draschan: just tried it for a day. a friend got the fancy leica version. it's an excellent excellent camera. the lens is simply amazing. the controls are phantastic!!! aperture on lens, time and compensation dials. nice viewfinder (although I have little comparison with viewfinders). fast, reliable. and the lens. did I mention it? the lens. it is 1,7 -2,8. the wide angle seems better than my excepensive olympus 12mm. It is a loveable camera. don't see much (or any) difference to my gm1 concerning the 12 vs 16mp. I personally would prefer a touchscreen and I'm not sure why it's not included. the extra leica lens hood is also great... as far as I can tell all panasonic I used did amazing video, I am looking forward to test the 4k (and extract 8mp images from it). so only downside: if you like touch then wait or get the lovely gm5. panasonic is really trying hard to please their customers.
The 12mm prime is a good but not great lens. The 7-14mm f/4 zoom, which is at its best at 7mm, even resolves better than it at 12mm.
Beckler8: The low zoom ratio makes it hard to consider this for general purpose video.
Camcorders can offer greater reach because they have a sensor commensurate in size to those found in a mobile phone.
mpgxsvcd: I wonder why they couldn’t have produced a camera like this a few years ago. I know the auto focus tech was not as good and you wouldn’t have had the 4K video. However, couldn’t they have put a 4/3s inch sensor in this size body back then?
Could they have produced this lens a few years back? Were they just waiting for the software correcting technology to catch-up with this lens design?
Apparently it was only recent advancements in lens technology that made it possible.
Beat Traveller: Thanks for publishing this. It sounds like a very capable camera.
Too bad the Australian price is an absolute gouge :(
"Too bad the Australian price is an absolute gouge"
It's actually cheaper here. US$900 converts to AU$1026. Yet Gerry Gibbs has local stock listed for $999.
Demon Cleaner: I'm still somewhat flummoxed by DPR's obsession with performance when compared to a full-frame camera. Most people will be weighing up whether a GH4 is worth the extra expense over something like a Canon APSC. That's where the value of the GH4 ultimately lies, and I think that comparison would be far more useful to the masses.
Filmmakers made up their minds regarding the GH4/A7s many moons ago. They don't wait 12 months for DPR to release their review.
G1Houston they published a 16 page Comparison Review between the A7s and GH4 a couple of months ago. What value is there in regurgitating the identical information verbatim in this review?
Surely some basic level of comparison against the GH4's direct competition is warranted?
You're telling me no one is interesting in knowing how much better the video image quality is compared to an E-M1, A6000 or CaNikon enhusiast camera? Because these are the questions constantly raised by prospective ILC owners on PHOTOGRAPHY forums.
DPR have written this review for filmmakers and have completely overlooked that photographers wanting to take video seriously might also have an interest too.
Why isn't there a comparison of DFD performance to phase or on-sensor phase detect? Why no comparison of video image quality or low light performance between these direct competitors? Why no explanation of this new 4K photo mode or the quality of the stills it provides?
It's all a great mystery. Unfortunately DPR have decided for us that the only people interested in the GH4 are those who want the size & bulk of a FF camera system and are prepared to carry external recorders and spend upwards of $4k on their system. I respectfully think they're mistaken.
I disagree Zdman. If you frequent photography forums you'll see the GH4 get a mention whenever someone touts video performance as an important consideration. However it's extraordinarily rare for them to say they have a budget of $4000 and are happy to carry around an external recorder to access the 4K video (as required by the A7s).
It is far more common for them to be considering other enthusiast level crop sensor cameras. This is the market segment for the GH4. The camera just so happens to be a hybrid and shoot internal 4K. It's not a FF competitor!
Those people will come to DPR looking for enlightenment as to the advantages of the GH4 over cameras such as the Olympus EM-10, Sony A6000, and CaNikon's enthusiast offerings. Yet there's nothing here for them. Certainly no comparison of video performance to assist with making an informed decision.
As I posted above, the LX100 can record 4K. Are you suggesting they should start comparing compact cameras to FF behemoths?
My point is that the parameters established for stills comparisons are every bit as relevant for cameras that have video capabilities.
There's a myriad of relevant questions facing everyday photographers that DPR have chosen to overlook, instead heading off on this obtuse tangent from a "filmmaker's" perspective that almost no one has any real interest in. It's an opportunity lost and I feel DPR have failed to grasp who their audience is on this one.
Realistically only a sprinkling of photographers would give serious consideration between an A7s & GH4. If someone wants a FF camera they'll look at FF cameras. If video is important they'll accordingly weigh their options from within that segment. The same goes for people after a crop sensor.
DPR have compared crop sensor cameras against crop sensor cameras for stills since time immemorial. Why is it that this comparison is suddenly no longer relevant when video enters the equation? The new compact LX100 can shoot 4K, is it now to be measured against FF cameras as a consequence?
I think DPR missed an opportunity to address concerns facing a far larger proportion of their readership. Photography forums are inundated with the same questions from mobile phone upgraders and prospective ILC owners:
"I'm upgrading for travel; size & weight are of paramount consideration; I want exceptional stills & video in a single package; what camera for me?"
I'm still somewhat flummoxed by DPR's obsession with performance when compared to a full-frame camera. Most people will be weighing up whether a GH4 is worth the extra expense over something like a Canon APSC. That's where the value of the GH4 ultimately lies, and I think that comparison would be far more useful to the masses.
mumintroll: Many people arguing that it has 4K video and? How many from you have 4K TV or monitor? Me not and I will not have it anytime soon. Sure 4K is the future but today?
This is the reason why people are shooting 4K now, and it has nothing to do with displaying the content on 4K monitors/tv's:
108: Don't know what to say either. Based on these samples I would not buy this camera . Based on the Oly Em10's samples here on Dpr I would never have bought it either but then I have seen good pics out of the EM10 from people that posted on their galleries . I would buy the Canon 70D based on the Dpr samples, although there's a guy saying the pics are washed out and the next saying the pics are over saturated . Then someone writing they are not even better than his Casio P&S, but I have owned a P&S and to my eyes the 70D's pics are not those of a compact camera . So this brings me to say that these sample images indeed , as Artistico rightly pointed out, look like compact output to me also . Have to wait further with buyers' feedback in order to make an opinion .
"you might enlighten me as to what is a photo "taker" ?"
Someone who fell in love with the craft of photography and had earnest visions of one day becoming a photographer, yet got lost along the way.
^^ The incoherent ramblings of a photo 'taker'.
EinsteinsGhost: @Damien (author): Why is there no mention Sony RX100 at all? It is LX100's most direct competition (the article wasted way more space providing irrelevant history lessons).
If you read the article then it's pretty self-evident that the comparison being made is to interchangeable lens cameras, and addresses the relevance of such enthusiast level compacts in today's market.
It seemed like a quality article to me and made for quite an enjoyable read.
telefunk: "I'm probably in a minority here, but I don't really use the EVFs on these small cameras. In a way it is making it too big. Used to have the LX3 and LX5, which I loved."
Same here. Love my LX5. Would rather have flash and a flipscreen. Viewfinders intimidate your subject. Makes you look like you're serious about photography. People don't mind if you look casual like, shooting from the hip.
"Makes you look like you're serious about photography."
Huh? It's a serious camera for enthusiast photographers. If you don't want to be taken seriously use a mobile phone.
Chris Yates: "We are very focused on getting the best image quality. I’m not sure what measurements you’re looking at but when it comes to dynamic range for example we consider image quality as a whole, from low to high ISO sensitivities and on balance we consider our sensors to be the best."
"We have been very serious in mirrorless from the beginning"
Masaya, whatever you're smoking, give me a drag.
I'd be testing the air filtration system back at the factory for hallucinogens.
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.
No I honestly have no clue what you are talking about.
I refer you to the topic title: Hands-On with the LX100. It is *not* Hands-On with Serious Sam. News FLash hotshot: You are not the center of the universe. The world does not revolve around you. You need to stop wallowing in your own magnificence for the briefest of moments and consider that other people might have different needs.
Only the intellectually enfeebled go to a compact camera topic and bombastically assert that the camera in question isn't going to get the job done because it doesn't have a FF sensor. It's laughably absurd.
Compact cameras are allowed to exist. People are allowed to find purpose with them. You are allowed to go post your unintelligible self absorbed ramblings on the Sony Alpha/NEX E-mount Talk forum. The cool thing being that they will actually have some relevance there!
Sorry dude but we're talking about the "compact" segment here. Please reference a dictionary for an explanation as to its meaning. We'll wait while you do so...
Ok you're back? Excellent! Now list us a FF camera with equiv lens to the LX100 that is either of similar size/weight or smaller. To simplify matters somewhat, lets say we're talking about a camera that will fit comfortably in a jacket pocket.
And no the A7s with 24-70mm combo that weighs 1kg and has a 15cm depth from rear to lens tip does not meet the criteria (I refer you back to that dictionary definition of 'compact'. It's a tricky one I know).
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.