mpgxsvcd: Why would anyone buy this for $500 when the LX7 was $280 last week. I can walk forward the extra few steps to save $220.
HowaboutRAW - looking at long-since replaced models makes as little sense as comparing the price of an aging model with the list price of a yet-to-become-available one.
The LX7's list price was $449, the LF1's list price is $500. Wait for a while and the price will drop.
Interestingly, Panasonic originally suggested this would be cheaper than the LX7 (in terms of list price, anyway). And in the UK, it is (£379 vs £450)
MrTritium: It has the same sensor than the LX7, but uses it differently. The resolutions are:___|_____4:3_____|_____3:2_____|___16:9_____LF1 | 4,000 x 3,000 | 4,000 x 2,672 | 4,000 x 2,248LX7 | 3,648 x 2,736 | 3,776 x 2,520 | 3,968 x 2,232
- The LX7 only uses the center part of the sensor and always keeps the same diagonal when you change the aspect ratio from 4:3 to 3:2 or 16:9.
- The LF1 uses almost the whole sensor when set to 4:3, and removes upper and lower bands when you set it to 3:2 or 16:9.
Yes - the LX7 uses its sensor to offer a multi-aspect mode (with the same diagonal, regardless of which aspect ratio you use). This is why we show the LX7 as effectively having a 1/1.8" sensor in comparison diagrams.
The LF1 is using the whole sensor but not offering the LX's multi-aspect feature.
Samuel Dilworth: It’s a handsome little thing, too. You can tell Panny was really searching for space by the fact that the flash had to go right where your middle finger rests! (Where it belongs, if you ask me – behind something opaque.)
If the price is right, and that’s a bit of a doubt with the internal EVF, I could be tempted by this LF1.
marike6: The all important RAWs in the Studio Comparison, there seems to be little difference in terms of sharpness between the GRD and Coolpix A. Acutance looks virtually identical, except in the corners and borders which unlike at f2.8, the Nikon is sharper.
High ISO are a different story, as by ISO 800 the Nikon is showing significantly less Chroma noise.
Still, because of the price, and the great GRD ergonomics, I'll be buying a GRD. If I were a rich man, I'd buy the Coolpix A fully loaded with hood and VF.
The key thing about that quote is that I don't say an old pair of shoes (which implies comfort). Instead I talk about a pair of shoes that start to conform if you persevere (which implies a period of some discomfort).
I lay my cards on the table - the Ricoh's interface is based on one we're regularly considered one of the best in compact cameras (albeit with a wearing-in period). The Nikon's is one from the company's entry-level DSLRs that requires a lot of button pushing. I have used both extensively on these cameras and others, and I believe the Ricoh interface is a better fit for the kinds of people likely to spend $800+ on a fixed 28mm equiv camera. That's not prejudice, it's reviewing.
There is more to both cameras than just their interfaces, though. As soon as I've had a chance to use and test both enough to draw an overall conclusion, we'll publish our review.
Samuel Dilworth: This is the key bit:
Canon S110: 98.8 × 59.0 × 26.9 mm, 198 g loadedPanasonic LF1: 102.5 × 62.1 × 27.9 mm, 192 g loaded
That’s an impressive achievement. The lens has the same f-number range as the S110, but over 28-200 mm-e rather than 24-120 mm-e, which incidentally means it will be slightly faster at shared focal lengths. And you get an electronic viewfinder too.
We've been asking. We'll update the moment we get an answer.
DrugaRunda: There is actually a lot difference from those particular samples
Ricoh - nice and even, excellent cornersNikon corners = mushSigma - head and sholuders above the other two in center while about par with Ricoh in corners, and no moire.
If IQ at low iso is a priority Sigma looks like a clear choice.
High ISO, GR has a bit more chroma noise than Coolpix, but also more acutance, it seems that Nikon may be using some NR in Raw, but in principle very similar performance.
The corners of our current (old) test scene are not in the focus plane and shouldn't be sharp. If they are, it suggests fairly pronounced curvature of field.
Kodachrome200: i just think this thing looks great. sony claimed the rx100 was the greatest pocket camera of all time. maybe it was. but now to me this is. well well done
Actually the Ricoh is about 1.5cm wider than the RX100 (head-on) but essentially identical in every other dimension.
Ultimately, though, the RX100 is a very different type of camera - its zoom lens gives it much broader appeal.
whtchocla7e: I remember reading something along the lines of this camera having a 35mm crop mode. Where is that available? Is there a button or a menu setting to turn it on? Is the framing adjusted on the screen?
To me that's as good a having both the 28mm and 35mm equivalents all in one camera. I prefer that to using a wide angle adapter on a 24mm lens ala Fuji. I hope it's true.
There's a sample image in the gallery in the 35mm Crop mode. It's mentioned on page 1 of the preview and is listed as one of the options that can be assigned to one of the Fn buttons.
JohnyP: Another useless preview. In the last 30 days there have been 2 camera reviews! Most cameras are either announced or previewed. Those previewed ones are likely to end up just like Nikon D4 - previewed and forgotten.
One of those reviews and both previews published in that time were by the same writer. As a result, there are other writers close to finishing other reviews and they'll be published shortly.
Also, this is an extension of the preview to take both this and the Coolpix A closer to a final review. There are plenty of other sites that will call their preview a 'review' on day one and then add to it - are you really going to beat us with a stick for being more honest with our readers?
Shamael: Moiré endless, just like the Nikon A. Look the coin over the head of Mikey Mouse, then go to the left on the head left of the one cent coin, look the left side of the head, from the ears down to the neck, then go in the small blue robot and look the Mr Robot inscription, the blue field is like a zebra pattern. The Nikon A has huge moiré in the Indian ocean on the globe, while the GR does here do better job, the blue feathers in front of the Volkswagen picture have moiré on both.
Almost all cameras have some moiré in those spots, the coin over Mikey's head is and the Indian ocean or the Robot is found quiet often to show pattern or zebra stripes. The camera is sharp and offers huge image, but with that amount of moiré, same as Nikon A, those cameras are not what I look for. I do not seek for the problems in the picture of a camera, no camera has perfect picture, but that much moiré is just too much. It's even worse than Canons 5DMk3.
The Ricoh has an option to re-process Raws in-camera with a Color Moire Reduction option if you find moire in your real-world images. We'll be demonstrating how this works as part of the review.
Ryan_Valiente: That's it?
We've been told there are no examples finished enough to be shootable. Any images you may have seen are not from lenses representative of the final performance.
wootpile: Totally off-topic:If that is how they shoot, I can tell which one gets sharper shots while the other has motion blur.. can you?
There's also a chance that I'm not actually trying to shoot, but trying to show the lens to the camera, which is a rather different requirement.
JEROME NOLAS: What is a great sensor good for when you put in Nikon1....
Doesn't this announcement imply it might appear in cameras other than a Nikon 1?
Craig Atkinson: DPR a question if you don't mind. The GRD4, I think unlike the GRD3 did not allow you to preview the 'effects' on the LCD before shooting, when shooting JPEG + RAW. If Jpeg, obviously the screen shows what you'll get. If RAW it doesn't, as expected.If R + J it will show basic b/w but I think that's it.
Could you see please whether if, when shooting jpeg + raw, on all 'filters / effects' you are given a preview on screen?
It's not a huge deal but sometimes for high contrast b/w it's useful.
You can preview all Effects, regardless of file shooting mode. If you shoot an Effect in Raw mode, that becomes the default way of processing it if you re-process in camera.
JohnCarolan: Question for the DP review team, how loud is the shutter? Say compared to the X100?
If you turn all the camera's sound effects off, it's a quiet click. Not, perhaps, quite as quiet as the X100's 'snick' but not terribly different.
fooddudeone: No Manual Exposure for Video? :( ...none for CoolPix A either??
If either of these had Manual Video control, I would easily sell my OMD Now and get one of these :)
I'll correct it first thing in the morning:
The Coolpix A, you can set exposure before you start recording movies, then adjust exposure comp while shooting (in S or A modes).
The Ricoh gives you no control at all - when you're in move mode no exposure controls work before or during shooting.
xc1427: "Alternatively, you can set the ADJ lever to just control ISO."From my experience of using GRD IV, it is not "just control ISO" but "control ISO additionally", which means we nudge the lever left and right without previously pressing it.
I do apologise - I'd tried it and not spotted that subtlety. I'll updated the preview. It's been a while since I used a GXR and this is a lot of camera to learn in a weekend (without a manual).
PK24X36NOW: Sigma again shows the "Big Boys" (i.e., Nikon & Canon) what can be achieved in lens design. You essentially have Sigma to thank for the fact that wide angle zoom lenses even exist, because it was Sigma that showed the stuffed shirts at the camera makers that such lenses could be made, and could be made to produce high image quality, in the first place.
Having said that, this lens also shows how "size and weight" advantages are non-existent when you compare lenses with equivalent DOF range. In fact, this lens is basically as big or bigger, and heavier than, Sigma 24-70 f2.8 FF lenses, which get considerably wider at the short end and considerably longer at the long end, with the same DOF. The new lens hardly has a terrific range in terms of start and end points, and too limited a range at less than 2:1. If they managed a 15-45 f1.8, that would have been a much more attractive lens.
The other thing is, wait till you hear the bleating when they announce the price - LOL.
In what sense is it a marketing trick if it potentially lets you get FF performance out of your current APS-C camera?
Even if you gain nothing in terms of size or weight, you gain something in not having to buy a new camera.
photog4u: Richard: you write;" Our early impressions of the image quality are that the JPEG engine is not doing as well as Nikon's in terms of getting the sensor's capability into a JPEG."
Did you come to this early impression from the test shot only or did you also tinker around with the in camera jpeg settings e.g. sharpness, saturation and contrast?
They're early impressions, so they're based on the defaults.
JWest: Could someone explain TAv mode to me in more detail? As far as I can tell, it's the same thing as shooting in M on any other camera, but with auto ISO turned on. Is that right?
The difference is that very few of the cameras that offer AutoISO in M then allow exposure compensation. And it's nicer from a semantics perspective, since AutoISO in M mode stops it being very manual.