Stephen_C: Before the RX100 this would have been a great camera.
I think the LX7 has a 24mm lens and a multi-aspect ratio as an advantage compared to the RX100.
Both are pretty good so it is just a matter of preference IMO.
logbi77: Interesting to see how the XZ-2/P7700/EX2F compares to the old XZ-1/P7100/EX1.
Wow. I'll be waiting for that!
Interesting to see how the XZ-2/P7700/EX2F compares to the old XZ-1/P7100/EX1.
Antonio Rojilla: Between the Sony EX100 (mainly for the sensor) and the Fuji XF1 (partly for the sensor, partly for the host of features and the nice design in a smaller package) this camera is DOA.
I think you meant the RX100, not EX100.
logbi77: No built-in ND filter?
Thank you very much. Hopefully this will clarify things.
iudex: So downgrading from 1/1,63" sensor to 1/1,7" sensor and asking 600 bucks for it? Hmmm, what a progress...
Found a quote from the DPR review of the XZ-1
"Rather than expanding to use different regions of the sensor, the Olympus crops into the 4:3 image size. The result is that it is exposing an area very similar to the 1/1.7" sensor used by many of its peers."
Where does it say it retains the ND filter?
It's not listed in the Olympus America website.
AFAIK, the XZ-1 did not use the whole 1/1.63" sensor area and only uses a crop of around 1/1.7" area from the sensor.
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.
No built-in ND filter?
TheEye: The Mini has the new sensor, but the E-PL5 has the old sensor? What?
Must be an error on DPR's part. E-PL5 sample images show 4608x3456 pixels with the original image size.
bradleyg5: The Ferrari of cameras. This is like the ultimate rich mans social camera.
The Ferrari of cameras belongs to Hasselblad
logbi77: Low light test:"Here it's fairly close. The XZ-1 lens is much much faster. The E-PM1 can push ISO higher safely (1600 vs 400). The 2 advantages basically cancel each other out. "
The bike photo of the XZ-1 according to the EXIF data is at ISO 200, which is why I think it is darker than the E-PM1, not the intended ISO 400 that was written in the article.
Oh, okay then. Understood.
But one more question.
How come when I check the EXIF data with EXIF viewer add-on from firefox, it shows that the XZ-1 photo is taken at ISO 200? Did I miss something?
Anyway, this is a very useful article so props for that.
Low light test:"Here it's fairly close. The XZ-1 lens is much much faster. The E-PM1 can push ISO higher safely (1600 vs 400). The 2 advantages basically cancel each other out. "