ecka84: Actually, 4.5-108mm f/2.8 is equivalent to 25-600mm f/16.
I knew you guys wouldn't be able to help yourselves...
Between the still and video features, and the robust build, this should make a nice hybrid travel camera for a wide range places and conditions.
belle100: I think it's time for me to ditch my DSLR and get this as I am not very demanding on absolute quality. Convenience is what I am after.I like the side dial position.
If convenience is more important to you than absolute quality, why have you not yet run screaming from your SLR? :P
I appreciate their attempt at a clever approach, but for me reducing high iso noise reduction and leaving more detail (and grain) gets closer enough to the old "film" look to be satisfactory, especially with these new high resolution sensors. I'm sure for the more particular crowd that has a real issue with high iso noise and grain, many are shooting RAW anyway.
I've always wondered why they couldn't figure a way to mate IBIS with OIS. I guess it didn't make much sense until you had a manufacturer that for some reason had produced both. This is a smart way for Panny to be able to add IBIS to new bodies while making their OIS lenses more useful rather than redundant. Very smart.
Panasonic has been doing a good job of integrating creative and promising tech into their new models. Some of their new focusing features on this model are quite interesting too..
Equivalence honks, stop. Shut up. All us gearheads on this site know both sides of the coin by now. We've heard it 500 times.
Is the difference in the filters really enough to need/justify two different models? Seems like an unnecessary waste of resources to me.
Macro Nutrients: Oh im sure there is unlimited storage. Google definitely wants you to store your entire life, one photo at a time, on their servers. Yep, move along people, no spies here, just honest government workers....
Isn't it a good thing if the ads I see are more relevant to me, anyway? I know I'm playing a bit of devil's advocate here, but I guess I am struggling to see the long term drawbacks for me personally. I don't have much to hide. I suppose the things I do want to hide- well, I just need to be more careful with those...
basale: submitting your pictures to this service means you say goodbye to your copyrights. Maybe this should have been mentioned in the original news item.
Pretty disingenuous to leave out the very sentence prior:
"Some of our Services allow you to upload, submit, store, send or receive content. You retain ownership of any intellectual property rights that you hold in that content. In short, what belongs to you stays yours.
When you upload, submit, store, send or receive content to or through our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones."
It gives Google a broad license, yes, but you retain ownership of the material. That is substantially different than what you suggested.
refusenik: I've always said that 16Mp is the sweet spot for sensor size. So I can upload unlimited full-res 16Mp photos to Photos. Sweet.
I remember a few years before that, everyone saying 8mp was plenty. As sensor tech progresses, there will be no reason to artificially limit your resolution. I think what you're getting at is that 16mp is a good compromise between resolution and the rest (noise, dynamic range, etc.) for now, and I pretty much agree with you on that, but don't worry, time marches on!
I could hardly care less if google, or the government for that matter, wants to look at my photos of my dog or what I had for lunch yesterday.
Lab D: Just read nerd2's classic comment abour how since f2.8 on m43 is really f5.6, and so apsc with an f5.6 lens is better. I bet he still doesn't get why that is so funny.
I have no problem with what nerd2 says, as its correct. The issue is the assumption that sensors of varying size are equally efficient, but they generally aren't. Small tend to outperform larger ones per unit of sensor area., and progress in smaller sensors seems to be leading larger sensors these days due to demand, which would tip the efficiency scales in favor of small sensors.
Its really a discrepancy between theory and practical results.
acassino: I think this ad campaign is stupid and offensive.
You seriously cant be that sensitive. Can you?
Offensive? To whom?
azlover: Too big. I need a smaller P&S with built in 35-90/2.8 lens and a new sensor that falls somewhere in between 1" - 4/3.
The Canon g7x is probably closest, since it covers all his criteria and is smaller.
0mega: I just don't see how this can compete with Sony mirror-less.
@thematic- what size do you often print that this camera could not live up to? I suppose it depends on your standards, but I have printed tons of 13x19 that turn out great. If you need to print larger sizes from images taken in less than ideal conditions, maybe you need 35mm or the like. For many, the IQ difference between the two isn't a dealbreaker. I'd go as far as to say that for most beyond pixel peepers, the difference between m4/3 and aps-c is unnoticeable.
ShatteredSky: RAW for the tough series please. Or better finally do a tough XZ-3. Thanks!(yes, I am aware that this may not be what the market demands, it's just me).
I'm really surprised Olympus didn't add RAW to the tg3 if they wanted to differentiate it from the other waterproof models already out there.
LukeDuciel: thumb up for adding 5 axis stabilization on a travel zoom, big competitive edge over all other in the same niche.
big thumb down for the proprietary port. I HATE this kind of design. I have a tg-2, you have to charge via that port, such a shitty thing. I have to taken care of the precious special cable, carry it and find it when needed.
The little Canon 330hs does a nice job for a dirt cheap price. Decent 2.3 sensor and lens combo.
Maybe a good compact with a separate waterproof housing would be a good option for you- more choices.