Deleted78792: As a happy detour from size debates of GM1 with RX100 & NEX-5T, these two sites have some pre-production samples, and they look pretty good-
All cameras are a compromise in the end, but the GM1 sounds (and so far looks) like quite a happy one.
To be fair, the IQ does look a step up from the RX100 sensor/imaging-pipeline. Exciting week this for photo enthusiasts.
Please don't mention the Sony SELP 1650. It is a crap lens. My LX5 gives much sharper pictures and most german test sites say the same.
mausta: Yeah you are right as always YaBOOKIE, we have had sensors on cameras for 100 years. LMFAO! Oh yeah you forgot to mention that it will never be as good as a full frame camera.
Nex 3n sucks IQ wise. So no contest. The RX100 is waaaaaaaaaaay better! And I hope this little guy even better than the RX100...
OneGuy: Now is a good time to put in a wish for dpr's full review of this cam. (Dear Santa. I was very good most of the time and) Could you tell me how big of a hi quality print I can make with F1.7/20mm lens? With GF1 I go to 30x40 cm and routinely get good comments. So, how about 40x60 with GM1? More? Less? (Hello to elfs.)
That's a big criterium for me too. I blow up pictures from my LX5 to maximum 1 meter, and it looks very good. Hopefully this little marvel will do even better. 16MP is not very ambitious though when you consider the quality of Sony's 20MP RX100.
Picture DSCF6996 of the sample gallery really makes me scared. Look at the bleached colour of the foilage in the background. And the way the artwork in the pond is overexposed and glowing.
http://www.instructables.com/id/3D-Printed-Camera-OpenReflex/?ALLSTEPSis the site with building instructions. The guy is Belgian and looking for a job.Anyway: bravo!
Hugo808: Sooner or later someone else here will have the bright idea of checking pics from different cameras side by side. Then the astonishing truth becomes apparent - there aint hardly any difference between these products. Especially at base ISO in bright sunlight.
Sorry you had to hear that from an amateur and one who has used the same digital camera for 5 years and honestly can't get his friends with their regularly upgraded super duper stuff to show him the difference pictorially.
Exactly my feelings. I take a picture at 100 iso of the same spot in my garden with every camera that comes into this house. The results have been disquieting. Some cheap tiny cameras take better pictures than Sony Nex. Why 100 iso? Because I hardly need to use anything else, even in dark buildings (steady hand, good stabilization...). And yes, I agree the dark areas come out better with bigger sensors.