Great idea! Now just think of the other possibilities? A siver-plated GoPro. A Fuji-Leica look-alike plated with fool's-gold! A solid gold SONY!
Omexis: And not to mention that you would look like a total tit with this camera, and become a major target for muggers and Nikon enthusiasts.
All those dangerous Nikonistas por favor!
Vlad S: Leaving "Nikon" on the lens cap makes it look cheap...
To change the lens cap would have made the camera too expensive.
Shunda77: Sorry, is that "wankon" written on the prism hump?
Brikk's Lux Nikon Df = JAIL BAIT !!!
Peter Gurdes: i said from the begining that the lens will ruin it.
my A6000 images look way better (even with the kit lens) and the package is not much bigger but cheaper.
Who said that? I said, "The A6000 with the kit 16-50 PZ lens has been compared to the RX100III and considered as equal. (DxO, I believe." To-day some are saying that the RX actually performs slightly better than the A6000-1650 combo. We're talking DxO overall scores around 70-72 here. That's in the same range as most 16mp M43 cameras.
A few examples have been, as you say, "garbage." It's probably the dreaded Sony lens sample variation. I just picked one up for $150 and it's not bad...over 18mm it is about the same as the older 18-55 NEX kit lens. It's a good walkabout lens, and tiny. I can put that on my 5R and stuff it in my coat pocket. But I agree that most competitors' kit lenses are superior.
Cal22: Panasonic LX100 and Sony RX100 III are rivals. Compare the samples in both galleries: Do the Panasonic samples look like having superior IQ?
Don't you think that the Fuji X30 samples look just as good?http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/reviewsamples/albums/fujifilm-x30-beta-samples-gallery
The A6000 with the kit 16-50 PZ lens has been compared to the RX100III and considered as equal. (DxO, I believe. The 16-50 being the limiting factor.)So by extending your statement, the LX100 should also perform with equivalence to the RX100 III.
How to Build Boeing - 747 Aircraft - New Documentary- interesting and historical.
callaesthetics: I feel Slater has been wronged. Wasn't it Slaters intention to have the monkey take some pictures. Take Slater out of the picture = no monkey selfie = no pictures for Wiki to exploit.
It might be a conspiracy to sell more cameras which make Selfies.
PicOne: A bit off topic. But can say a 6 month old baby who accidentally pushes a button on a camera own copyright? I guess I'm asking if it was the fact that an animal took the picture, or whether the issue is that an "author" of a work, in order to claim copyright has to have mental capacity to be aware of what they're doing?
Yes besides, that could be an adult monkey. Ha ha!
Rick Kent: I do not believe this photo was actually taken by any monkey but instead by David Slater himself.
Maybe the monkey had undertaken a basic course in photography and therefore was well-primed for the task.
IonPortraits: Fact is, that the monkey can't loose or gain anything from this selfie, but others will. So, the one who can only loose is the actual photographer (without whom this selfie would have never happened!). Therefore, the situation as it is, is not correct. It is just common sense.
Well if the camera was pre-set at iA, then it might be deemed to be God's will: "If choosing the aperture and shutter determines who should own the copyright." Then the monkey wins.
captura: Panasonic fanboys rejoice! This article completely ignores the 'other' competition; the Sony RX100 trio, and the best-value Fuji X-30.
I partially agree with all of you. How refreshing it is to be hearing "the other side of the story." The forum to which I most frequently attend is dominated by Sony fanboys and paid shills, it seems.
Sony has a problem with lenses and it's not design, it is wild variation in sample quality. As a new design ages, the QC tends to pick up so the formerly sad 16-50 examples are now quite acceptable.
I have difficulty in forgiving Panasonic for being part of a scam where broken LX3's like mine were sent for resale from the US to Canada and passed off as new. Mine has never worked properly and is junk. Pana's warranty service was useless.
The LX100 is probably a nice camera but too expensive for it's purpose. I own a Fuji X10 so I'm naturally predisposed towards the X30.
The NEX-6 still scores a 78 rating on DxO; higher than even the Panasonic GH4, which has a 16 mp sensor. It can shoot bursts at 10 fps. with auto-tracking. I doubt that 4/3 sensor in the LX100, with only 12.8 mp will score anywhere near that. Perhaps 60 points, which much closer to the Fuji X30.
Similar mpx, EVF, size & weight, better build, zoom to 112mm, hybrid PDAF, much longer battery life, macro to 1 cm., $300 cheaper.
Bhima78: Seems like an amazing oversight by Panasonic to not have a touchscreen in this camera. Its like they packed so much in, that the touch guy at Panasonic just forgot about it.
I use the touchscreen on a NEX camera to change the menu.
NeilJones: Seriously peeps. You all need to wait 2 months as Sony is about to release a killer new tech camera that will blow everything else out of the water!
Mark my words.
Well that is a strong possibility. I have found rumor sites to be somewhat unpredictable. You may quote me on that.
EinsteinsGhost: The author has downplayed the compromise in sensor size (the crop factor increases from 2x to 2.2x compared to 35mm format) and only highlighted difference in resolutions as if all else is unchanged.
With reduced sensor size, LX100 actually competes as much with Sony RX100.
No, it compares much more closely with the Fuji X-30. Same MP, same size. The Fuji is better built and $300 cheaper.