchase a camera that doesn't have a well implemented touch screen control anymore.
I'm impressed with the aggression you display towards someone who expresses an opinion that doesn't align with your own. Admirable work my friend. Keep it up.
It looks a beautiful camera, certainly much more aesthetically pleasing than the E-M1. However the ISO lock issue and the convoluted & antiquated means of moving the focus point completely detracts from the purity of the shooting experience (for mine).
Demon Cleaner: "Though the GM1 has a larger sensor than the Sony RX100 II, it doesn't really offer better depth of field control."
So if I attach one of the fast primes or constant aperture zooms I'll pretty much get similar depth of field to that of the RX100 II?
@peevee "They mean with the 12-32 kit lens."
Well that's kind of an important caveat to omit. The main differentiating feature, sensor size aside, is that one is an ILC with over 30 native lenses available.
Making blanket statements that depth of field is similar is dreadfully misleading.
"Though the GM1 has a larger sensor than the Sony RX100 II, it doesn't really offer better depth of field control."
JJ Rodin: EOSHD said the video was essentially superior to the GH3 by a small margin, and only short of the BMCC/PPCC in rendering shadows. So equal or better than GH3 which we all know is only inferior to 5DIII & BMCC/PCC is a solid statement for its video.
So either DPR or EOSHD are not judging well.
The GM1 sensor is a new Panasonic built one, unlike the Sony sensor in GH3, some believe the GM1 foretells what to be expected for GH4 but full 4k video, &/or full sensor scans downcasting! Likely just good 4k video.
Good that Pan did not cripple GM1 like many other cam makers likely would! Good price considering.
Yes the video review section is amateurish in many respects. They write from the perspective of a consumer who would just as readily use their mobile phone for video purposes, but will use the camera if they have it with them.
I wish they'd just leave the video section out entirely if they're not going to bother doing it competently.
Peiasdf: RX100 / RX100 II is just too much camera in such small size that it renders small mirrorless / EVIL camera like GM1 and Pantax Q pointless. Unless the intent is to use 20 f/1.7 or 17 f/1.8 with the GM1, everyone is better served by a RX.
@Jogger. Perhaps the reason why they're so enthused about it is because their photos aren't blurry? Exactly how many GM1 owners have you personally visited to assess their files anyway? Scores I suspect, for you to be able to draw such a definitive conclusion.