you know that Canon has plateaued out when you see this sort of release. Great innovation there guys
Happens here in Australia too.
noflashplease: If a Chinese start-up introduced a camera with the same specifications, and yet another (unnecessary) proprietary lens mount, at even 1/10th the price of this Leica, they would be mercilessly mocked and ridiculed. The world doesn't need another proprietary lens mount. I will give JK Imaging the benefit of the doubt for the new "Kodak" Pixpro S-1, if only because it expands upon an existing non-proprietary lens mount. If Leica had followed in the footsteps of Panasonic with a M43 camera, I would applaud them, even with this silly "Made in Germany" sales gimmick.
Maybe it's time for Leica to stop producing any cameras and just concentrate on rebranding Panasonic cameras with (admittedly) improved firmware?
Indeed, its all about how it feels in your hand and naturally the brand. Ouh ouhh it feels solid and premium. Now, let me hold the camera.
Joseph S Wisniewski: A Samsung S4 has a 9.88 watt-hour battery. That's 35568 watt-seconds. To charge that in 26 seconds at 90% efficiency requires 1520W.
Just what everybody wants, a phone that has a 30-pound, $1000 charger that requires exclusive use of a domestic circuit, like a refrigerator does.
Oh, and the phone is a low voltage device. 1520W at 5V is just over 300A. Anyone know a 300A DC connector that's smaller than a cell phone?
Every year or two for the last 12 years, dpReview has ran a 30-second charging battery story. It's sort of the ultimate solution to a problem that doesn't actually exist. Battery technology far outstrips charger technology. 5-10 watt chargers are a practical size, weight, and cost, and 1-2 hours is an acceptable charging time to get that size and weight of a charger.
Wonder what sort of explosion one gets if it shorts? Small hand grenade with chemical mist?
it does look interesting, but I wonder how different it is optically to the Panasonic 14mm f2.5 with the x0.79 adapter? That outfit costs (new) in total something like US$480 and weighs totally 125g (about half). Of course if you already *have* the 14mm its even more attractive to get the GWC1 :-)
samples on my bloghttp://cjeastwd.blogspot.fi/2013/10/panasonic-079-wide-adaptor-on-14mm.html
at the risk of being obvious, lenses do work and using them to be capturing less of the scene will always mean that even a basic digicam will beat a high end phone on telephoto. Two years ago I compared my 2009 Nokia E72 to a panasonic digicam. At wide the results are better for the Nokia, but it was clear that I wouldn't even waste my time with zooming.
Marty4650: "The AF-on button is now easier to press, and the hand grip is better" just about sums it up.
Why did they bother with so many very minor improvements?
This is a very slightly better camera than a D4, but provides very little reason to upgrade from one. The probably should have waited two more years so they might have some more significant improvements to offer.
> "Why did they bother with so many very minor improvements?"because the sheep fuss around over meaningless stuff not knowing whats better till they're told, meanwhile the goat is headed for the water hole because it knows where it is ... the sheep follow it
Quick question. You say "During live view (before a half-press of the shutter button),"
what other view does the GH have?
So, seems Panasonic had the formula RIT from the start. No "faux prism" comments now ...
Tomee21: But why 15mm? Why not 12? Or at least 14? Those would make more sense to me than a 30mm equivalent.
as you just observed about the 14mm, Panasonic already makes a lens that fits that range, its the 20mm ;-)
great stuff. Of course if you didn't put so much clutter on your site in the first place it would load fine on a mobile in low bandwidth.
but its nice to see an alternative happening :-)
adhemar: Long, long ago dPreview made camera reviews. Now they make previews. To-morrow they'll do rumors.
Meet you in the basement.
by the time you get there they'll be gone