joel avery: Yes!
OS X is already doing the 2x scaling needed (to be able to see the menus at a normal size) because of the MacBook Retina models. It's possible a "hacked" OS X would do the same here. But Apple won't endorse this tablet, so it won't become "a Mac" unless Apple produces one.
What would happen is Windows would be given a similar "2x"-like scaling capability before this goes on sale.
Mescalamba: Why would anyone buy this?
@miles green - agreed. I have never used the hot shoe or purchased the EVF for my XZ-1. The former is unnecessary on this level of camera, and the latter is too expensive (how can I spend $250 on an EVF when I only spent $400 on the camera? Not a good value proposition).
If this camera matches the performance of the XZ-2, then it isn't behind the times at all. There's even a chance Pentax eked a little more out of the sensor, just as they do with their DSLRs. While I doubt they spent a lot of time or money on the development, Pentax engineering is quite good at optimizing performance where they want to.
Rocky ID Olympian: Olympus E-M5 has:- great IBIS- just the right size- touch tilting screen. If only it has swivel like E-3/E-5- Live Time/BULB (cant believe not mentioned yet). Groundbreaking technology for long exposures- one key success is the new Sony sensor. It nullified the gap between 4/3 size and APSC. OM-D would never be as popular with Old 12 MP Pana sensor that Olympus was "forced to use liked it or not" for years.- the availability of m4/3 lens is just right in 2012. just only this year we have a wide selection of HQ prime lenses, and the 2 f2.8 zooms from Panasonic.- the classic look is the icing on top.
Timing is just right for Olympus.
I've been an Oly user for quiet some time, and I have accepted the compromises of (m)4/3. Some image quality for portability. Its just this time the sacrificed IQ is the smallest ever, since I used Oly cameras! I guess this is why FF and APSC users tempted to use OM-D as their daily camera or even ditched their bigger cameras all the way.
Yes, but did he invent the internet?
The Olympus OM-D is merely m4/3 finally reaching its potential.
Fujifilm X-Pro 1, Nikon D800E, and Sony RX1 are changing the direction of the industry, as will be clear next year.
harry cannoli: I have to admit I'm a little bummed that the LX7 failed to stand out in any meaningful way, despite the fact that I'm a hardcore DSLR shooter who adores this little camera. Sheesh, I am a fanboy.
I suppose the big sensor in the Sony means so much more than the beautiful, super-fast, pin sharp lens in the LX7?
The lens makes the magic, the sensor records the magic made by the lens. The Sony sensor does an absolutely fantastic job of recording images created by it's plain vanilla lens. Of course the magic created by the lens is a personal judgement, but that Panny lens stands out, heads and shoulders above the pack. How can I see this and the respected, highly competent reviewers barely acknowledge the outstanding flavor of that Panny lens?
Oh, never mind. I'm a fanboy :(
Thank you Richard for getting this done. Good job.
The lens is the reason I bought the XZ-1 18 months ago, and it's the reason I'd consider the XZ-2 and LX7 if I were buying today.
Because of its other class-leading characteristics I think it's fair to put the Sony in the top 3 as well, but I still prioritize the lens.
As impressive as the LX7 lens is, keep in mind that the XZ-2 has less variance in the maximum aperture, yet does so over a wider zoom range. Because of this the XZ-2 should be less than 1/3 stop slower than the Panasonic's at equivalent focal lengths, and about equal at 90mm.
I think one of the more interesting points is that the K-5 II output is different from the K-5, and I think I like it better.
I happen to have purchased the K-5 IIs to complement my K-5.
It's clear that the K-5 IIs is a trade-off. It gives a more 3D effect than I see with the other cameras. For example, the needle going into the X on top of the playing card looks like I could reach out and grab it on the IIs. I even see it out-doing the D800E in some respects, like this one. But the D800E has the obvious MP advantages and handles moire better when a scene is viewed at equivalent size.
At other places, like feathers, they almost pixelate too much - that is, like the "jaggies," which is exactly what an AA-filter adjusts.
Fortunately moire hasn't been an issue for me in real-life shooting. But it will happen.
Overall I think the K-5 IIs has been a good choice for me. It certainly allows resolution that differentiates my better lenses from the rest, and gives me new capabilities.
Combatmedic870: Compare the LX7 vs the XZ-1.....The XZ-1 looks better in low iso and its almost draw in high iso(the XZ-1 has more color noise @ iso 800 and 1600, but retains more detail.) The LX7 output is VERY much so like the XZ-1(except in the low iso's and colors.(the oly is more punchy and saturated)) That is NOT a bad thing at all. The XZ-1's raw output is very very good(a little noisy, but very sharp).
ISO1600 does seem to be more useable vs the XZ-1 though, due to the lack of color noise. The use of iso 1600 and 1.4 would be some pretty low light.
So you can now shoot 1080p video...but since they had to switch to cmos sensors vs CCD. There is more noise in the lower iso's...Lens sharpness and speed is the only real gain(which is a REALLY good thing), unless your a video shooter
If you were just getting into buying a camera like this and wanted a wide angle shooter. This is going to be your best choice out of the bunch.
If my XZ-1 died, I would buy this. Very nice job Panny!
Today, if my XZ-1 died, I'd get the LX7 too. But when the XZ-2 comes out, I'm not so sure ... .
Renzokuken: dpreview seems to be on a decline these days.
first critiques were aplenty for iPhone reviews, followed by the integration of dxO's very debatable database into their lens review, and now...
using photo prints in a camera test scene.
I find all these critiques/feedback as valid. I hope dpreview can take all these comments positively and do consider modifying a few decisions.
#1Photos prints fade overtime#2camera used to capture the photo in the prints has its own version and method of rendering color, does not give accurate color impression to viewers#3 print quality might affect camera test, a blurred line can be both be due to bad print quality or the camera used to take the test scene itself
please use lesser photo prints
Come on people. If you're too dumb to recognize that the color in a test-scene photo isn't a direct representation of the camera's native color rendering, then you deserve to be confused.
ginsbu: Any plans for a mobile-optimized version?
As is more common now, please make sure it's clear that the user is on the mobile version of the site, and make it easy to switch back.
Also, please make the site suited to some popular tablets - at least the iPad. Whether this means the using mobile site may depend on your layout. If it does mean using the mobile site, perhaps the regular site should still be the default for tablets.
Impressive performance - I guess DxOMark isn't lying. In High ISO performance it appears to be less than one stop away from the D4 and D3S - especially based on the RAW studio samples.
parallaxproblem: Ricoh has been good for Pentax, but the long-term prognostic cannot be optimistic: Pentax's core selling point is the K-mount - a full-frame mount. Furthermore with the advent of the new mirrorless systems, the future of DSLR's and current DSLR mount cameras at all price levels has to be Full-Frame, however Pentax have no full frame lenses in their range, having committed fully to APS-C in one of many terrible business decisions over the last few years and have insufficient resources to revamp their lens range back to the full-frame standard. This has been the situation for some years now and it isn't being addressed
Throw-in what has been until recently a completely incoherent product and pricing strategy and things look rather bleak
Pentax's best bet would be to partner with Sony, making bodies which support K-mount (via adaptor) and NEX mount lenses. Simultaneously plugging the current gaps in the NEX lens range, selling to a captive market of existing, lens-hungry NEX users
Stop living in the past. Open your eyes and you'll see they're already headed in the right direction for the future.
The majority of current Pentax lenses over 22mm are already FF compatible - they just can't advertise them that way yet. And indications are they're reworking FF designs from the previous generation to fill in the gaps. They're acually only 2-4 lenses away from being able to release a FF today (presuming they had the body ready, which they don't yet).
If you pay closer attention you'll notice the issues ARE being addressed now and they DO have the resources. Like a sports club rising from a string of disappointing seasons, give them a year or two and you'll see the difference.
Perhaps a quick recap of the situation (and the interview) will help:
- Hoya invested as little as possible in Pentax; Ricoh is making big investments
- It takes about 1.5 years to develop a new product
- "We're developing a FF plus other higher-end models, but I can't tell you about them because they're not ready yet"
- The K-01 is Pentax' best video camera, but not what Ricoh (or most buyers) want for the future.
- The Q sells itself as long as we can get it in people's hands (and it's priced right)
- Pentax is getting back into US retail stores
- "We've heard customers concerns and have been working on them for a long time, but you can't see the results yet. Our current products are very good. I don't want to cannibalize current sales, but what's coming is even better."
- "Ricoh is focusing on producing a complete line-up of Pentax DSLR-class products that excel in key performance areas rather than adding frills."
It sure sounds like a lot of people here have trouble reading between the lines.
Curt Geiger: It will be interesting to see what happens. I love SFX Pro 2 but as a Lightroom User who needs quick conversions I've been using the excellent Skyline B+W Film presets. They are great when I don't have time to use SFX Pro 2, and great value for money at only £7.99. Richard Curtis at Adobe recently did a good feature on them. http://adobe.ly/Ul0HRz
Unfortunately I don't think it will be interesting - it will be sad and pathetic watching what NIK once was quickly melt away into a few features for a couple of Google products.
ptox: I want it in red! (I refuse to make compromises!)
OMG, wait: can't I get this with the sapphire LCD cover of the previous generation? Uh, dealbreaker.
Plus, the exterior finish on the 645D Grand Prix edition gives it 68% better image quality and makes it 130 MPH faster!
GabrielZ: Only costs 22 grand, I'll buy a dozen...ha ha. But seriously why go for this when you can get a D800/D800e with virtually the same resolution, add to it a Zeiss prime and you've got a system with the same image quality for a fraction of the price. Still...a nice camera none the less.
I don't even have to see the Leica to know that the image quality will not be the same.
The Nikon may be a better choice for you - especially considering the cost - but it's definitely not equivalent.
Deleted-pending: So Sony sold billions of its new FF CMOS 24MP sensor to multiple brands, even Leica... I actually liked the colors and details coming from the 18MP CCD sensor very much, I hope that they simply removed the AA filter from the Sony CMOS 24MP sensor bu then, video will become useless too, so I guess Leica will scarify global still imagery IQ to make videos look smoother...
Leica here explicitly states that this non-Sony CMOS sensor retains most of the color quality of a CCD sensor, so let's give it a chance and see if it comes through.
vincenzo_filippo: Please dpreview can you post the price in Euro too and not only in us dollar and GB pound ? Thanks
I agree with increments - I think DPReview has nothing to do with it.
Auke B van der Weide: "Highest quality materials, elaborate manufacturing processes and painstaking manual assembly guarantee functional reliability for decades to come."
If you believe this is true, and it outlasts every nikon/canon/sony/pentax/olympus/panasonic/samsung than a Leica isnt that expensive.
Digital cameras are designed for obsolescence. Film cameras got an upgrade every time a new film came out.
So, other than the possibility that a CCD sensor will be desirable 10 years from now, the longevity is meaningless.
djorgji: Nice lens. Guess panasonic will have an identical one for much cheaper.