Looking at this comparison of pictures and persons you wouldn't think that about 46 years have gone by. Congrats!
Thanks for sharing the personal story behind it!
Rodger Kingston images in the showcase and the information that he uses an X10 and an X20 made me curious about his book (mentioned at #10). The title "Searching for Edward Hopper" has somewhat of a marketing trick: There's the cover photo that quotes the famous painter, with a number of pictures following that might be seen as Hopper style; other pictures let me think of Walker Evans. Overall, the book contains a mass of pictures which are just good if not great snapshots. By the way, in Part II, #28. Morning Coffee, Belmont, MA 2007, there's a picture of Stephen Shore's "Uncommon Places" on the table, if I'm right!
Well, Rodger, I'm not an expert on selling art, but I guess, there are too many (good) images in just one book. Maybe you had better done with a book containing not more than about 35 pictures and an additional print; later on a second package of that kind (and a third one?). Nevertheless, your photos stand for a capable photographer!
Cal22: The high resolution mode of the OM-D E-M5 II is really fantastic as everybody realizes who checks the studio test scene out (in comparison with ff cameras). The caveat with this mode is, you have to use a sturdy tripod and your object may not move otherwise it gets blurred.
Well, I remember an Olympus representative saying (here on Dpreview), their engineers want to build a 4/3 camera that allows to shoot in high resolution mode at 1/80th sec (which means handheld). The technical problem and its solution has certainly to do with sensor size. Since Olympus and Sony go together in some respect I could imagine Sony to launch a 1inch RX with high resolution mode at 1/125th sec.; the IQ would be equal to an APS-C sensor. Let's hope for such a capable compact at the next Photokina!
No, I haven't!
I suggest taking the studio test scene (in full screen mode) within e.g. the Samsung NX1 review. Compare the IQ of the NX1 and of E-M5 II (in High Res. mode) and of Sony A7 II or A7 R.
Concentrate on the playing cards in the upper part of the studio scene and therein on the middle card (jack of hearts). I'm sure that will convince you! You can also change from High Res. mode to Normal in order to see how huge the difference is.
Are we at the eve of a revolution? A Sony RX 100 model will likely be the first camera providing that great IQ handheld - with Olympus 4/3 cameras following. Soon photographers won't carry a bulky DSLR around anymore unless they have to.
The high resolution mode of the OM-D E-M5 II is really fantastic as everybody realizes who checks the studio test scene out (in comparison with ff cameras). The caveat with this mode is, you have to use a sturdy tripod and your object may not move otherwise it gets blurred.
Cal22: Samsung should offer an EVF as an accessory: Many potential customers will turn their back to this interesting camera because you can't buy an EVF!
You're right as to the NX100! But nowadays EVFs are way better than they were in 2010, and if Samsung want to be regarded as a serious camera maker they'd better not ignore the various demands of serious photographers. The NX1 might be a good camera, but its SLR-style is not for everybody. I had hoped for a capable alternative, the NX500 unfortunately can't be because of its lack of an EVF.
Generally I'd prefer an external EVF over a built-in one because the latter is a bit uncomfortable for a lefteyer who I am. And since I like composing with my eye at the vf, I'd rather buy me an Olympus PEN (with VF-4) than an OMD.
Samsung should offer an EVF as an accessory: Many potential customers will turn their back to this interesting camera because you can't buy an EVF!
Kudos to Samsung! They clearly want pros to defect to their NX system, and with the NX1 and the new 'S' zooms they might succeed. (However, the advantage of mirrorless - less bulky and less heavyweight than SLRs - gets lost a bit with the camera/lens combo in the video) Be aware that Samsung do it all themselves, as to development and production, whether it's sensor and processor or camera and lenses!
I'm hoping, though, for the new sensor/processor in a (stabilized?) NX400, slim and lightweight, and eventually an optional EVF for flexible use in landscapes and travel. As to the lenses: More high quality lenses (especially wide angle primes: 12mm/20mm or 14mm/24mm) and good third party lenses would certainly be appreciated by many customers who aren't content with the current lineup of Samsung lenses to choose from.
He did it again! :-)
BTW, King Ludwig was king of Bavaria.
If these shooter's photos here aren't as compelling as you wish they were, don't blame the photographer. He proves the G1X II can be a companion for the photographer on the go. I doubt that all these grumblers here bring better images home. David's photos are OK, in my view.
I'm not saying, that the camera shouldn't be delivering better IQ. But I'm not competent in this respect. Though, the main issue with the G1X II seems to be of a different kind, IMO: A fullframe DSLR doesn't have to look nice, it may even look ugly, because it's presumed to be a tool for the pro; it's about the same as for the smaller DSLR's for amateurs who emulate the pros.
But the market for mirrorless cameras is different, customers here are 'enthusiasts' and more or less narcisstic people (hence the selfie rear-screens!) who won't carry a camera that looks old-fashioned or heavy-handed like the G1X II does.
My advice to Canon: Pay regard not only to improving your cameras but also to the look of them!
Cal22: Go to the LX100 First Impressions Review where the lens design is to be seen (compared to the lens of the LX7). You can see there that Panasonic has changed the AA filter on the LX100's sensor: It's quite a bit thicker now!
We know lens design must be matched with the AA filter, otherwise sharpness in photos will be more or less reduced. The samples in the gallery now could make you think that Leica designed the lens not knowing of the AA filter in the LX100 has been changed. It's not really thinkable, is it?
Panasonic has the production line, as far as I understand, after Leica designed the optical construction.
@Menneisyys: Maybe massive distortion correction is needed for the small sized zoom and that's causing noise.
On Imaging Resource they compare crops (LX100/RX100 III/L7X) and the LX100 performs clearly better. It's confusing!
Go to the LX100 First Impressions Review where the lens design is to be seen (compared to the lens of the LX7). You can see there that Panasonic has changed the AA filter on the LX100's sensor: It's quite a bit thicker now!
Panasonic LX100 and Sony RX100 III are rivals. Compare the samples in both galleries: Do the Panasonic samples look like having superior IQ?
Menneisyys: A little bit oversharpened, with discernible color noise (blotches) in the asphalt even at ISO200. Which (the latter) is a pity, given that the lens seems to be producing great results.
The leaves high above in the tree, the edges of the building or the lamp post right hand - there's no oversharpening as far as I can see. Maybe even a little more sharpening could be worth a trial.
The pictures in the gallery here seem to be a bit on the warm side, which might be common with compacts nowadays.
The noise you're speaking of is probably due to the built-in automatic distortion correction.
We may expect the Leica lens to be performing well, but should not expect any lens to be capable of exceeding the limitations of MFT!
Once again a German name in the gallery? ;)
With the RX100 III it was the "Bauhaus", Richard photographed, and this time it's the "Bären Haus". (Note the humor: It's a Bear House and not a Beer House!)
The LX100 seems to push the warm colors a bit too much; or was it just the warm light of the day?
Cal22: Informative pictures! Thanks, Barney!
As to your photographic approach: You photographed sans flash? What camera did you use, what lenses? And did the pictures take any amount of post processing to brighten up the shadows?
Compared to the past when photographers had a film in the camera nowadays somewhat challenging light conditions seem to be no problem anymore. I guess many young photographers aren't aware of the benefits of the digital era in photography, because they can't compare.
@Bond: I know of Fujifilm's DR modes, a feature that's likely similar to Sony's Dynamic Range Optimization in their RX100 series. Overall, Fujifilm's JPEGs are praised for their quality.
As to sensor sizes I guess there's no best one in every respect. May it be FF, APS-C, MFT or 1 inch - they all have their pros and cons.
@Barney: Thanks for answering!
That's interesting: You underexposed first and boosted afterwards with fine results! Similar approach with some films was possible but came along with heavy noise.Remember the Kodachrome 25? This was the sharpest color transparency film on the market, but its dynamic range was poor (not to speak of issues with color cast and rendering). Photographing in plane's interior with K25 would have been a real challenge - with flashlights being indispensable.
You brought 'huge' cameras to the plane providing for high technical quality. And there's nothing to complain about. I wish, though, you'd taken two or three of the interior shots also with APS-C and with 1inch sensors, in this way allowing a comparison of sensor size and performance.
Informative pictures! Thanks, Barney!
Not any word about the Loxia line? I'd expect a 25mm or a 21mm to be announced.
You don't need AF in wide angle photography (with primes)!
PLAMBERT: The new GM5 might just be a better camera as it has interchangeable lenses and the size is comparable. The drawback of interchangeable lenses is that you have to carry them with you to use them! The whole outfit would be much heavier than the LX100. I use a compact coupled rangefinder camera with various lenses and the outfit bag is heavy, no zoom lenses included.Phil
Yes, the more lenses you're carrying around, the more you might wish to have instead an all-in-one package in your hands. That's what the LX100 seems to have been made for.
Quite the same with depth of field: In the film era everybody yearned for sharpness all over the scene (apart from portraying) - even the photographers using large format cameras outdoors. And now as small sensors let us have expanded depth of field, everybody seems to be striving for shallow depth of field.
As to the zoom lens in the LX100 which has a maximum aperture with a ff equivalence of f5.6 in 70mm: You can forget about shallow depth of field in mft. Regard it as an asset or as a drawback. So, a GM5 with the tiny 12-32mm might be a good alternative to the LX100 and you still have the option for interchangeable lenses. The GM5 might fit better in your pocket and the LX100 better in your hands!