I had the Lenovo K900, their old flagship. Got it mostly for the camera, which was the first with a 1.8 lens I had seen.
The camera did OK in low light, but not as great as I expected.
It over-processed the images a lot. They looked great on the phone's screen, but shown on a 65" plasma they looked "fake" compared to similar shots taken with the iPhone 5.
Panorama did not do continuos measurements like the iPhone does, which meant that if different parts of the panorama were lit differently, part of the shot would be overexposed/underexposed dramatically.
Finally, the phone was buggy. Had poor reception: way too often I had to dial repeatedly before the call would go through (sometimes it did not at all), while there were no issues with other phones on the same network. Lenovo never updated the firmware in any meaningful way.
I would not buy another Lenovo phone for a while, regardless of the specs.
Macist: What's with all of these superzooms without GPS?
Who uses these things, other than people who travel? And unless you travel to the most predictable tourist spots, a GPS is a must nowadays.
I have a good memory, but I recently spent some time travelling and trekking in Indonesia and came back with a lot of photos, the locations of which I would never know or remember, without having GPS tagging.
Even hiking in Death Valley results in some great shots, but after a few months I have no idea where they were taken, unless they are tagged by GPS.
Even if you are just driving around Loire, it is still useful to have your shots tagged, so you can tell which villages you visited a couple of years later.
Unless your idea of travel is limited to only visiting readily recognizable locations like the Eiffel Tower, GPS is invaluable.
My point is, most people who accept the compromises inherent in a superzoom do so in order to avoid lugging bulky equipment while travelling.
Virtually every photo catalogue app or storage site has a map locator, which maps your photos according to their locations. Why would you NOT want this, even if you never stray outside the cruise-ship routes?
What's with all of these superzooms without GPS?
Dominick101: Luckily we have GSMARENA for a fair comparison:
Enormous amount of artifacts and noise:http://www.gsmarena.com/piccmp.php3?idType=1&idPhone1=6144&idPhone2=4577&idPhone3=5753
Fuzzy grasses anyone:http://www.gsmarena.com/piccmp.php3?idType=2&idPhone1=6144&idPhone2=4577&idPhone3=5753
Nuf said. You guys and DP can tell me Z2 is the new king but facts will never lie. Don't kid yourself, checkout the comparisons.
Nope. GSMArena is basically a Samsung fan site, where every comparison places the S5 on top, or as close to the top as possible without their faces being completely covered in egg....
Even though their own sample photos from the S5 show the poor dynamic range and heavy over-processing, GSMArena boldly claims it's a great camera.
Samsung either sponsors the GSMArena reviews, or they are pandering to get their ads.
Either way, GSMArena is just about the most unreliable site for camera reviews.
miiicho: Is this a joke?1/2.3 and 30-60x zoom? That was maybe cool 5-10years ago.Why not give us rather double the sensor size and 1/3 of the zoom? it could fit into similar package. Nobody ever (ok maybe some exceptions can appear) needs more than 10-15x.This thing is big and still is a toy (okay the price is right, but stilll...).
I kind of disagree on the zoom.
When I travel, there are a lot of things I can't get close enough to, so a superzoom is handy. It's great for wildlife, as well as people - when you don't really want to be rude and stick your lens in their faces.
I currently use a Nikon P510, which is decent for the purpose. My main problem is that its GPS function is rather weak, and in remote areas it seems to fail to tag most of my shots (and since it's remote, I have no clue where I took them exactly).
I am waiting for the DMC-ZS40, which will do 30x in a compact body, with a Leica lens.
In my experience the compact Panasonics have by far the best GPS implementation (you can set it to keep the location even when the camera is OFF), so I have high hopes indeed. The ZS40 can use both GPS and the Russian GLONASS, which should make it a total winner in this category (IMO).
Francis Carver: Wow, yet another "fixes lens superzoom" -- just hat the world has been waiting most anxiously, I suppose.
But this one from Oly and Hardy is so bad, the poor lens' aperture can only be coerced to open up to F6.5 in tele setting. What good is THAT? Particularly when shooting video?
The "dot-line" gimmick is totally ridiculous -- you have to pop up the little flash just to use it, so where are you supposed to be looking at here, anyhow -- dot-line, EVF or LCD screen? Two out of three? All three?
I make mine "none" or "neither," and save $399 in the process as well.
I must give it to Olympus -- they are constantly trying. Just rarely succeeding.
No offense, but some of the Luddites may as well ask why we need digital cameras, or the internet, when we did perfectly fine before that....
The point is, when many of us travel, we go through jungles, small towns, villages, parks, lakes, etc., many of which are not easily recognizable months, or years, later.
Virtually all photo apps and catalog sites nowadays, such as iPhoto, Aperture, LightRoom or Smugmug, have a mapping feature, which will take the coordinates from your photo and place the precise location on a map.
So, I can see the exact curve on the river in Borneo where I took a particular shot, or where a particular village was, the name of which I never knew, until Aperture mapped my shot of it.
So, yes, I can say "Asia," but it's much better when I know exactly where the shot was taken.
Now back to my point about superzooms: they are a compromise by their very nature and most useful to those who travel and need to pack light, yet need a versatile lens.
Macist: Without GPS, it's useless as a travel camera.
Fail, since superzooms are mostly bought for travel photos.
Yeah, well..., I suppose if it was black&white only it wouldn't be totally useless, either. :) Or, alternatively, by getting a good grip on the barrel you can use it to hit people with it :)))
As superzooms are generally a compromise, I wonder what else do people use these superzooms for, if not for travel?
But unless your idea of memorable travel is to just to Paris and back, a GPS is very useful nowadays: virtually every image storing app or site has a mapping feature and most of those who have moved away from film use the location info.
Thus, I think a superzoom without a good GPS implementation is largely "useless" as a travel camera.
Without GPS, it's useless as a travel camera.
Wow, it looks like this would become my new travel camera.
I've had a couple of the older ZS cameras and was really happy with them, but then went to superzooms, first Sony, now Nikon. (I have given up on DSLRs for travel, too much weight and hassle.)
My main problem with the Sony and the Nikon superzooms is that for them, GPS seems to be an afterthought and it takes so long to lock, that the majority of my shots are not tagged (just came back from a rainforest trip, where out of about 600 shots, the Nikon tagged about 40 :(
My old Panasonic ZSs seemed to remember their previous location and lock almost instantly on being powered on.
Really hope that the GPS on the ZS40 is as robust. Combined with the 30x lens, this would be a perfect travel camera.
Can't wait to try it.
The quality seems to have been a bit improved over the 100V (take a look at the comparison shots -- it's particularly evident when you look at the Paul Smith clock dial (you can't even read it in the 100V shot). I had the 100V and I was very happy with the overall quality, but then I am not a pixel-peeper. The 200V does seem to have the sharpness turned on a bit high, though, and it seems to over-saturate a bit.
I gave away my 100V, because I found the GPS function useless for travel -- the GPS turns off when the camera is off, so it has to lock every time the camera powers on. Which means that most photos taken spontaneously are not tagged by the GPS. I really wish DPR would start offering more detail on such aspects of GPS (Panasonic does it best on their compacts, BTW, with the option of leaving the GPS on when the camera is off, thus it's always ready to tag).
I went to Nikon Coolpix 510, and I like the IQ a tad better. The GPS is also better, with the option of leaving it on.
Wow! The COOLPIX P510 sounds like the perfect travel camera.
If the GPS implementation is better than on the Sony HX100V (which sucks, since it has to lock anew every time the camera is turned on), this will be my new travel camera :)
No GPS = not interested.
Not for traveling, at least (but why else would I look for a compact supersoom?)
For travel, the Panasonic ZS20 and the Canon PowerShot SX260 HS would be much better bets.
Very interesting. Great improvements to the GPS, which is a must for a travel camera nowadays.
Curious if Canon implements some sort of HDR on these models and if so, how well it works compared to the competition (mainly Panasonic's new DMC-ZS20?
It looks like a good year for travel cameras :)
Wow! Panasonic has the best GPS implementation of any compact zoom manufacturer I know. With the addition of HDR, this camera is hard to beat.
It will be my new travel compact :)
Macist: No GPS?!
Seriously, who buys superzooms? People who travel, I'd guess, so they don't have to carry an SLR and lenses.
Without GPS, this fails as a travel camera.
@ Francis Carver: LOL, I can not only name the countries, in many cases I have actually been there. But perhaps you should try naming a few, since you are the one making the assertion?
And you not only missed the joke, but missed my whole point about why super-zooms are the best of all worlds for travel, where a DSLR and the corresponding lenses would be too much to carry.
Perhaps you don't see the need for GPS tagging, but I bet you've never had a camera with that feature. But then you probably used to question the need for digital photography, and never saw any use for email, either....
Even the new version of LR has built-in GPS mapping capability. It's mainstream. A "travel" camera is not for real travel without it. Cheers.
"People that know they can only get the shot from a long distance."
O.K., so perverts, as well as travelers. :)
Francis, you show your age :) Other than possibly North Korea, I can't think of a single country where your camera's GPS would be deemed a "serious crime."
I come back from a trip with usually couple thousand shots, often taken in multiple countries, as well as multiple locations. It is often hard to tell where a shot was taken after a few months.
In addition, many shots are taken in between populated areas, and it is really nice to be able to plot a shot on a map and be able to tell where it was taken.
Virtually all major photo sites offer GPS mapping, so I can only imagine that those who see no need for it have never used a decent GPS camera, or are simply too old to learn.... :)
Anyway, I'd never buy another camera without GPS.
Macist: "High End?" Without GPS in 2012? For a superzoom?
Don't think so....
Why? Perhaps you never travel?
But if you want the best image quality, why do you want a superzoom? Superzooms are a compromise, but they are the best of all worlds for traveling.
For traveling, a GPS is invaluable, so that those of us who stray away from places like the Eiffel Tower, can remember the locations of our shots.
This looks like the compact travel zoom to beat in 2012. Let's see what else comes in, though.... Oh, and I want it waterproof :)