jeffinchiangmai1: Still waiting for my LX100 to arrive. 2nd try now, the first one was lost. Yeah right, but still not arrived.The reviews I read, in anticipation, seem a little misguided. People are trying to turn the LX100 into something it isn't. I have the E-M5, the LX7 and GM1 (all great cameras in their own right). I took the E-M5 as a second camera with the GM1 on a motorbike tour in Thailand and wished I hadn't. I didn't use it and it only got in the way (too big). The GM1 with the 17mm prime and it's nice little leather case was almost perfect but the light's too bright in Thailand and I need an EVF. The GM5 perhaps? The LX100 wins because of the great lens. It's small, has EVF and great lens all in one. Perfect for my bike trips and I expect to get some pretty good pictures (if it arrives).If I want to do other stuff, I'll use my other cameras with fixed primes.That's my point, buy it for what it is and don't criticise too much for what it isn't.
Jeff, I wonder why you think the LX100 is an improvement over the LX7. For all the reasons you mention (I take motorcycle trips too with my LX7) I love the LX7 and have never been dissapointed. The LX100 is NOT a tradeup in my opinion just because it has a larger sensor, eViewfinder and newer processor. And slower lens and lack of flash just kill the LX100 for me.
Michael She: Almost a winner ... no built in flash is a killer for me.
I have the LX-7, one thing I don't understand is why the buttons on the lens barrel are so easy to move - Panasonic should introduce switches that "lock" in place so they're not bumped to the wrong setting so easily.
Not just the missing flash. I also own the LX7 and it is the best compact that I've ever had, a perfect blend of good sensor, and wide/fast lens with manual controls. The LX100 takes away flash and slows the lens slightly (the larger sensor is a tradeoff for the lost upper zoom range). I don't blow my pictures up in a major way so the new version just doesn't make enough of an improvement to make it worthwhile. Instead I'll use the money to upgrade my Canon EOS 7D, since I have a deep investment in ultra fast glass for that line of DSLRs.
Does the SL1 use the non-STM line of Canon APS-C lenses? I shoot with a 7D and have several very expensive Canon "L" USM lenses, and I'm not going to buy a Canon camera that requires I buy another set of glass.
xoio: Getting a bit tired of this .. more zoom! more zoom! FAD. Then dumbing down other fundamental features... if what 'motiv500' says is true ... "no raw," & only 200K screens & EVFs ... thats rubbish!
The Pro1, a 7 year old camera, had a screen and EVF that were 235K, it HAD RAW, & even had the extra quick info top LCD (something you only get on mid range SLRs now)Seems that the user interfaces are becoming more & more retarded, as is image quality, in favour of faddy rubbish like GPS & 'baby mode'. - I suppose at least it still has an EVF. Something else that seems to be getting left off cameras these days.. In favour on waving them about in front of your face like an iphone! :-/
I agree on the lack of RAW. But if you care that much about having RAW then you should be buying a DSLR. And I think this is Canon's strategy as well.
Mark 100: What is the actuation lifespan of this camera?
If anyone knows, please post this somewhere under a simple findable heading, e.g. "Actuation Benchmark SX40".I'm referring to the sensor corrupting, and they do corrupt and the repair cost might outweigh the second-hand market value.
I'm still smarting from my Canon SX-10, for which I bought the lensmate attachment, the filter adaptor, extra lenses to fit onto the filter adaptor, multiple sets of batteries, dedicated camera bag and other extras, all worthless when the sensor corrupted after the 1 year warranty expired.
I have bought, owned and shot to hell and back an SX1, SX10, and SX30, alongside my 7D (with "L" lenses) on pro and personal shooting trips without incident. In the beginning I just used the SX cameras for "test" shots and location coverage, but with the SX20 (under good daylight) the shots are hard to discern from DSLR shots in regular enlargement. I have taken thousands of shots with the SX20 without issue. I have friends and relatives who have taken my recommendation on this camera and are very pleased over the past two years of all kinds of shooting. I will buy an SX40 now that the sensor is CMOS. I've found NO issue with Canon CMOS sensors at all in longevity.
williams359: not sure why anyone into photography as a hobby would choose this over a basic SLR. no raw no hot shoe small sensor slower at focusing fixed lens but sam price.
Actually, I don't choose this over a DSLR, but rather buy it in ADDITION to a DSLR for very long shots and different perspectives. The SX40 sometimes provides "walk around" shots that are different from what I can get with my 7D and "L" lenses without all the switch-glass effort and the umpteen pounds of glass in my backpack when I am shooting for me instead of the client. shots from SX cameras have appeared in magazine alongside my DSLR shots and the reader cannot tell. "Every sniper needs to carry a handgun" is something I learned in 'Nam, and it's true.
Anybody who needs GPS data for all pictures should just cut back on the drug prescriptions so they can recall where the heck they were when they pressed the shutter. I mean, really, go buy a point-and-shoot camera with GPS instead; the rest of us know where we were and what we shot. I may make an exception for National Geographic photogs (who wouldn't be buying this camera anyway for other reasons), but otherwise GPS is a crutch for amateurs and has nothing to do with core imagery and creative photography. If it is your discerning feature between two cameras, then you are not a photographer, you're a map freak.