Like a bad movie, the reruns keep coming...
Guess we now know where the designers who lost their jobs at Hassy went... :P
Pritzl: I think the next iteration of this compact will be incredible. It's a great camera as is. However, if Panasonic threw in an articulating and/or touch-sensitive screen, allowed us to program the Filters/iA buttons, added EC in Manual mode + Auto ISO and possibly a built-in ND filter the LX200 could be a dream camera for me. Better jpeg processing would be nice, if only to cut short any false negative perceptions about IQ. I noted the latter the first time we saw the image samples and everyone was crying "soft!" Appears to be a JPEG-only issue.
So yes, I'm intrigued, but not enough to part with $900 at the moment when I already have a DSLR and a compact. Then again, I have caved and given in to GAS before.
I understand that, but it's not exactly the same. I prefer to focus on the scene rather than the exposure meter.
@teddoman, never understood that dichotomy. It makes no sense at all given the premium commanded by these cameras; it's not like adding both would erase the profit margin.
@mpix, I was ready to buy (and still might) but can't justify "settling" when I have other cameras doing the job for the time-being. If, for some reason my X20 meets an untimely end though... then yes, this is the one I would get. I really hope they take the Fuji approach instead (perhaps not on the button placement though ;) ) of just improving on a winning formula instead of re-positioning the product each time.
Fuji X-T1 is another camera on my wishlist for I win the lottery though. Just can't justify it on top of my existing gear, no matter how much I like it. :(
Wonder what Olympus' response might be?
I think the next iteration of this compact will be incredible. It's a great camera as is. However, if Panasonic threw in an articulating and/or touch-sensitive screen, allowed us to program the Filters/iA buttons, added EC in Manual mode + Auto ISO and possibly a built-in ND filter the LX200 could be a dream camera for me. Better jpeg processing would be nice, if only to cut short any false negative perceptions about IQ. I noted the latter the first time we saw the image samples and everyone was crying "soft!" Appears to be a JPEG-only issue.
Someone mentioned how this damaged Hasselblad's reputation and I can attest to that personally. As one of the hoi polloi, I know next to nothing about their medium format heritage. My only real exposure to the brand has been these horrendously "designed" and horribly over-priced mis-steps. Their name has been irreparably tarnished in my case. Then again, I guess I was never the target customer for either these products or their medium format cameras.
There is a lot less chroma noise in the 7Dii files. Easily a stop better than the others in that regard. However, I am not seeing significantly more detail in most areas; has Canon decided to bake in NR into the RAW files too now? :P
Nice to see the LX100's ISO performance reflect its sensor size advantage vs the other 2 compacts. More surprising though is how much detail it captures despite its resolution handicap.
It seems the initial concerns around "soft" sample images may have been the product of a combination of suboptimal jpeg rendering, real lens weakness at wide angle and wide aperture (not really surprising for anyone who has used wide angle lenses) with a prodigious helping of trigger happy forumites with a severe case of jumping-to-conclusionitis.
Any chance we can view some more RAW conversions? At least that would eliminate the JPEG processing as a potential source for the perceived lack of sharpness. There appears to be only one RAW sample and there the shadows appear to have been pushed which results in noise obscuring fine detail.
Pritzl: For me, the top reasons for opting for a fixed lens compact with a larger sensor over a CSC are:
1. The combination is usually quite a bit smaller than a CSC with an equivalent lens. It's not a huge difference but it's the difference between pocket/belt-pouch and a dedicated camera bag. And, since the point of a secondary camera is to always be with you, this is a significant difference. It's much easier to slip the compact into a jacket pocket or belt pouch than taking your other camera bag.
2. As a secondary camera, I know I don't care for starting another collection of bodies, lenses and flashes while emptying my pocket. I already have my APS-C Canon gear to do that.
3. Being lighter and smaller, it is hopefully more discreet to carry and use. If I had a dollar for every time my wife rolled her eyes as I lugged the Canon on family outings, I'd probably afford to buy both! :P
Oh I know. A couple of years ago I took only the Fuji X10 on vacation and it was heaven; at least vacation-wise. Unfortunately, I missed some decent photo opportunities due to the limited 28mm starting point for the lens, limited DR and dodgy low light performance. Still got some decent keepers though.
For me, the top reasons for opting for a fixed lens compact with a larger sensor over a CSC are:
Pritzl: Dang it! You guys missed the most significant question: X-Trans RAW processing support by 3rd party software. JPEGs are nice, but until RAW processing (particularly in Lightroom) becomes completely hassle-free, it's hard to accept Fuji X-Trans for your only camera. Any chance for a follow-up?
Which may speak to how bad the original demosaicing must have been. That said, the X-Trans is such a departure from the standard bayer filter I'm not surprised it had some initial issues. Didn't expect these issues to linger so long though.
Thanks Dr_Jon, but I am not about to increase my workload. Lightroom is what I use for everything else and I won't jump through hoops in order to own what is otherwise admittedly a very nice system.
Thanks for clarifying Jeremy. I admit that I have not looked too closely at more recent results so I'll check it out.
Every time my heart says you'll love the X system, my brain reminds me that my 70D is the more complete do-it-all camera. I just wish I had the luxury of investing in both systems.
Thanks Jer. Did not see that in the interview. Mind me asking where it's from?
Either way, it's a bit disappointing as I have a high opinion of Fuji responsiveness based on prior experience. Denial is hardly what I was expecting.
Dang it! You guys missed the most significant question: X-Trans RAW processing support by 3rd party software. JPEGs are nice, but until RAW processing (particularly in Lightroom) becomes completely hassle-free, it's hard to accept Fuji X-Trans for your only camera. Any chance for a follow-up?
I'm having a real hard time sticking with my decision never to buy a camera with a fixed screen again. The combination of large sensor, bright lens and analog controls in a reasonably compact form factor is extremely appealing.
whtchocla7e: The point-and-shoots are alive and well.
The Nex 3/5, the small m4/3 cams from Oly and Panny, the Nikon 1, the Q from Pentax, the premium compacts from various manufacturers?
They're all point-and-shoots in disguise. They sell in mass quantities, the majority of the buyers never purchase an additional lenses or accessories.
Your casual photographer may now have a more capable camera with interchangeable lenses (and they may not even know it!) but the point-and-shoot mentality does not change.
The definition of a point-and-shoot should be more dynamic to reflect the current state of the (lower end) camera market.
You are free to call it whatever you want. However, the meaning intended by the article is patently clear.
That last picture should have been a half-full (or half-empty depending on your perception of the mark II) glass.
Pritzl: So how much do we pay for the pleasure of advertising the red dot?
Insults are lame. I will not partake. Welcome to my ignore list JD.