photo nuts: Was all excited about the LX100 until I read this little blip:
"The original version of this article stated that the LX100 has a touchscreen, which is not the case. We are very sorry for any confusion caused." - http://www.dpreview.com/previews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-lx100
So, out of the 3 competing cameras, Sony RX100 III vs Panasonic LX100 vs Canon G7X, only the G7X has a touchscreen which is very important for changing AF in a small format camera.
OK, I'd read T3's comment the other way round, anyway.
DerekWillmott: The specs sheet shows 2.7 megadots on the EVF. This article says 2.3.
Ok, thanks for the clarification.
@T3 How so? I'd have thought AF point selection by touching the screen would be least useful when holding the camera to your face.
What? There's also equivalence for EVFs? That's news to me, and worrying. As if we didn't have enough with all those tiresome threads discussing 35 mm equivalence every single week.
Definitely too big, I don't see why they couldn't fit a flash in there.
And that lens looks huge when extended. It can still be a nice camera, but a compact camera it is not.
Dimac: too big and too ugly and missing things, deleted from my wish list
Who's we and why do you feel you can speak for them?
Alphonse75020: No new Q lenses?No Q lenses roadmap?
That's probably for the better. The Q cameras are dead unless Pentax brings out a 1" sensor model pretty soon.
zorgon: It's hard to believe that they can make a lens that small, with that zoom range and aperture. On paper at least it looks better than the Sony RX100III and Panasonic LX100 but I get the feeling that something has to give. I guess we'll have to wait and see what the image quality is like.
People take pictures in bright light with their smartphones every day. Lack of a VF of any sort has never been a problem. If you say it's a personal preference, ok,but it's not a must for everyone.
Kirk Tuck: No EVF? DOA.
For some others, maybe ;)
For some, maybe.
Tripeiro: Had Canon put an EVF they would have had a very interesting product (and it has been a while). But of course they had to disappoint and launch a product that although interesting, still feels half baked. Canikon being Canikon.
Disagree. It would be bigger with an EVF, and right now pocketability is one of the, if not the, biggest advantages of the G7X over the LX100, along with the longer zoom lens and tilting screen. A larger body, even with an EVF, with a 1" sensor would be pointless.
locke_fc: Not really interested in the camera, but no wifi caught my attention.
It's 2014. At what point will camera makers decide it is no longer acceptable to release a flagship camera with something as simple, but highly useful, as wifi??
So yeah, no good reason NOT to include wifi in a high-end camera.
Not really interested in the camera, but no wifi caught my attention.
Unless there's a big differemce in IQ (which looks unlikely), I'm going to be SO torn between this one and the LX100...
Impressive specs indeed, although I'm not too crazy about the short zoom. Somethning like 100mm would have been much more practical for a compact.
However, I'm more disppointed in the size. I know, it's a m43 sensor in a body with external controls AND a VF, but still... too large (particularly, thick) to be anywhere near pocketable.
I'll defnitely wait for reviews as this is a really exciting camera, but right now, I'm slighlty more interested in the G7X, with its much smaller body, longer zoom, tilting screen and integrated flash (I truly hate those tiny clip-on flashes).
Too heavy, far too expensive. Not for me!
Jogger: We basically don't need any dedicated compact camera that doesnt have a large sensor, isnt a superzoom, or isnt ruggedised. Flagship phones are already using 1/2.3 sensor and some have even larger.
I still agree with the other points Jogger made.
I read the piece, and before even reading any of the comments I thought that this reads like something straight out, or heavily inspired by, Fuji's marketing department I'm not saying it is, but maybe writers should consider what the stuff they write may sound like, and maybe put their arguments forward in a different manner. Just saying.
Oh, and my personal take? No, we don't 'need' the X-30 and it adds far too little for a camera coming almost two years after its predecessor. At the very least an upgraded sensor, or a smaller size, or something more substantial than this.
RickBuddy: Pretty sad day when a photographer attempts to convert a photo taken by a monkey to his own copyright.
"No! I'm really as good as that monkey!'
Right about there, the guy's lost.
Pretty sad day when a photographer buys the equipment, travels thousands of miles to get to some monkey, sets the equipment up so that the monkey can get some meaningful results with it, PP the images, distributes them and yet he's denied copyright.
b craw: I was really hoping we were not going to revisit this monkey business upon ruling. But alas...
Sorry for those that are speaking opinions relating to fairness or some abstract spirit of fairness that should exist in this whole matter. Truth is, all laws are subject to degrees of interpretation, but the interpretive latitude was quite narrow in this case - outcome quite predictable. Defining moment of creation " selfie" resided in the activity of a natural force (animal) therefore copyright can not be held by photographer despite preparation, editing, or distribution. Animal cannot hold copyright, therefore no copyright of these images. Period. And, contrary to some opinion, this ruling should not make vulnerable copyrights granted to photographers setting wildlife photo traps. That action is entirely different, involving much more distinct authorship/production by the photographer.
Well, that is the US Office's interpretation. But it's wrong.