SeeRoy: Solution seeks problem.
Like most innovation.
prossi: How about DPreview focus on some of the cameras people want to see reviewed like the GM5, a5100, EPL7, d750? Why would anyone want to get this thing when the rx100III is out there? I don't know what's up with Canon but I gave up on it since 2010.
@Joseph BlackIt would not be quick as a transatlantic flight would be necessary :) I have never seen a Best Buy this side of the pond. In the UK they would have to call it the 'Least Worst Buy'. Over here Canon always tends to be shown as the camera on any general Christmas promotion, ironically the the total power failure if you video zoom SX280 is often pictured. This is why I get the overall feeling that they are just not under the same pressure as the competition to perform. At an air show virtually every camera is a Canon SLR with the odd Nikon.
@Joseph BlackHow many owners of the G7X have used many other cameras for comparison. Do not forget that a large percentage of Western buyers are not aware that anyone but Canon make cameras. Probably this is why Canon cameras are so unrefined as the market is there whatever so why would they need to bother.
Mike FL: For Zoom = F2.8 all the way with small sensor/body, you can get Panasonic FZ200 @$379 as today's price (10-31-2014) while Stylus 1 is about $600 from respectable sellers.
Other than huge price difference, there are PROs and CONs, but FZ200 has much wide (24mm vs 28mm) and longer (600mm vs 300mm) zoom, and SHARPER lens.
Link for FZ200 @$379:http://www.abesofmaine.com/item.do?item=PSDMCFZ200K&id=PSDMCFZ200K&l=PLA&gclid=Cj0KEQjw5syiBRCwxPbE6o_MsK4BEiQAUowjppy6E61JOlFAx2gUAglH5L2E7U00PHEkDHpkHabxgUYaAlGC8P8HAQ
Why FZ200 is better choice:http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Olympus_STYLUS_1/verdict.shtml
Not sure how you come to the conclusion that I own the camera. Just a detached observer a bit mystified by your comparison. Your post does not really merit any other comment.
The FZ200 is double the thickness of the Stylus 1 and weighs 46% more. The FZ200 is certainly not a small camera and given its limited zoom is rather oversized nowadays which is why it is so cheap given that compact travel zooms are 30x nowadays. Just a completely different sort of camera with only the f2.8 as a matching feature and really irrelevant to this thread.
straylightrun: Absolutely disgusting. With such minor software changes, why not just make it a firmware update?
So you know for a fact that all the changes in the camera will run on the current hardware? You can run any software on any processing platform coupled to any physical camera components.
Sirandar: I also checked out the similar legacy lenses from the 70s and 80s. They were beautiful creations but the images were nothing special .....
They were not sharp as the midrange m43 lenses I had and the contrast was sometimes good sometimes poor and the colours were mostly washed out. It is very hard to fix washed out colours convincingly in Photoshop.
They were dirt cheap and I still didn't buy them.
Nothing even cane close to my 45mm Oly Prime in any aspect let alone all three.
I also found a new respect for my cheap Oly 40-150. My copy is pretty darned good for any price. If only it was faster .....
You can't judge a lens much by how it looks or what is made of, or a red dot.
You judge it by the images and how easy it is to use.
My money would be on that it isn't worth 359$ as that is about what I paid for my Oly 45mm prime but we will see.
Possibly there has been some development in materials and optical design since the 70's and 80's. These lenses will be deigned for your digital m43 camera and the legacy lenses were not.You contradict yourself by saying that you cannot judge a lens on what it looks like then assume this lens will be same as a 1980 lens because it looks like one.It is going to be a useful addition to e-mount as this focal length and the aperture is very appealing.
I suppose it is just a case of trying to make these old technology electro-mechanical machines look modern and up to date.
AV Janus: Its cute how these filter makers still hang on to the pre-post processing technologies for photography. They are down right retro!They should sell their brand while its still worth something.
Is that a fact that post processing can match everything single thing in a normal image that this at the moment modification can do and as easily for that matter? Even a RAW image has a degree of commitment that cannot necessarily be undone later.
I would like a sensor half way between 1/1.7" and 1". This would create a pretty high performance zoom compact without creating the gigantic beasts that have appeared with equivalent focal length 200mm+. They have tripled the area of the sensor when doubling it would probably suffice for compact purposes.
Astrotripper: Looks promising. A bit mushy, which I guess is typical for in-camera jpegs. However, I'd say:- those look much better than jpegs from any of Samsung's mirrorless offerings (now, that is one lousy jpeg engine), including NX1- it seems to handle lens flare pretty well- CA must be pretty well controlled, since the in-camera corrections have left very little traces of it, no obvious purple fringing as well- a little bit of softness in the corners on the wide end (probably resulting from distortion corrections), totally expectable, still much better than some DSLR zooms- no extreme vignetting, but that's most likely corrected in software, so hard to tell how the lens perform in this regard- ISO 1600 looks to be perfectly usable
Can't wait for in-depth review. This looks like it may be a perfect walk-around camera for more advanced users.
These glib assertions that such and such a make has a lousy JPEG engine always amuse me. Especially as I have read it for just about every make and the NX1 probably is not yet in to its production firmware and we have it trundled out here. The fact is that for a lot of post processors any camera jpeg which did not show a clear sky as bright turquoise and every colour super saturated is going to be a fail.
Zeisschen: The fact that Panasonic uses the same sensor size as in their other cameras is a bit strange. I think they just wanted to surpass the Sony RX100 in sensor size again after their LX series fell back behind and for sure the sales dropped due to the Sony. Now it's a big ugly transformer monster camera that is not really compact anymore, somewhat missing the point imho. I'd also go with a M43 camera with interchangeable lenses instead of I can't fit it in my jeans pocket, the RX100 can. Canon GX series has the same problem.If course the LX100 will be great camera, it just doesn't make much sense for me. As the one and only camera beside a smartphone it would make sense, but not for M43 owners. At Sony the difference between a A7 and the RX100 is much bigger so it makes senses to own both cameras.
Where did all this nonsense start where any camera that does not fit in a jeans pocket is classified as not compact? It seems a pretty trivial way and irrelevant way of categorising portability of cameras. Putting a camera in a jeans pocket is only really applicable to people who can afford to trash their expensive equipment on a casual basis.
NeilJones: Seriously peeps. You all need to wait 2 months as Sony is about to release a killer new tech camera that will blow everything else out of the water!
Mark my words.
Sony have dropped the level guide on the A6000 and reinstated the old Alpha SLR days menu system. On my NEX 6 things like histogram and the level have to be toggled through as they can only show one at a time. The hardware is good but hardly new tech when trying to use the kit. Going backwards from what I can see.
tmurph: Pricing is the key here. Why would Panasonic leave the price of the cameras so close.There should be a clear distinction between the GX7 and the LX100.The GX7 with a 14-42 is at the moment in the uk is about the same as the LX100 asking price, that to me is too close. Obviously the price of the LX100 should come down but why leave the two cameras so close in price within the Panasonic range?
The magic word is 'at the moment'. At the moment any newly released camera is going to be dearer than an older one. The body only list price of the GX7 in the UK matches the LX100 complete with fast lens plus a lens to match the LX100's, if it exists, is going to double the price of the GX7 package and the size I would expect.
An utterly delicious contrast of old 20th Century design technology in 21st century high fashion chic.
Greynerd: Well Canon may have fallen flat on their faces with mirrorless but they are the undisputed top dogs of viewfinderless.
@gmkeSome screens are OK and others are not. I have found it is just a bit of a lottery whether the camera you buy has a visible screen or not. I find with my Panasonic TZ60 the little low resolution screen is a great backup even though the screen is pretty good and I just hope Canon can start putting a little screen in the corner. The G7x looks a great camera but you just never know how these screens will perform in extreme brightness and I would not want to find out the hard way after shelling out £579 which is a lot of money for just a 1" sensor. It is a bit of a high stakes gamble.It is difficult to understand how this technology is so erratic after so much time. The G7X may be OK but the only way to find out is to buy it. Too much of a risk for me at this price. Just a little low resolution EVF in the corner would make all the difference.
Well Canon may have fallen flat on their faces with mirrorless but they are the undisputed top dogs of viewfinderless.
Zarniwoop1985: Hey guys. Question for you. Not sure if this is the right place but anyway! Have pre-ordered the Panasonic LX100 from Adorama US for $955 (incl shipping). This equates to £590. The UK website Wex Photographic is selling it for £799. This seems too good to be true. Are there any disadvantages or issues that buying from the US might give me? Like different video capabilities etc?
So the sort of surcharge we see in UK over exchange rates which is often 50% or more is in fact a very expensive warranty. I do wonder whether just to buy overseas, as given the failure rate of my kit, UK sourcing is just a waste of money on what is very expensive and limited breakdown insurance with no accidental cover.
Where do you get this 20% import duty from repliers. There was a long discussion of this on a forum and the consensus seemed there was no import duty. The whole point of the short video times is to avoid import duty if classified as a video camera. Can give the source of this information?
aroundomaha: No microphone input port. Not a deal killer but that is disappointing in a camera capable of potentially pretty nice video work. Shame.
Sony are happy to sell you a microphone for their cameras which goes in the hot shoe. I am sure Panasonic would prefer to do it this way if they do not do it all ready.