Well, constant f2.8 is nice, I wonder how is does vs. an FZ200.
Awesome price points for the body. Sony once again underwhelms on lenses.
Photog74: Anyone know if you can use lenses with M42 screw-mounts - or lenses with Pentax K bayonet mounts - on these things (using an adapter, of course)?
Any lens that can be adapted to NEX will work here.
Wow, these look like the new Sigma lenses...
lazy lightning: Over 3/4 of a pound? DO NOT let the m4/3 users see this thing as it will have them running in terror at the thought of having to "lug" this monster around.
Ok yabokkie ya got me. How the hell does a slower lens=lower image quality?
Actually Canon USA has it wrong. There are 7 Canon lenses with Stepper Motors. Just because the douche bags won't stock the 11-22mm doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Truman Prevatt: Nikon was looking for a home run. The last home run came with the SLR which changed the camera industry and is still dominate - independent of digital sensor or film. Home runs are difficult to come by. What people want is not important - it is what people buy is. I expect the Nikon 1 type cameras will be around in the mix for a long time. However, just as the flexibility of the SLR system limited the rangefinder cameras of the 50's and 60's to a niche - I expect the flexibility of the DSLR system will limit the mirrorless to a niche. That doesn't mean that the companies won't pursue their development or limit their utility.
I expect that good PDAF on chip will make the SLR market obsolete, but the technology is still a couple years from mass market.
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.
@peevee1 The Nex6 was $300 HIGHER in price at introduction. The GX1 sells for $199 often now, your example is arbitrary. Manufacturers are going to charge maximum $$ for the next big thing for the 1st sheep who "need" the latest.
Fiacre: Nice camera, but why the silent mode (electronic shutter) is limited to 200-3200 ISO ? Does the electronic shutter add eletronic noise to the signal ?
It's limited to ISO 1600 on the G5 and it doesn't go up to 1/4000 exposure either (I don't remember the shutter speed limit as I'm using a G3 currently).
Panasonicus: $1000 body only may be a deal breaker for many. When you consider the price of a G3 or G5 at less than half that amount or the latest G6 with the upgraded kit lens at $799 you have to wonder if the GX7 will see a big price drop early on.
With IBIS it looks like Panasonic may phase out in-lens stabilisation as it adds to cost, size and weight. The ability to use Olympus glass is a big plus and the built-in EVF is a massive advantage. I have never figured out why people buy a GF camera when, for the same money, you can buy a G series with built-in EVF.
The GX7 is heavier and larger than my G3 but not by much and apart from the high price this looks like the best product Panasonic have come up with to date. I may buy one if the price drops to around $699. By the way, I am in the UK and expect the usual rip-off pricing (probably 80% more) will apply making a US purchase a 100% certainty.
It all depends upon the sensor. If it is equal in DR and Low light performance (or better) than the OM-D and other Olympus bodies Panasonic will be able to maintain the pricing like the GH series. If it is only a marginal improvement over the IQ of the 16mp Panasonic sensors (from G3 onward) we will see this as a $349 body special this time next year.
rhlpetrus: Well, I'm catholic re cameras, use the iPhone, the V1 and the D7000 and several lenses, can't see a single reason to restrict myself to just one kit. Why, in a site dedicated to photographic gear, echo the big media calls for the demise of dedicated photographic gear?
@midwest And yet here you are commenting on a thread extolling the values of mirrorless/small form cameras.
GeorgeD200: I see a lot of comments that revolve around one idea: "I replaced my aging, outdated DSLR system with new, higher-end mirrorless or premium compact cameras, and I'm much happier now!"
Really, who wouldn't take a Fuji XE-1 over a D200 or K10D? Those were fine cameras in their time, but pretty outdated now. I know, I had a D200, and it was cr@p at anything over ISO 400. Somebody else compared a D300 to an M9. Original EOS 5D for OM-D or EP-5? Come on. At least compare apples to apples. An EM-5 to an SL-1, now that's more like it. There's no denying that modern cameras with APS-C or m4/3 sensors can compete with 6-7 year old SLR. It's a silly comparison.
OM-D has better IQ (IMO) overall than an SL-1/60D/7D/T5i (or EOS M) for that matter. The distinction isn't that great though. It's all about what a person needs and preference of optical vs. EVF etc...
jjnik: The RX100II night shot is fine to post on Facebook - but beyond that it is a noise-reduced mess and way inferior to what a good FF DSLR would deliver. I'm fine with people being OK with these shots and wanting decent IQ in a portable package - but there are significant IQ trade-offs that come long with that - so I hate when people try to suggest that they come even remotely close to what a good DSLR would deliver in the same situation because that is complete BS.
@marike6The RX1 does not have "poor AF" and I don't need a D800 to compensate for a lack of something between my legs. :)
I've shot over 1500 files through an RX1 and I've also used a D600 w/the Sigma 35mm f1.4. Simply put, the RX1 wins every time in IQ. My non action 35mm "caveat" has only to do with contrast vs. phase-detect auto focus. Don't pretend you've ever used an RX1.
Also, I'm not against DSLR's and physical controls--my comment on IQ is simply fact: DSLR's do not offer better IQ than same size mirrorless sensors. Many times they are the same sensor (APS-C Sony sensors in NEX/Pentax/Nikon DSLR's etc...).
However, there are instances when size does matter (I couldn't resist). Getting into a club or museum is a helluva lot easier with an RX1/X100(s) than a FF or Crop DSLR in many instances.
tbnl: Meh. To each their own. I've been using an aps-c dslr and a complement of lenses, and I've had no issues scaling up walls, climbing a top of rocks, hanging from ropes and cruising around on a skateboard with my kit.
Sure, it'd be nice to have something compact, but until Nikon makes a mirrorless that uses the F-bayonet without an adapter, and has the capabilities for flash and external lighting, I'm keeping my dslr. If they made something with the controls an size of my FE, I'd buy it.
I like having all the controls at my finger tips without having to scroll through menus, and the stability of using a viewfinder over a screen does it for me.
To each their own.
Absolutely, it is great to have so many good choices!
Why would I spend money on a $4000 on a 4 pound FF Body and 35mm lens. You can get shots with a small camera that you can't with a DSLR. The advantages and disadvantages go both ways.
I humbly suggest that mirrorless cameras are capable of producing images just as good or better than DSLR's. Especially of the same sensor size. You won't do better in a non-action 35mm shot than an RX1 with ANY FF DSLR body/35mm lens combo.
Well, you could go mirrorless, 35mm and shoot at "ISO 20,000+" with an RX1 and save space! All kidding aside, a very well formed piece on the practicality of photography and balanced to boot. I started in mirrorless (GF2) and have found very little need to go "bigger" even though I like to shoot birds. Right now the EOS M with the 22mm is a great, small and ridiculously cheap combo for the 35mm eq. FOV--$300 for the EOS M vs. $2500 for an RX1. I can afford and have owned (and loved) the RX1 but for my use, the EOS M is damn good and a damn good bargain. Thanks again Barney!
Adrian Van: Very good photos overall. Image quality similar to OMD. What is the point of taking photos at 12800 iso, to show how noisy it is at an iso most of us would not likely want to use anyway, and would get a prime for a lower iso? It cleaned up fairly well in ACR though in second image. I would rather see more images at 1600, 3200 and 6400. There was some night photos taken at 800 iso with F1.8 or longer exposures looked very good. All in all a great camera though. Robin Wong also has great examples on his website blog.
How effective is the IBIS? On par with the OM-D? Thanks for posting the samples :)
PBR and an RX100 (II). Life doesn't get any better.