peevee1: Isn't 12mm on APS-C (18mm eq) a little TOO wide in most cases? For close objects (like shooting inside a room, or on a city street), the corners will be pulled apart (ugly effect), and when shooting landscapes, you'll have to crop to something like 5:2 or 3:1 to have reasonable amount of land and sky left, and these crops are too wide for HD media.
I think Fuji 14mm is more suitable for 2:1 or even 16:9 landscape crops.
Not all serious photographers use high ISO, especially with UWA. Point here is, level of m4/3 lenses is a lot higher and bigger choise than on nex and fuji only starting, choice is really small.
And btw, m4/3 used by serious photographers for pro work in various fields.
white shadow: Exciting time ahead for Zeiss lens lovers. I wondered why Zeiss has decided to start their venture into the mirrorless camera market by targeting Sony NEX and Fuji instead of micro 4/3.
Currently, Sony has already been making some Zeiss lenses for themself and Fuji has quite a well accepted range of prime lenses. From their popularity, the Fuji camera owners would be unlikely to go for Zeiss with a much higher price. Wouldn't it be better to go for the micro 4/3 market where the market is bigger and have a need for some higher quality lenses?
With the introduction of the Olympus E-P5, for example, there is an obvious need for some better quality lenses. I am sure they can make some really good wide angle lenses for this larger market.
Maybe DPR can throw some light into this and perhaps ask them when they meet them in future.
Because m4/3 already has many stellar lenses and with how much Zeiss is asking for those lenses it sure going to be difficult to sell enough. For example 7-14mm panasonic (14-28mm FF eq.) it's really sharp even in corners, amazing performer.
Check m4/3 stellar panasonic 7-14mm, which is even wider - 14mm FF eq. So 18mm eq. is actually quite nice.
Not that difficult, at least when camera is used regularly. And don't really need to change them all the time too, customize it once to fit your needs, easy to remember this way.
mpgxsvcd: It is like a GH2.75.
You can dislike 4:3 ratio and still like m4/3 as system. Like i do for example. Nex sure has superb bodies, but sadly you can't stick m4/3 lenses to it.
miketala: I've got a G3, which has a sensor that performs similarly to the GH2, and my biggest gripe with it is that it's rather easy to blow highlights. Most reviews pick up on this problem too.
The new Oly's and the GH3, I believe, hold onto highlights much better, and that's why I would like to see a better sensor in the G6.
Sensor in G3 is noticeable worse than in GH2. And blown highlights are not exactly fault of the sensor, auto metering system is not perfect, but at least there many workarounds for this, including manual exposure :)
Xellz: Oh wait, focus peaking? Almost missed this major part, first m4/3 body with focus peaking from panasonic? Nicely done, though still dislike pany decision using older sensor, when they already have better one in production.
I'm not saying it's bad, just gh3 is better and already in production. I like to bring back details from shadows, kind of pseudo hdr. G3 sometimes is noisy and doesn't preserve as much details in shadows as i would like. So the more DR, the better. Though doesn't matter now, anyway still too little time for hobby :(
Oh wait, focus peaking? Almost missed this major part, first m4/3 body with focus peaking from panasonic? Nicely done, though still dislike pany decision using older sensor, when they already have better one in production.
Wonder how much price difference there is by using old sensor, not new. Or simply they want to keep their "pro" body better by cutting down specs of more cheaper bodies? Either way, seems going to be oly user soon. G3 i have lacks some things i'd like to have in body.
Vinc T: Same sensor as that in the GH2? I am really disappointed.
yep, but seems they are not using this feature in G6. Too bad, that would be at least some benefit.
A bit sad that pany is going this way. I like their bodies more than oly, especially G series. But to use old sensors, when a noticeable better one is available... Seems my next cam will be from olympus after all, G3 that i have now is lacking some features i'd like to have, like build in level gauge and better DR at base iso
IrishhAndy: This kills micro four thirds but it is not really good.
most lenses are a lot smaller, especially with longer reach difference becomes quite huge. Try to compare for example any small sized body like pens with panasonic 14mm pancake. Can't match this.
Great for giving this to your kids to learn photography. Especially if already have canon lenses
Mssimo: I have had the Sony RX1 for a month. I might return it for and buy the Fuji x100s. I did not like the results I got with the RX1. Very mixed. Auto focus was unreliable. Face detection did not focus correctly. They could fix all of the issues with a firmware, but I will not hold my breath. Fuji has a good reputation of taking care of customers, I really wish I could say the same about Sony.
Thank you for the image samples, looking forward to the full review.
Seriously? Something went really wrong in this world...
Vitruvius: So the 16MP, 7FPS, with 1.3X crop factor would be almost exactly the same crop and resolution as a Micro 4/3 camera, except slower frame rate than the M43 cameras.
2x m4/3 is not aps-c, but FF size
Lupti: Wow, an extended preview. That´s worth a message on the top page? What about a finished review - not just previews? Previews that never become reviews is a disease that only is spread on DPreview. Maybe the name doesn´t stand for "Digital Photography Review" but "Digital Preview". Other sites have their finished already up for some weeks. Don´t you think it´s time to speed up your reviewing process? Should be possible as you have more staff than ever before.
uhh... so much content and it's still not enough? Does it really matter that much how it's named? Preview or review? Can you point to better and free content?
Mescalamba: Wonder if it will be worse than previous, tho its hard challenge to beat such cr*p of lens. :D
Last time Panny did kit lens "right" was original 14-45 for G1/GH1. And even that had some serious reservations.. (distortion/sh*tload of CA).
They should ask Leica how to do proper kit lens (14-50mm f2.8 - 3.5 for 4/3 was their design).
Will a proper kit lens also cost 50-100$ at most? But an option of middle price zoom would be nice, something between those cheap kit zooms and 12-35f2.8.
peevee1: Another one nobody needed...
Bundled with GF5 and G5? So it is going to be another SKUs for the kits, right? GF5 is kind of old and outdated, aren't they discontinued it already, or was it for the older SKU?
And who you are to say, that no one needs it?
guermantes: Why do some people complain that this lens is slow? No-one has tried it yet.
Do you have to try a lens to know, that f2.8 is not so fast? :)
Wow, took long enough for someone to make this kind of tripod. Though the price is a bit too high.