DualSystemGuy: The slow lens is really a bummer on this camera. Only F2.8 on the wide end (RX 100 is F1.8) and F5.9 on the long end is brutal for a P&S. I realize it goes out to 250mm but by 50mm it's already at F4 which is pretty terrible. By 100mm you're already at F5.1 - clearly they cut lots of corners with the lens, and you aren't going to get much for DOF isolation on the already small 1" sensor at such small apertures. If they are targeting enthusiasts with this I think the lens kills it.
As DPR state above, the TZ100 is targeting a currently unoccupied sector of the market: "small camera with a big sensor and a long zoom."
And there's nothing wrong with that.
GodSpeaks: I wish that the manufactures would concentrate on improving the QUALITY of the video, rather than trying to go beyond 4K resolutions. At least for the consumer/prosumer market.
The days of us having to put up with 4:2:0 8 bit video should be over. Instead all we keep getting is the same drek at higher resolutions.
That's an impressive level of entitlement you're expressing there GodSpeaks. The video capabilities we have at our disposal in consumer products would've cost in the --many-- tens of thousands of dollars even just a few short years ago.
The advances in video have far outstripped those of photography in recent times. So instead of the moaning and the whining how about engaging the intellect for a brief moment (challenging I know) and go and purchase a professional level camera if you want professional level output.
"AF makes for very usable action shooting of moving subjects. You can expect in focus shots of crawling babies."
What if I ply it with red cordial?
Demon Cleaner: Another day another cut & paste job:
Page 4: "It lacks a couple of the more basic functions that can be really useful on some of its rivals. It would be really useful to be able to zoom in to the chosen focus point in playback mode, to check focus and shake, sadly this is something this is absent."
A double tap on the image enables selective zoom focus at up to 16x magnification. Every Panasonic camera has had this identical functionality for the past half decade.
Appreciate your patience and for taking the time to reply.
PS. Your arguments make all the sense in the world to anyone who:
* Currently owns or is downgrading from a high-end CaNikon camera; and* Is consequently familiar with one-button 100% magnify; and* Is intimately familiar with Samsung's and Sony's newest cameras; and* Is aware that the DPR staff have been haranguing manufacturers to implement 100% magnify in lower end models.
So basically yourself, your DPR colleagues and a few select others (ie, camera nerds).
Which suggests the review is written BY dpreview staff FOR dpreview staff. The rest of us will be "misreading".
All due respect Rishi Sanyal, but if you specify inside the review what the "rival" cameras are...
"makes it competitive with the likes of Sony's a6000, Olympus's E-M10 or Fujifilm's X-T10."
...then it is improper to claim the camera lacks the basic functionality of its "rivals", if the "rivals" you've nominated don't have that functionality either.
My point specifically is that if you read it from the perspective of someone who is not familiar with the cameras in question (therefore not yourself, nor I) then it will read very clearly and succinctly that the G7 lacks the ability to check focus and shake.
Which is an erroneous claim.
I happily concede that a one-button 100% magnify might be a more "efficient" means of accomplishing it, but I disagree with the implied assertion that a double-tap for between 100% to 800% magnification doesn't allow for focus/shake assessment at all.
MXC: Amateur size sensor
Well suited to your amateur sized intellect.
Do you find that offensive? Perhaps I should've been more considerate.
Demon Cleaner: * Panasonic users request IBIS to better enable the use of Olympus and other third party lenses;
* Panasonic listens and implements IBIS, so their users have stabilisation with Olympus and other third party glass;
* Richard Butler lambasts Panasonic for implementing IBIS, and suggests that in providing stabilisation for Olympus and other third party glass, Panasonic are in effect "building walls", and goes on to suggest that "it's sad if you end up being essentially constrained to Panasonic lenses."
Oh common sense, where art thou?
Revenant, your argument would have merit if Olympus lenses focused poorly on Panasonic cameras, but that's simply not the case. AF is every bit as alacrious on Pana bodies as it is on Oly bodies. In fact the low light AF is noticeably better due to the -4ev sensitivity.
So no, there are no walls. I own both the 45mm f/1.8 and 75mm f/1.8 and AF is lightning quick with both on the GH4 and GX7.
The suggestion that a lack of DFD means I'll use neither is ludicrous beyond belief. And the same goes for the IBIS argument. It's inclusion means I'm MORE likely to use non-stabilised lenses, not LESS.
Ok G-D, I'll bite, how does IBIS "constrain" use to Panasonic glass, "undermine the Micro Four Thirds system", and constitutes Panasonic "building up walls around its part of the garden."?
Please answer constructively. I'm genuinely confused and am interested in your counterpoint.
Fair comment there Narretz, but I was referring specifically to the inclusion of IBIS and Butler's fallacious argument that it will constrain use to Panasonic glass only.
* Panasonic users request IBIS to better enable the use of Olympus and other third party lenses;
AdamT: Hokay Richard ..
I don`t think the IBIS/Lens IS co-working "wall" matters one jot, the fact that it has IBIS at all (like the GX7) makes it far more of an option for use with Olympus lenses than any other Panasonic , 4 Axis simply makes it even more of a practical alternative , who cares if the IS works better with Panny lenses (lets face it, Panny make the best small / slow zooms anyway by far in M43) , it still works far better with Oly lenses than any other Panasonic body and a good few Olympus ones too !
Does it have an AA filter on the sensor ?
how is the E-Shutter done, full 12Bits like the GX7 or the 10Bit compromise of the GM series, G7 and GH4 - does the new sensor allow fast scan and 12 Bits ?
Most importantly - Has the thing got electronic 1st curtain - and is the shutter the clacky rat-trap that graced the GX7 or something nice and quiet like the EM5-II ?
"it's sad if you end up being essentially constrained to Panasonic lenses to get the best out of the camera."
Butler do you even read what you write? I mean, seriously.
How does the inclusion of IBIS constrain one to using Panasonic lenses any more than is already the case on any other (non-IBIS) Panasonic body?
Logic suggests that the inclusion of IBIS makes third party glass a more effective and viable option. It will actively increases the usability of Olympus lenses on the GX8.
How on earth do you twist that into a con?
My comments have merit JakeB, and he knows it too. Everything I raised is factually correct and predicated on common sense and reasoned thinking.
Feel free to add something constructive to the conversation if you wish. Or continue to gutter snipe to your heart's content. I'll happily LOL along with you, although I suspect we might be laughing at different things.
And lastly (sorry, it's frustrating), perhaps consider reading back through the review from the perspective of those who will find it of most value, ie, prospective owners.
It will read to them that not only are there shake issues, but the camera lacks the ability to check for them. So you'll be none the wiser until you get home.
And that's going to be a major disincentive to anyone who values their photography. Hell I wouldn't buy a camera that reviewed like that.
Clearly there is some capability to review focus/shake there, and it's not a major imposition to activate (likely be second nature to those familiar with mobile phones).
And that's fair enough. However the cameras you list in the review as direct G7 rivals probably should in actuality have that functionality if you go on to make the claim that they do.
By your logic, you're suggesting that:1. Photographers are oblivious to where they place the AF point; and 2. A double tap on the point of focus, with 2x, 4x, 8x, or 16x magnification, which is subsequently moveable by touch, does not allow for a review of focus and camera shake; and3. The above functionality is so lacking that it's enough to underpin the claim that the camera "lacks basic functions that can be really useful on some of its rivals."
I guess I should've clarified I was referring to the touchsrceen ILC's!
The LX100's magnified review is activated with the zoom lever. 2x, 4x, 8x and 16x just like all the others.
Another day another cut & paste job:
Demon Cleaner: This is a nicely detailed review. However one thing I take from it is that the G7 is basically a GH4 lite, just without the weather sealing and some pro level video features (luminance settings, etc).
For half the price.
Yet it receives a negative assessment because of it. Which is a really confusing standpoint for mine. Surely we should be encouraging manufacturers to provide more capability/functionality for less outlay, rather than punishing them with lower review scores for giving us more value for money. I don't understand why DPR are actively attempting to dissuade manufactures from taking this path.
Particularly when there are multiple models (GF and GM lines) targeted specifically at the entry level consumer.
Are you suggesting the G6 doesn't exist because there's no DPR review of the thing?
Sure ikfoto, as long as they maintain that approach across reviews. Which they don't. If you read the reviews of the competing cameras listed in the review they are primarily reviewed against the preceding model, with an overarching view to how they fit in the current market. So why hold the G7 to a different standard?