Not too bad. The color performance is nice. You really can't knock cameras like these...the image quality won't win awards but you can't beat the versatility. And at least you can shoot RAW with this model.
In addition, since this model is very nicely spec'd, I wonder what Panasonic will do with the successor to the FZ200.
It would be neat if they would release a weather sealed Q. That would really shake things up.
CameraLabTester: There must be a lucrative market for these cameras because Pentax just keep on churning them out with such gusto!
Well, whatever works for them and their profitability...
If you reformatted your first sentence by taking out the "There must be a lucrative market for these cameras because" and just left the rest...that would be a more accurate statement.
I wonder if this will replace the 18-105 in Nikon's lineup and they will stop making that lens as a result.
I would venture to say at base ISO it's as good as any APS-C camera. Impressive levels of detail.
vapentaxuser: No doubt in my mind it will be an excellent DSLR. I have to wonder though if this model is it for top-end APS-C Canon DSLRs (no 7d replacement).
I was just basing my doubts on the fact that an interview with one of the top execs at Canon seemed to throw cold water on the idea that there will be anything beyond the 70D as far as high-end APS-C goes (at least in DSLR form).
No doubt in my mind it will be an excellent DSLR. I have to wonder though if this model is it for top-end APS-C Canon DSLRs (no 7d replacement).
Gesture: But the more you look at this, it makes the argument (like Sony) for a fixed mirror, i.e. the pellicle mirror solution. Either view should have equal capability and always be on.
I have heard Sony is done with making pellicle mirror cameras (the A58 being the last one) and the next Alpha mounts will be entirely mirrorless.
Hard to tell what to make of this news. At first glance it seems like they are taking the first steps into dissolving the Pentax brand into Ricoh, and just continuing to keep the Pentax brand for now so people won't be further discouraged into buying Pentax DSLRs/lenses. But I have to wonder if in a couple of years we will be seeing Ricoh K-Mount DSLRs (reminscent of what Sony did with using the Minolta mount on their cameras).
Regardless of what the company finally is in the end...my hope is that they continue to work on their marketing efforts in the US to make sure that people can handle/buy a Pentax or Ricoh DSLR down at their local big-box retailer or camera shop. I have already seen some Pentax at Target, so maybe they can use their footprint there to offer more in the way of product.
vapentaxuser: Raising the starting price over its predecessor by $100 is a risky move on Sony's part. I guess they're operating on the assumption that any other enthusiast compacts coming out later in the Summer/Fall will still have 1/1.7" sensors. It might be worthwhile to wait a few months to see what else comes out before buying this camera.
Okay, so maybe in the short term they aren't taking much of a risk, but I think Sony is trying to test the limits of what people are willing to pay for a camera like this. And as long as this remains a unique product, I'm sure they will sell many of these cameras at the $750 price point. However, I can't help but have a great deal of skepticism regarding whether you get your money's worth with this camera.
The images have nice color and contrast to them.
Raising the starting price over its predecessor by $100 is a risky move on Sony's part. I guess they're operating on the assumption that any other enthusiast compacts coming out later in the Summer/Fall will still have 1/1.7" sensors. It might be worthwhile to wait a few months to see what else comes out before buying this camera.
forpetessake: It's a bombshell! The world of mirrorless cameras is shaken!
If everything they say actually works well, this camera will be extremely successful. Competition will be scrambling their design to catch up with Fuji. Expect huge discounts from Panasonic/Olympus/Canon/Nikon and Sony soon. Actually, it will cannibalize Fuji's own X-E1 and X-Pro1 cameras, so they will have to be discounted even deeper. The next step for Fuji will be adding an EVF, and grip, and updating sensor with PDAF, and until FF mirrorless cameras come the competition will be licking their wounds and losing money.
The problem here is Sony sells an APS-C camera with a 16-50 pancake lens for $450. You can buy it in more places than you can the Fuji. Canon offers a lightweight DSLR with a touch screen and viewfinder for $700 and you can also buy that at many, many more places than you can the Fuji. Plus based on my observations of the hot tourist spots here in Seattle, most people are shooting with Canon Rebels and Nikon DX cameras. Out of hundreds of people I saw with semi-pro cameras, only one had a mirrorless (a Nikon 1). Maybe mirrorless will catch on in the future more than it has already but I guarantee the aforementioned cameras will outsell this one many times over.
I am interested to hear what the company's plan is to market these cameras in such a way so it will reach a wider audience.
Maybe it's just me, but I like the styling of the K-30 better than the K-50. But aesthetics aside, you get a lot of camera for your money with both of these models. I also think it's awesome they brought out lighter-weight versions of their WR kit lenses.
ErikH: Well, it's a dilemma for me. I'm upgrading from a 350D and the 700D felt the best to me in the store. I'm sure that it is a good camera but there are so many options now that it makes it a dangerous time to purchase because of the potential opportunity cost.
What to do, what to do?
If you can live with your 350D for a little longer, I would wait. Canon will most likely release a 70D with an all new sensor later on this year, and if that happens, people will probably choose the 70D over the 700D which would prompt Canon to drop the price substantially on the 700D.
The camera is an absolute rip-off and another example of how out of touch this company is with the current market. I know, in a way, it's not fair to judge a camera before you've actually had the chance to shoot with it but I just can't see how Leica can justify selling an APS-C camera with such a slow lens for this price. IMO, if they wanted to capture a larger market share with this camera, the MSRP should have started at or just below $2,000 but even that might be a little higher than a lot of people would pay for a camera like this. And APS-C cameras are only going to get cheaper going forward as a whole, making this look even more ridiculous.
One really great thing that both these cameras have is a physical exposure compensation dial.
They are both wonderful cameras that can produce excellent photos if you take the time to learn how to use them. Anybody who dismisses these cameras as useless or junk has no idea what they are talking about.
As far as comparisons to the RX100 go...yes, the RX100 produces better image quality (although both these cameras have better color reproduction) but the overall shooting experience leaves a lot to be desired, in my opinion.
RichRMA: People are STILL paying $400+ for P&S's when interchangeable lens mirror-less cameras with the same or bigger sensors are available? Why?
When you find an ILC bundled with a 28-200mm F2-F4 lens for $400, let me know.
A great little camera. A good $1,000-ish setup would be the E-PM2 with the kit lens, Panasonic 20mm F1.7, and the Panasonic 45-150.