fmian: In regards to this cameras handling, I think it feels like a dog made out of bricks.The camera is weighted horribly towards the opposite side to the grip, seemingly beyond the placement of the lens. While having no protruding grip, there is also an annoying strap lug placed where the fingers would sit, along with a mash of tiny buttons and nothing for my thumb to grip except the back dial.On top of all that, the outer section of the lens is deceptively designed to make you think that it can be rotated to change settings. But it can't.The only saving grace seems to be the lens, and the way the camera looks from certain angles. I was also quite unimpressed by the fact that the top flash plate, where it says 'BRASS' actually seems to be made of plastic.Too little, too late. Pentax, please see Canon & Olympus for how to design a compact camera.
I begrudgingly have to agree with your assessment.
sonnief: naw I'm confused to choose this or the LX7
I would go with the LX7. The MX-1 is a fine camera but that Pana-Leica lens on the LX7 is really something else. Both are about the same in terms of ISO performance.
vapentaxuser: Would make a great, discreet little street shooter. Especially if the AF performance is as good as I suspect it will be. I do think Panasonic should have incorporated a touch screen on this model though.
Is there any information on when Panasonic expects this model to start shipping?
Amazon says it will ship July 5th.
Would make a great, discreet little street shooter. Especially if the AF performance is as good as I suspect it will be. I do think Panasonic should have incorporated a touch screen on this model though.
Anfernee Cheang: "Enthusiast" DC without hot shoe? That sounds funny to me...
I like EVF while all other specs are the same. However, without an EVF I still can shoot. But without hot shoe I can do nothing under certain circumstances. I'd prefer Nikon P7700 in this case, with same 1/1.7" sensor and a brighter F2.0-4.0 lens. P7700 does not have EVF, but instead it has a fully articulated LCD.
Why would it sound funny not to have a hot shoe? It's far from the first enthusiast compact not to have one. It defeats the whole purpose of buying a camera like this.
Mostly impressive except for the incandescent light shot. The auto white balance did a terrible job there. Has been an issue on past Rebels as well.
I like the image quality overall. The photos have a typical Nikon look to them, which is to say that the level of sharpening and contrast is on the conservative side (vs. Canon) but that isn't a bad thing at all in a lot of instances and leads to a more natural look. The color reproduction looks quite good as well.
David Franklin: Well, most of these comments just prove that the internet is the true home of the great critical thinkers and corproate product analysts of the 21st Century. Not.
This camera is probably a very good idea. I hate to seem to "defend" a billion-dollar corporation, but so many comments here that this camera is not enough of an innovation for them is merely a reflection of their own narrow and relentles search for the "next thing" that conforms to their own narrative.
To me, smaller is better, with a 40mm pancake for vacations and weekend walk arounds. Takes my Canon lenses and HAS AN OPTICAL VIEWFINDER, so I don't have to view on an LCD, hold the cam awkwardly and put an extra layer between my eye and the world. I know about the add-on optical and shoe-mounted EVF's, and the more expensive cams with built-in EVF's. They make mirrorless cams more tolerable, but also, more expensive, and still don't compare to the viewing experience of even the puny optical viewfinders of the Rebel series.
It's tempting to bash Canon Rebels right out of the gate because there aren't a lot of whiz-bang features on them. But in the instances where I've used one, I've always enjoyed shooting with them. Everything generally works as it's supposed to and works well. Plus I think Canon has the best color reproduction out there with its images.
stdavid: No hot shoe is a killer for me. I wonder how much more space and technology it would be to make the flash on this camera a controler?Nikon always seems to miss the boat on their compacts.
That would defeat the whole purpose of a camera like this. The idea is to have it as compact as possible, but give you more control and better image quality than your average point and shoot.
thx1138: Yikes, good to see Nikon's lens speed still puts it alongside Canon S1110 for worst effective aperture f/8.5 or so wide open. Much worse than their P7700 and trailing the other competitors by quite a margin - up to two stops at the tele end.
You mean F5.8
It looks like a fine camera but between this and the Canon S110, I would still go for the S110 due to the touch shutter/touch focus feature.
Marcelobtp: Did you guy really looked at the files? I am the only one who thinks the noise is just too much? Every image for me is just washed by the color noise, no fine detail and the lens is just soft. I have my nex 3 and i do think it has the same softness. I will wait for the raws, but something is not right...
I really looked at the files and they looked pretty good to me. About on par with other contemporary sub-$1,000 APS-C cameras.
I hate to drag K-n R--kw-ll into this comments section, but he keeps making statements to effect of "Sony doesn't have resources to do what Canon and Nikon do in terms of perfecting image quality" - which seems like a bunch of baloney. I mean, maybe that was true a few years back, but I think the images that come from this camera and other recent Sony cameras compare very nicely with the big two.
It seems like a pretty nice camera, if a little unexciting. I am curious to see how that new kit lens performs. It looks like it has better build quality than the old kit lens.
I like what I see, overall. It uses that tried and true 16MP sensor. I like that the battery life has improved (according to Sony), and I like that they are using the 16-50 lens as a kit lens, which I think is better optically than the old 18-55 (not to mention more compact). I noticed they cut the screen resolution in half over the NEX-F3, which is unfortunate, but not the end of the world.
But really, how much can you knock a camera which gives you the same quality as DSLRs in its price range but can fit in your pocket?
I kind of wish they would sell this camera in a bundle with both the 18-105 lens and the 35mm F1.8. Even if they charged something like $1,100 for it, you have a versatile travel zoom and a fixed prime lens which will make better use of the 24MP resolution.
Hugo808: What exactly do all these extra pixels actually do that gets everyone so excited?
Other than clogging up your hard drive they don't seem to have any purpose, these pics sure as hell don't look different enough to warrant an upgrade from the D5100.
And the EOS 650D pics look much better to me, and that camera has 6mp less!
I think it's all marketing, people will get scared if they don't have a camera with the biggest numbers.
I have to agree with you on the D5200 vs. D5100. If you're really looking closely, the D5200 is slightly better than the D5100 but not by much. Certainly not worth an upgrade from an image quality standpoint. But might be worthwhile for the performance boost.
mpgxsvcd: F3.5 - F5.3. Enough said! When are the manufactures going to stop giving consumers what they ask for(30x zoom) and give them what they need(F1.4-F2.3) like the LX7 has.
@Karroly My sister knows much less about photo gear than I do and she's still a better photographer than I am. She has taken better pictures with her little circa-2007 Fuji point and shoot than I have with my Pentax DSLR. Not everyone aspires to be the next Ansel Adams. There is nothing wrong with Fuji marketing a travel zoom camera to the casual photographer. In fact, it's more camera than a lot of people would ever need.
Not everybody has an enthusiast mindset when choosing a point and shoot camera. A lot of people just want something that has more versatility and features than their phone camera has and don't really care how fast the lens is. What Fuji offers here is a pretty reasonable package for that kind of photographer. Don't really understand what's wrong about the company listening and responding to their customer base. I think that works out better than the company trying to tell the customer what they think is best for them.
Airless: This has got to be the worst product announcement in the history of digital cameras. Nikon is going to get destroyed by this failure of a system.
If someone gave one to me for free, I wouldn't turn it down. They're not bad cameras at all. I think the S1, especially, is a decent amount of camera for the money.