Androole: I've always wondered why people are so obsessive about having a lens that's rectilinear "in-the-glass" in this focal range. The perspective distortion is already so radical and surreal in the 11-15mm range that you might as well just digitally de-fish (using an open-source program like Hugin) and get an even wider image.
I guess the rectilinear lens has somewhat higher resolution in the corners, and makes framing easier. But for a 10x higher pricetag, I can deal with those compromises, thanks...
It's a valid point IMO, tho I imagine more/less valid depending on the rectilinear UWA and fisheye alternatives available for your system...
Sometimes I use my 7.5mm FE and 9-18mm UWA on MFT (2x crop) interchangeably, the UWA isn't super great in the corners anyway so defished images from the FE can be just as sharp at times but have a larger FoV, and I can play with the projection opting for something more natural like Panini instead of straight rectilinear.
It's definitely much easier to get composition just right with the UWA tho, and easier to leave it on the camera for hours thanks to the long end, which is true even for this Canon.
Now, if a mirrorless manufacturer ever came out with a live view mode that defished a fisheye or at least threw up some potential crop lines, that'd be really interesting and would take defishing from a fun experiment to something you could rely on...
Sounds interesting, tho a bit expensive. I've only got one lens on which I keep a clear protective filter, if this actually resists scratches better than a typical filter I could be interested in the CPL tho (mostly for the beach, I tend to use a CPL as dual purpose there, for it's polarization and also added protection).
Jorginho: Well...very niced cam for the size. But I have to wonder what it gets us over a GM1 or GM5 basically...Selfies?
No mixup, just different markets and probably more leftover GM stock on this side of the pond... I bought my GM1 from Taiwan (NTSC) for $340, granted that's a body only import so you'd expect it to be cheaper...
Looking at Amazon tho, I'm seeing it for $430 from US sellers without lens and $530-600 with lens. Even if you ignore third party Amazon merchants, it's still only $600... Or was until the other day, it's prone to erratic price jumps.
The GF7 is $600 with lens and I'm not seeing any discounts anywhere, tho I'm sure they'll come eventually. For the purpose of the US market they're effectively priced the same and the current GF is coming in at $100 more than the previous one was at launch.
tkbslc: It's basically a GM1 with a little size added to make room for the odd flippy screen. Extra button or two. No surprises here.
Pretty sure it has less buttons and less useful controls actually... No custom modes or AF/MF switch, not a big hit for the target demo, but it also has less control points than the previous GF.
brendon1000: This is the sort of camera that mirrorless is all about. Good IQ in a very small compact body with small compact lenses too.
Sony and Fuji offer better IQ especially the A7 but those aren't terribly small anymore once you factor in the lenses.
That's largely why I bought a GM1, less conspicuous (small + super quiet shutter even when not using the electronic one), and great backup/second body on other occasions to keep a different lens on for less swapping.
It's not any cheaper than the GM1, tho that may be on it's way out eventually... Flip screen and slightly more to grip some will be a plus to some, worse controls or battery life compared to past GFs tho.
coyot3: I relly need wifi raw transfer but 32gb itto muchh for me i prefer 4 sd cards of 4gb if anithyng goes wong with the card. Somebody knows if there ir another option like this?
So you're saying you want to make it so it's 4x more likely that something will happen to your media? Juggling multiple cards just increases your points of failure... Figure out a backup strategy on the go instead and you'll save yourself a lot of hassle.
These days it's pretty trivial to copy a card's contents over to a phone/tablet or to a thumb drive thru the use of a phone/tablet, at least with Android devices ands USB OTG.
0mega: I just don't see how this can compete with Sony mirror-less.
It's not trying to... Different price bracket, different market, and very different size once you account for lenses. It's priced kinda high for an entry level body still, but at least the kit lens is solid.
CNY_AP: Any shutter shock?
Same shutter as the GM line, with the same benefits and limitations. It's a hybrid shutter, but even under 1/500 it's very soft and uses an EFC... So SS is very very unlikely.
Peiasdf: Poor ISO performance like most cheap Panasonic m4/3. Only the GH4 and some say the GX7 have comparable sensor to Olympus' SONY sensor.
This has the very same sensor... Along with the GM line.
justmeMN: A mirrorless camera in a camera bag isn't significantly more convenient than a small DSLR in a camera bag.
How is the comparison not valid? I'll give you a less extreme one... A G6 with the largest M4/3 lens (for now) has a 600mm equivalent range and it's still about the size of a 70D with a 400mm max zoom. Add an UWA zoom and an f2.8 zoom and the disparity continues to grow... A 28-280 equivalent zoom is about the size of an APS-C kit zoom, etc etc.
GodSpeaks: I think they missed the boat here. Tenba says these are for mirrorless cameras. So what are the primary traits of mirrorless? Small and light. Yet these bags are designed to carry a camera and multiple lenses, tripods and large tablets. None of which meets the small and light criteria.
How about a smaller bag(s) that could carry a mirrorless camera with lens attached and one additional lens. No tripods or tablets. In other words, keep it small and light. A switch 4 or 5 pehaps?
I already have too many bags that can carry multiple cameras/lenses that I no longer use because they are too big and cumbersome.
I think the problem with designing bags that compact is that then they DO start to become very purse like largely because of the size... Even something like the Crumpler mentioned above falls pray to that a little bit. For the record, I don't find anything purse-like about these Tenba (beyond maybe the leather look of the stock flap, I like some of the other flaps a lot tho).
If you go small enough then it's no longer a purse but a non decrepit P&S case with a belt attachment or wrist strap and those are a dime a dozen... I think there's room for better designed slings in the middle tho. Something like the Thinktank Turnstyle but smaller still, with there was a Turnstyle 3 or 2... The BlackRapid SnapR is pretty clever too but kinda ugly, great functionality tho.
Personally I just use waist packs (yes I'm avoiding the f word), from like surfing/skate brands (O'Neill, Quiksilver), usually slung around my shoulder/back. They aren't built for cameras so padding is minimal unless I add it, but they're very conspicuous and depending on the pack I can fit a small body and anywhere from 3-5 lenses with two being pancakes...
'Course I'm talking tiny lenses (Oly 9-18, 45, etc), not superzooms and large teles. Still makes for a pretty versatile setup that's not swinging around all the time like a shoulder bag tho. I've seen one or two fanny packs (there, I said it) specifically designed for cameras but they were still not very optimal or very conspicuous.
Papi61: "for the PROFESSIONAL mirrorless camera user"
Sounds like an oxymoron... :)
I really don't get it either, I think the trolls are just crankier than usual, maybe a bridge collapsed or something. I actually think most camera shoulder bags out there either look very feminine or just scream camera bag...
There's few styled like more conventional shoulder book/messenger bags (like the TT Retrospective), I happen to think these look pretty cool, I dig the swappable flaps... Maybe it makes me a hipster or whatever, but I'd go for that camo lid or the graphic grey/blue design.
The top facing zipper for going thru the flap lid seems genuinely useful, tho I'd kinda want a zipper underneath too like the Mirrorless Mover.
misolo: Wish they'd gone for a less extreme zoom range (say 25-200 or 25-300), and included a slightly larger sensor and slightly brighter lens. At 600mm-equivalent, the aperture equivalent is f/35. At that point diffraction will mean it won't have much more than about 2MP worth of resolution.
So a Panasonic LF1? 28-200, f2 at the wide end, and a slightly larger sensor... It dropped under $300 not too long ago and hovered just over $300 for much of last year. I paid more than that but still thought it was a solid pocket alternative to higher priced RX100s with shorter range. Seems Panasonic might've discontinued it tho as prices have gone up, at least on Amazon.
ryan2007: In the micro four thirds class, Panasonic has always been innovative and first to the market place with great products. They were the first with the 12-35 & 35-100 mm 2.8 zooms.
Good for micro four thirds and Panasonic. I knew from the start they were a better product than Olympus in this MFT's niche.
Well, their f2.8 tele goes usefully longer than Panasonic's and the 300mm isn't a road map bulletpoint but a sure thing, tho still unreleased. Panasonic does keep things tighter to the vest tho so who knows that they have under wraps.
The Squire: Like the 42.5.
Just need an LX100-alike body to attach it too plz!
Some GX7 reviews were bizarre, specially DPR's... I hear ya tho, I got turned off by some of them and I almost kind of regret it.
Cameralabs' comments about the EVF and the look of bokeh with IBIS scared me away and I jumped into M4/3 with a GF6... After a while I realized the GX7 would've really been ideal for me tho, I prefer the rangefinder style and certain things about Panasonic.
I've been tempted to pick one up as prices drop but at this stage I'd really want DFD for better C-AF and 4K (E-M5 MkII missed the mark on both counts), not a single GX8 rumor out there tho... Then again, Panasonic plays things close to the vest, no one saw the 42.5 coming either.
For now I might pick up a GM1 instead since it's even cheaper and wouldn't be wholly redundant when/if get a (hopefully) GX8.
JOrmsby: Does it say anywhere if these are metal-bodied, or are they the same cheap plastic like Oly has in their 45 and 25 1.8's?
Weight isn't always a sure fire indicator, the 20mm version II has a very thick metal body and yet it weighs less than the original plastic version... Panasonic describes both of these as having "metalic finishes" tho so more than likely that means thin metal plating around a plastic body as on their 12-32, 35-100, 14-42 II, etc.
jhinkey: It will all depend on how good this lens is compared to the Oly. If it's optically not as good, then for me OIS likely won't be worth it.The Pany has one aspheric, but no ED-like glass while the Oly has no aspherics and two ED glass elements. I can handle CA, but lack of sharpness off-center is not attractive to me.
Though I own the 42.5/1.2 already (fantastic lens), this f/1.8 version is attractive due to the small size (like the Oly), but still having OIS (which the Oly does not).
Perhaps this means the GX7 will be the only Pany camera ever to have IBIS - shame . . .
And they don't have any longer primes so it's hard to draw any conclusions beyond that... This might mean we could eventually see a competitor to Oly's 75mm tho, possibly cheaper and/or with OIS.
Yeah I'm wondering if it has any implications like that, tho it's not their first prime with IS... Even the macro had it even tho it seemed to be quite useless for actual macro work, you could actually say IS is standard for Panasonic primes in this focal length range.
brumd: Somehow, the Panasonic m4/3 lenses never look even half as sexy as the ones from Olympus. Yes, it's important! :)
Uhh, the 42.5 looks really really similar to the Oly 45mm. Panasonic's 20mm ver II is one of the sharpest looking pancakes, tho it looks like nothing else, Oly just seems to be somewhat more consistent in their designs (tho they still have like three or four different styles, for the cheap zooms, pro lenses, and metal or plastic primes)...
Panasonic's been chasing trends with recent kit zoom designs (smoother, metal plating) and is generally pretty scattershot. Not that it makes much of a difference, I've got half a dozen Oly/Panasonic lenses and the only ones that have any sort of matching aesthetic are the meant-for-GM zooms, doesn't really bother me l.