Realll: "Overall, the ZS100's photo quality is very good, though not the best in the 1"-type sensor class. The 20MP CMOS sensor captures a good amount of detail, though its lens isn't terribly sharp and JPEG sharpening is on the weak side. Colors lean toward neutral and yellows take on a greenish cast, which can lead to undesirable skin tones."
I do not think that is right. There wеre other cameras that were first in its class but they have not received a gold award. For example RX100 revolutionized the entire PS sector, and received a silver award. I believe that with such results gold award of TZ100 is undeserved.
"Overall, the ZS100's photo quality is very good, though not the best in the 1"-type sensor class. The 20MP CMOS sensor captures a good amount of detail, though its lens isn't terribly sharp and JPEG sharpening is on the weak side. Colors lean toward neutral and yellows take on a greenish cast, which can lead to undesirable skin tones."
bernardly: Much more interesting comparison of Canon G7X to Sony RX100 mk3 at the link below. The language is not English but the pictures speak for themselves. Enjoy!
RX100 M3 is definitely better! Canon has heavy smearing details softwear (even at base ISO)and colors are too warm.
Just saw the review of Photographyblog. Even my LX7 does better.
aandeg: Now that is a disappointment.
HowaboutNOW (given this images)?
Realll: I would ask you WHY to buy camera with limited zoom and so small image size (only 12 mp)? The size of the camera is almost same as my Sony a5000 with 16-50, but Sony has big APS-C sensor and 20 mp images... Yes, I know- the glass is important. But amouont of light is approximately equal. So with Sony and 16-50I have same size, same zoom, almost twice bigger images for beautiful crops and I have it on half-price of the LX100... So again WHY ?
I'm tired my friend, so I stop here. You are wellcome to proceed.Congratulations about your brand new LX100. I will wait until Pana make it more competitive.http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-A6000-versus-Sony-A5000-versus-Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-GX7___942_929_901
So I understand that you state Panny's m4/3 sensor is better than Sony's APS-C? That's funny.... And few posts above you concluded that I'm not so knowledgeable about Photography. :)
HowaboutRAWI have to agree again with your statement.So be SURE that the sensor of Sony is better than Pany's. The good Leica lens could compensate differences BUT hardly make LX100 better camera. That returnes us to my initial post. :)
HowaboutRAWThank you for your opinion. Actually I share same thoughts about zooms and range so I think that it is slightly premature to make conclusions about my photography knowledge. :) I don't want to put much theory here and I'm based on my own experience and it shows that the bigger is the crop the better is the print. :)
If you have LIMITED zoom range you wil definitely need cropping your images so in thess cases SIZE DOES MATTER...And it is not the same if you have for example 3 MP large crops or 10 MP crops.
Death89: In my opinion you will need advanced compacts until the price of the lenses with interchangeable cameras comes down to a similar (more sensible price). If I could buy an ILC with a directly equivalent features for only a reasonable amount (maybe 10-20% more given the advantages) more than the LX100 then I would.
As it stands I can get good enough performance from LX100 for £799, why would I pay 2-4 times that to get similar performance from an ILC version? I maybe an amateur enthusiast only, but I also have to be budget concious. 1 months wages or 4? Hmm...
Being honest I won't be able to afford either any time soon, but I may be able to get an LX7 which it seems will give me similar result to any ILC I may be able to afford with a kit lens.
I am not comparing any fruits. I am just coparing two cameras which compete to take place in my pocket. And if I have to choose one it will not be LX xxx. The camera which gives me better range and better quality is ILC 5000. Actualy I'm cosidering myself as Pany- fen, so I am wainting for Pany camera that could replace a5000 from my pocket. Unfortunately this camera is not LX100.
OK, LEICA lens.... BUT you will not win extra light with such lens if the size of the sensor is smaller. With a5000 you will win SONY sensor and Sony's JPEGs which are beter than Pany's. Yes, 16-50 PZ is not the best but it is good enough in the center so you wil have images twice bigger which actually increase your zoom range twice. AND if you decrease images of a5000 disadvantages of 16-50 PZ are hardly ever seen. So finally you win not only 500$ :)
I have bpth- LX7 and Sony a5000 and I prfeer Sony more, even for the night shooting. Only flash -needed pictures of LX7 are better... But it still is good camera though.
I would ask you WHY to buy camera with limited zoom and so small image size (only 12 mp)? The size of the camera is almost same as my Sony a5000 with 16-50, but Sony has big APS-C sensor and 20 mp images... Yes, I know- the glass is important. But amouont of light is approximately equal. So with Sony and 16-50I have same size, same zoom, almost twice bigger images for beautiful crops and I have it on half-price of the LX100... So again WHY ?
Lupti: Please look for another writer than Jeff Keller. I miss the old DPreview reviews that were objective and prosy instead full of gushing praise. I have the TZ25 and it is by no means a good camera. Build quality is bad, and IQ is far from good. Look at the ISO100 samples, you will clearly see that these images look slightly smudgy due to massive NR. And you can´t change NR, sharpness, contrast or anything else in the camera, you only have the choice between standard and "vivid" look(beside Sepia and B/W). Also I think the price premium of the "bigger brother" is it worth as the TZ31 not only has longer zoom, better movie capabilites and GPS(IMHO useless) but also a slightly better IQ, however as the TZ31 also hasn´t the best IQ I would rather recommend looking for remaining stock of TZ10/ZS7 as this camera has MUCH better build quality, better IQ with adjustable settings and no rolling shutter in movie mode.
I don't know what kind of comparison did you make but the fact that TZ25 has better IQ even at base ISO is too obvious for my eyes... The watch, the coins and the texture details is definitely better than TZ30's. Even at ISO 100 and more visibly at all ISO above 400. Just take a brief look at the label "NI-MH" on the batteries in the left corner at ISO100-400. You sould be blind to not see the difference...
I would like to thank DP for this review. I have TZ25 and I totally agree that it is great little camera. My pixel peeping shows that it is definitely better than TZ31 and at least as good as SX230/260 which I own too. I'm happy with my new camera and I think it has very good low-light performance ( which is very important to me). Well done Panasonic, well done DP.
coastcontact: I just purchased this camera last week. So far I am delighted with its performance. I am somewhat surprised that Barney Britton gave the camera such a low rating. Other reviewers have all been giving this camera outstanding reviews. http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/Extended-Zoom.htm gave the camera a 10 out of 10. DPR’s owner, Amazon, has raised their price to the Panasonic suggested retail price. Probably proof that the camera has been very well received.
It would be very interesting which camera wins the GOLD AWARD...
Exellent!Thank you Dpreview! Now we are waitng for update of the sample images gallery!