John McCormack: I don't get the GM1 - for an amateur at least. Yes, it's small with a big sensor, but the kit lens is slow and short in reach. There's no hot shoe. To get a faster lens jumps the price up to or over $1,000, I think. Nice for a professional's second camera. I'll stick to the 1/1.7 cameras until or unless the price on the GM1 falls in the next six months.
I'm an amateur and I sincerely "get it" - if you already own M43 lenses. Paired with an Oly 45 mm & Panny 25 mm you have one hell of an event snapper, which allows you to stay a part of the event ;-) as opposed to the guy lugging gear.
I'm getting one in about 6 months time. The price should be lower by then.
Yehuda_: Here's an interesting comparison:
Panasonic G5 goes for ~300$ and weighs 392 grams (w/ battery+card)Panasonic 12-35 F2.8 goes for ~1000$ and weighs 305 grams.
So total price is ~1300$ and total weight is 692 grams.The height of the G5 is slightly less than a sony and it's slightly narrower while the length from the back of the EVF to the edge of the 12-35 when mounted is just over 13cm - so both kits are almost identical in size and the G5+12-35 weighs less (697 grams vs. 813 grams for the Sony RX10).
In short - both combos cost roughly the same and the bulk is very similar though the Sony is definitely heavier.
The Sony has a more useful focal length and better EVF and is better weather sealed. The G5 has probably much better IQ with the 12-35, (probably) faster AF, a fully articulating screen etc. etc.
Which of the 2 would you prefer (I know my preference - not the Sony...)?
The OP is not using common sense. He dimisses/ignores the very point of this camera - the focal length choices. 24-200 mm in a small package, precluding the use of larger sensors.
Add the Panny 35-100 to the G5 setup to cover the same aov - then let's talk cost and weigth.
This camera trades in IQ for size. That's the POINT
Fuji. Who knew that the ackward girl in class would be the one to turn your head in the end.
Bravo - although some of the improvements were long overdue. Af point selection was a b....
HubertChen: The FE lens mount is brilliant, and compliments to Sony.
Sony has 3 lens mounts now: Alpha, E and FE. And this camera can use them all. With all automatic couplings. Great backwards compatibility and yet most modern features in one lens mount. Sony needs to be applauded to allow Sony users to reuse their lenses instead of forcing them to re-buy in a different mount. Very commendable.
As for the future it will be very interesting to see how this plays out. Will Sony over time consolidate the lenses to the FE / E mount? E for APSC and FE for FF? And you can mix and match to your hearts content. Use FF lens on APSC Sensor and APSC lens on FF sensor? And whenever you come across legacy alpha glass, you use an adapter.
I am curious to see if this is the end of the DSLR for Sony? Personally, I already do not miss the OVF any more :-)
Hubert. I'm all for positivity. But introducing adapters to combat different flange distances is a double-edged sword. Robert Cicala wrote an interesting article about the very small tolerances needed to align a lens and sensor for peak performance.
An alternative suggestion is to build in the adapters in the actual body. That'll give you some ugly designs - but better performance.
I'm not sure A-lens owners will get the same performance on this body compared to an a99. I might be wrong. It simply annoys me when product strategies are more marketing driven than anything else.
As it stands in 2013, you still need to pair a lens with its original mount to get the best possible performance. Thats a shame. A-mount lenses are expensive. I'd hold on to an a99 as long as possible.
Bastian Junker: Fuji Xpro 2 fullframe - yes, please.....please:-)
Leica glass (save S) does not autofocus, capiche?
Everything is a trade off.
shutterdragon: I paid $1,700 for a brand new Noct f1.2 about 20 years ago when it was still in production. Been very happy with the results and I'm glad I made the decision to buy this lens since nothing else comes close to what Noct is designed to excel at. $1,700 was as much as my monthly salary at the time, by the way. If this new 58mm can perform as well as Noct, it's a great buy actually.
Good to hear that you've kept it. I've been looking at it enviously for a long time. But as mentioned elsewhere people are charging handsome sums of money for on eBay.
How do you rate it on DX bodies?
I'm seriously considering it for concerts and events paired with a d7100.
samhain: Leica just released an official statment reguarding this lens 'invoking the spirit of Noctilux':
"Aw, isn't that cute".
Canon couldn't be reached for comment but was reported as simply 'smiling' after learning of the aperture. :D
Jokes aside- if I shot with Nikon, I'd probably get it. (assuming its as good as the description/price indicates).
I'm guessing they meant the 58 mm Nikon Noct, which sells for between 3-4 k on ebay. If this has the same superb coma free images Nikonians can save a handsome sum of money, for a minor aperture penalty.
I'm very interested. Think night time urban shots.
Good news. There seems to be something inherently tricky about the 50 mm focal length when it comes to coma. Zeiss' latest also seems to imply this. Anyone with some knowledge on this matter?
GabrielZ: 83% score - why only a silver award and not gold? The XF 14mm f2.8 got the same score and was awarded gold!
In a quantum state there are probabilities. 99% is larger than 1% probability of a cerhtain state.
Government? Nah - the business sector pays more :-)
Al Valentino: As an owner of this lens I can say the IQ is fantastic. I did a few quick tripod tests stopped down against my old Nikon 70-200 VR I and they tied. Shortly after sold the Nikon lens and began selling off the rest of my Nikon gear. I use Capture One 7 Express when I shoot RAW but jpegs are often good enough.
Tandua. I wouldn't discount the 70-300 so easily. Its AF performance seems to be miles ahead of this one. But you are right about the IQ. Just.... Ok.
I'll reserve judgement for when I've seen other samples. This seems off. Fuji are great at making lenses. This is just plain weird...
Dp needs another scale - or start beeing true to the logic of numbers.
100% should mean the perfect camera. 0% should mean no camera. Everything inbetween adheres to the logic of numbers everywhere else in the real world. Higher is more or better. There is no arguing that I'd prefer a raise of 20% more than 3%. Reverse for costs.
Drop the percentages - just stick to the gold, silver, bronze etc.
Cant reply to the post I wanted...
Ddd - rrr. Your and his story gave me a big smile on an otherwise hectic and rainy day.
I see what he saw. I understand. He is communicating with me. Thats very comforting - the kid has a way out of a very solitary existance. The tragedy is that he might never know it himself. Just hope (and believe) that he's having a blast doing it.
mediasorcerer: Olympus will be fine, the next omd will put them in a better position soon enough.Part of me hopes they will create a csc with ff sensor at some stage of the game, or fixed zoom ff rangefinder style, it's the next logical step, and an area they are not covering, that badly needs some competition.hey, im allowed to dream.
Dottore - if the rumours of a hybrid mount are true then the next om-d will outsell the current one.. Hardly slightly updated..
E-5 owners will buy 3-4 each :-)
FF?? C'mon - care to guess what happens with lens sizes?
Then again .. 2012 is a very hard year to follow..Seems that all major manufacturers released very attractive and innovative cameras...
Cant speak for everyone else, but 2012 was the year of the om-d for me. Many lenses and accessories later, I'm both satisfied.. And cash strapped..I dont need to splurge out again this year... Point is - I guess many of us are still just enjoying our 2012 models.. ?
As for financial analysts... They may simply not understand the customers buying criterias or the market in terms of available product mix. We had a ton of models last year that surpassed previous products by a substantial margin.
Take the Nikonian with full frame lust but being short of the cash to buy a DX(x). He might have wished for his D700 to have a better MP count. He might have wished for 20-24. He got 36. Thats good enough for many years to come.
GaryJP: Simple. If YOU can't see the difference between a little pocket camera and a DSLR, you don't need a DSLR. Personally, I need a DSLR. (And yes, I do have plenty of "pocket" cameras).
You sound bitter Jimmy.
The Merrills have first class IQ - concurred. But everything else (noise performance, handling and cam performance) is "pathetic".
Weren't you lauding the superior quality of MILC a posts below.
To rephrase you: You sound bitter. Seriously bitter.
When people stop smoking, find God or lose a great deal of weigth a certain Messiah-like spirit comes over them..
They feel compelled to tell everyone about the error of their ways, and how they know the only truth.. That they are right.
Freakin' tirin' is what it is.
Let people enjoy what they use. Can't help but feel that many of you posters feel the need to justify your purchases to everyone else. That's fine. But stop bashing others choices.
I have a Fuji X, a Nikon Dslr and a Oly M43.There is no chance in hell of the latter eclipsing the Nikon in any way shape or form. It is however refreshingly fatigue-free to carry around all day.
Stop kiddin' yourselves.
mediasorcerer: The cheapest i can find this camera for as a "pre-order" in australia is $1300 for BODY ONLY!!
Thats just disgracefully greedy, that will buy you an xe-1 with lens and uv filter or leather case, you have to be kidding olympus???
I'm sure it's good, but not that good, youd have to be barmy to buy this body only over the xe-1, how could it compete?[im asking, not describing], other than possibly being easier to fit in some pockets and having a few extra gimmicky features more?
I'm not doubting it's a superb camera.Isn't it about image quality, first and foremost for price paid?
What raist3d said. I own both the d7000 and the om-d. There is no contest. Try upping the oly to iso 3200.
I have shot events with both - the Nikon is simply better in handling dr, shadow recovery and ISO performance.
Beautiful shot, and a lot of useful pointers. Much appreciated! I'll have to join you one day Mr. Marom.
Timmbits: DPR obviously is here to help it's owners sell these cameras. And the GH3 is the highest margin Panasonic they sell. Hence the Gold award.
(yes, amazon sells direct too, not just through it's sellers. I bought a printer from them)
To me, a "camera" is still a "camera", not something nuanced into a video camera. We're here to read about cameras, not video cameras. Cameras that can do video too, yes. But they're still cameras. A gold award camera this is not.
You're a resilient one, aren't you?
The point they were making is quite simple really. Cameras were once (post-critacious) intended for photography. Technological advances allowed for extended functionality. Including the ability to shoot continous, lower resolution images for as long as retarded legislaterswould allow it (30 minutes or so in my neck of the woods - YMMW). Enter video.
No worries so far. The thing is, all companies exist to create profit. Gross margins. If a substanial sum of the cost is tied up in man hours, I'd prefer for the engineers to spend their time on either improving the PHOTO quality (for which the product was intended) or giving me a cheaper product. Not working on video codecs, redesign of the body for improved heat dissipation and the likes. Give me a better tool for photography or a cheaper product. For video I'll use a dedicated video camera.
Nukunukoo: To those who plan to get the GH3 solely for the video, here's one other model:
Blackmagic Design Pocket Cinema
Jorginho - just out of curiosity..
What kind of a weather photographer relies on the weather sealing of a camera + lens combo?
Every single one I've seen had a cover over the camera.. To keep the front of the lens dry - ie rain drop free images..
Wish i could partake in that slapping BB. Sarcasm can be very elegant. You're just trolling.
Both Tim & Larry make an excellent point. Stick to your guns.