Florida Kayaker: I don't really get it. "Overall, the ZS100's photo quality is very good, though not the best in the 1"-type sensor class"Well yes, detail looks terrible as does color comparatively."Despite a few quibbles, the ZS100's image quality is light-years ahead of any other compact travel zoom on the market"because there is nothing else that qualifies as a travel zoom that employs a 1" sensor?
This review although bestowing "gold" has made me re-think purchasing this camera. I have had it in my basket on Amazon for weeks now but now i'm thinking better to give up the 100-250 range for significantly better image quality found in other 1" compacts. Anyone else feel this way? Maybe my take is all wrong.
Order your priorities. If portability, good photo quality and a useful zoom range are topping your list, this is the only option.Bridge camera's (FZ1000 and Sony XXX) provide better image quality but are bulky and heavy and hence not portable (imho)Later RX100s provide better image quality but have very limited zoom rangeNikon 1-serie might be an alternative, but is definitely heavier with the zoom-lens and hence less portable
Seems they finally released the camera I've eagerly been waiting for: one that strikes the proper balance between portability (small package & lightweight <=350g), useful zoom range (from sufficiently wide 24/25mm to sufficient tele 200+) and image quality
I used (lightweight) super zooms in the past (FZ20/FZ7): Portable, very enjoyable zoom range but mediocre image quality. Switched to enthusiast camera's for better photo quality (LX3 / XZ1 / RX100): Portable, acceptable photo quality but zoom range very limited. Tried a A37 with kit-lens (not impressed) and some primes (50nmm (very impressive), 30mm macro (too nervous)) : very good photo quality with primes, zoom-range flexible because of interchangeable lenses but all at the cost of portability Considered the modern bridge camera's, but they are too bulky and too heavy for me, which defeats the purpose of a single package
Well the question is not whether Sigma can create good camera's and lenses, but when it is no longer required to use hellish software.
Mescalamba: So soon? :D
Well, just before Sony's launch of the Alpha 7S II.
Dougbm_2: Nice part of the world!
Thanks. It is indeed beautiful and makes me want to grab my hiking gear.( Looks quite Alpine, I actually thought that it was somewhere in the French Italian Alps )
But the burning question is .... where is it?
Ivan Lietaert: I have the same feeling expressed by others: in this 'subtle', devient, fiendish way, this article suggests the iPhone is the only portable device that allows to take decent pictures - which is clearly untrue.
In your article all words with possitive connotation are about the iPhone, while all words with negative connotation (eg 'lacked'; 'high light clipping' etc) are in the paragraphs about smartphones.
Funny how you don't realise that in the long rung your biased apprauch undermines the credibility of the author AND of Connect and dpreview...
Mmh, an individual apparently reads what an individual wishes to read.
( No I don't have an iPhone and will never have one either )
What a true joy to read this article with fascinating photo's, thanks!
( I like using the 1:1 format on the XZ1 as well. Gives a certain touch to the photo.)
unbelievable: Seems that the major improvements over the XZ-1 are operational: - (Most likely) much faster performance due to new engine.- User interface seems to have become stellar with the hybrid control ring and the function buttons. Changing settings in the XZ-1 is not really a joy or really not a joy
920K screen over 640K screen is a further improvement. That it is tilting is a not essential bonus imo.
Image wise I'm wondering whether there will be a real improvement, shifting from a 10 MP CCD to a 12MP CMOS. The image quality of the XZ-1 is already a joy.
Downside is that it increased its weight by 30% and that the file-size is most likely larger.
I sincerely hope that they improved the mechanism/software to manually "capture/set" the white balance setting in a low light environment. That works 100 times better on the Panasonic LX3. Of course you can should only raw, but I prefer nice looking jpegs straight out of the camera
Pity they did not make it slightly wider .... 24mm?
@FrancisNot entirely. The (even brighter) Panasonic LX7 (with 1/1.7") starts at 24mm (but stops at 90).
The LX3 (2008) also started at 24mm, but (unfortunately) stopped at 60mm
I fully agree though that 22.5 would be even nicer... ;-)
It will be equipped with a patent lawsuit ...
Seems that the major improvements over the XZ-1 are operational: - (Most likely) much faster performance due to new engine.- User interface seems to have become stellar with the hybrid control ring and the function buttons. Changing settings in the XZ-1 is not really a joy or really not a joy