DustSpeck: Give me a break, are the manufacturers really that stupid? New Olympus EP-5: $999 for the body; New Panasonic Lumix GX7: $999 for the body. Do they really think these are going to sell? Right price is $599-$699. I'd like an Olympus 12mm wide angle for my EP-1... at say $499, not $799. Do they think everyone works for Goldman Sachs?
For the several thousand "Pros" that earn a living with their work, perhaps $6 or $7 grand is a reasonable investment. But the mass market is the hobbiest and as their paychecks continue to shrink, so will camera sales. Just like the disaster in the PC industry, a tablet computer is "good enough" to browse the internet, just like a cell phone camera is "good enough" for pictures because I can't afford a new EP-5, GX1, or 70D.
Cut prices? How to do that if products already sell at a loss?
There are high fixed costs associated with advanced cameras. The sales volumes are too low to make any profit, unless the prices are rather high. People who buy newly announced models do pay a premium. But that's their affair. 2011 or 2012 models sell quite cheaply. Meanwhile, to cut a lens price by half might prompt unit sales to rise by 30%, but entail a loss on each unit sold.
martin0reg: For the price of a om-d the new IS should be as good as the five-axis IS from olympus, especially on video. Dear DP, please make a comparison in the forthcoming test.Why is the grip so big? It seems to be very near to the lens...
Panasonic is not claiming that the IBIS is five-axis, nor even as good as the in-lens Mega OIS of earlier models. The deficiency may not matter much for still photography, or even be an acceptable trade-off for people who want to use assorted non-stabilized lenses, but could impair video competitiveness.
Shamael: I have seen it more than a week ago on a German Photo magazine, my first impression was, "heh, Sony goes 4/3". Seems that the alliance with Oly pays off. Sony works with Oly on the Nex FF, Isis on that new camera, Oly works on the lenses for it, and should show up around end of this year.
Stev Huff was fire and flame to anounce a "presumed" body price of 2800$, what left me react and tell him that double sensor size must obligatory mean double price, while you need not much more material to make a FF camera than any Apsc. One nedds to rememeber that RX1 has a lens that is worth the price alone and the body is just a gift in the combo. I wish Sony made cameras that sell and that anyone can pay for. This permanent overpricing of FF cameras to protect the Apsc market sucks. The 1500$ D600 and 1800$ A99 remained a dream and as it seems, sales for those gear do not boom as expected. Maybe one should review prices a bit and sell at affordable ones, not at "special" gear rates for 1% ers.
Panasonic (Mashita) makes components for Sony Vaios, and Sony makes sensors for camera sold by Panasonic and others.
Joe Talks Photo Gear: As a past owner of the GF-1 and GX-1 I say I would rather own either than dump $999 for the latest iteration. Let's look at it in say 9-12 months when it's selling for $599 or less. Panasonic lost its mojo quite a while ago. Olympus took it from them. Don't want to believe this? Just look at the recent $200 off of the GH3.
A G5 (if you can find one) or a GF5 are a good buy right now. But lenses are what tie up most of the investment, and only certain models ever sell at much of a discount. The 14-140mm or fast primes stay rather expensive.
justmeMN: In the USA, you have to be an enthusiast, to know that Panasonic makes cameras. It's a pretty obscure camera brand name here.
True, you don't find the micro 4/3 models at any most brick & mortar retailers at all. But some stores do carry the (dwindling) P&S models.
TN Args: Why would they choose an eye point of only 17.5mm? Surely eyeglass wearers like me cannot live with that? My camera's eye point is 22mm and it is only just enough when wearing glasses. I would not want to go below 21mm.
What were they thinking?
The eyeglass problem involves more than people in need of corrective lenses, since an EVF / OVF is often needed most under bright sun, when an LCD is useless and many will wear sunglasses. Would polarized lenses skew perception via an EVF? Does the diopter need to be adjusted differently?
Abaregi: Man i wish this had a larger sensor so i could use my legacy lenses without messing up the focal length and dof :(
Really nice specs, i guess Canon Sony and Fuji have some catching up to do now. I'll grab the one that puts this panasonic to rest.
Sony never stops introducing new bodies. Lenses are the topic on which it forever slumbers.
solarider: Hello and greets,
My Q's to DPR staff,TIA!:
To what degree would Olympus brand lenses function with the GX7? Is there significant loss of function in some way? Bad idea?
Does panning work with IBIS or is there need to disable IBIS? Would a camera like the GX7 even be doable for BIF's?
What degree of tracking is working with this camera if any? Bad choice for BIF's?Are any of the mft's cameras even close to being BIF-able :-p ? probably barking up the wrong tree. Nevertheless, what long lenses would be usable for bif on this cam?
I've read marvelous things about Olympus making the very best lenses out of Japan, how do the Panasonic lenses compare?
Maybe DPR should stage a BIF test with every camera, perhaps using a football hurled in late afternoon light. A real bird might be difficult to recruit, feed, and board. But maybe some enthusiastic interns will volunteer to flap their arms and leap through the air.
mpgxsvcd: Couple of Questions for Dpreview
1. You say that the Image Stabilization can be used with any lens. Is it available to use with lenses that have built-in IS? I assume you can't use both at the same time?
2. This is still a rolling shutter camera so the silent mode still has the serious drawback of skew when the camera or subject move. It will be nice for weddings and posed shots but not for the shoot from the hip street shooting that most people would want to use it for.
3. Is there a 1080p @ 60 FPS MP4 mode?
4. And the number one question on everyone's mind is "Does the GX7 use the GH3 sensor, a GH2 sensor, or an entirely new sensor?".
I'm stumped that the GX7 does not feature the 5-axis stabilization found on the OMD EM5 and also on Panny's own x920. Could that be to avoid killing further sales of other Lumix m4/3 wares?
pixelcollector: i just read the max bulb shutter is 2 minutes. If true, the p5 is vastly superior with 30 minutes. Crucial for star trail photography. Does anyone know if max bulb could be extended through firmware update?
Star-gazers are probably better off with a D5200 or an old full-frame model.
vroger1: Will this mean that Lumix will cease producing new stabilized lenses?? It could, of course produce 2 sets- I am still waiting for an interchangeable lens like that on my Fz200- f2.8 all the way.
Got $2,500 to spend on a 200mm f/2.8 lens?
Paul Amyes: I was really ready to buy this until I got to no external mic input. Why oh why cripple the camera like this? I like the form factor very much. It was this or the EP5 and both have been crippled badly as a multimedia device. I hope BlackMagic gets its act together and ships as promised and then I'll buy one of the pocket cinemas and an EPL5 for the stills.
"I hope BlackMagic gets its act together ..."
Patience, patience. Shipments are certain to be be made no latter than 2015, barring usual troubles. Feel better?
PicOne: Why does Panasonic use the (IMO) really cheesy "LUMIX" name? Does any other company slap 3 separate model names (or are these brands or what..?) on their cameras? Panasonic, Lumix and GX7 all on the camera.. spread about so they're not in the same spot.. but still..
A Tokyo committee decided that LU, derived frum the Latin word for light, should be welded to MIX, which would signify diversity or gregariousness.
Is a camera named Lumix less appealing than an auto named TOYota or the (motorcycle) Honda? Samsung (three star) is a name most people probably confuse with an over-performed melody, but its products sell well enough. Google sounds like baby babble, but the name caught on.
Opinionator: Let's face it the game is changing very quickly, but this is all to reminiscent of programming changes prior to global adoption of social media contrivances. It's like the 1950's post war kitchen filled with electronic refriges and soon a dish washer. Yes Betty White will be able to have her maid cook, clean and prepare the guests quarters in rapid fashion with improved results. But is it better than a 5D III or D800E? And where's the perfectly executed zoom from wide angle to an equivalent 200mm FF? And make that prime. For under a grand. I'm sorry but this is more replacement technology than a genuine bargain or improvement. Catchy. Yes. Game changing. No.
Gamer changer: smart phone. Makes many other appliances and gadgets (including cameras) obsolete or marginal. The "dream lens" you mention is impossible for the simple reason that not enough people would buy one to support the economy of scale required to sell one for under $1,000. Meanwhile, you might be able to buy a $1,000 one-man jet pack to fly to work, but decide against it when you consider the risk of self-incineration or fatal crashes.
CZFox: I have a dilemma. Buy Pana 35-100/f2.8 or GX7 ? Where should my money go? I have GF3 and I need tele lens :)
Buy a few stocks, picked at random, every week or month. Hold them all for 20 years, and you won't suffer the either / or dilemma any more.
DotCom Editor: "The most unique new feature of the GX7 is its flip-up electronic viewfinder."
Something can't be more unique than something else. Unique is an absolute. Either something is unique, or it is not. There is no such thing as degrees of uniqueness.
The High Academy of Rap Slang would prescribe the terms "da mostest" or "mo' bedda" instead of Unique, which is more commonly used as name for a temporary companion.
QuarryCat: Far better optics then for Sony Nex or Samsung NX or Nikon 1 - and sensor-shift-stabilisatiion and the best af-system yet from all small system cameras,
that's looking pretty smart as second body to a GH3 or alone but I will have some trouble with the small finder, if it is not good to see in complete for glass-wearers...
all is better the the flickering Sony-finders but the finder should be perfect.
No more reason to buy the exoensive Olympus cameras - it seems Panasonic does it all better.
On what basis are you judging the GX7 IBIS relative to the OMD EM5 5-axis IBIS? Aren't the two cameras priced about the same? Aren't the Olympus m4/3 lenses the most obvious candidates for a GX7 buyer to use?
Panasonic appears not to promise much from the GX7's IBIS. There is no pretense to outperform the in-lens Mega OIS (around since 2008?), to say nothing of the 5-axis stabilizers available on the X920 or OMD EM5. The limitation owes, possibly, to the difficulty of getting advanced IBIS to work with "dumb" legacy lenses. But it might have been nice to have an advanced 5-axis mode available for 5-axis-capable lenses and a simpler mode for old lenses.
Good stabilization is a big deal if one is shooting hand-held video. Faster lens or shutter speed is no cure for hand jitters or walking motion. Casual or travel video can't always employ (or afford) a Steadicam, tripod, or jib, either.
"A new in-body Image Stabilizer is nearly as effective as the MEGA O.I.S. found in Panasonic’s conventional DSLM lenses," the company reports.
Disappointing: not as good as Mega OIS, which is not as good as Power OIS, which is weaker than the 5-axis stabilization available in the X920 or OMD EM%, and of which none match the gyroscopic "balanced optical steadishot" of some Sony videocams. Of course, BOS might not be suitable for a hybrid m4/3, but one might have hoped the GX7 would at least try to match what the OMD EM5 offers.
Might the GX7 IBIS be "crippled"to prevent depreciation of existing inventories of lenses with in-lens stabilization?
Henry Falkner: Another 'Water' fall that dispenses cotton wool instead.
Video shot at 120fps or higher, and then played as slo-mo, conveys motion of drops and globs of water. This is impressive for a few seconds, maybe. Cotton wool turns out to be more enduring.