nicoboston: For less than 400 USD, we can get the tiny EOS 100D body, which can be used with dozens of amazing lenses and generates infinitely better images that this pixel jello.Whatever the brand, all these "premium compact cameras" are just a joke IMO. They are not small, not versatile, not cheap, not convenient, very slow, and generates files that are technically put to shame by any entry level DSLR, as well as a growing number of smartphones.Save your money and have fun with a good camera! Take time to study what you can get for... $999.
Only mention of the size of the camera body? Tell us about the tiny and amazing long zoom lenses. Which would you recommend?
Francis Carver: "Panasonic announced the first-ever 20MP Micro Four Thirds camera."
Product announcements are usually not reviews. Also, since we have had cameras with app. 20MP sensors for seemingly ions, and including all sorts of form factors and size sensors to boot -- why is it a "big deal" if Panasonic now is announcing one such camera with the same pixel density sensor?
Whereas I do not wish to rain on anyone's parade, summertime is usually not the time to get overly excited about new camera products and announcements about them. Let's hope this autumn and winter will bring a more palatable crop of them to fruition.
My 20 mp NX3000 aps-c camera which cost £189 actually has a lower pixel density than this camera. I use my EM5 MkI for its higher specification, ease of use and viewfinder but the cheap and cheerful Samsung camera for the best image quality. It is a funny old business this camera world.
In the UK the G7 is going for £679 and the the GX8 for a stonking £1,149 both with the 14-42. On my part I would save myself a headache trying to figure out the differences and a lot of cash and buy the G7 which is not a lot larger. I really doubt the differences in IQ will be that great. They never are. Sony always like to soak up any sensor improvements with extra pixels if it is a Sony sensor.
rwdigital: Don't waste your money on this camera with this tiny sensor, remember guys, 1” sensor is 4x the size of the 1.2/3” sensor, so that means you gathering 4 times the light over this cameras (FZ200/FZ300), and if it’s a BSI sensor, that double the light sensitivity. So you pay for a camera like the new Sony RX10 mk-II which has 1” sensor (or the The FZ1000 but has no BSI sensor), that gather 4x more light than the FZ200/FZ300 but you will not pay 4x more for that low light capability, you will only pay twice the price on the RX10 II or few hundreds on the FZ1000.
"You only pay twice the price". That's a punchy marketing selling pitch. I am surprised we do not hear it any where else.
Aleo Veuliah: Great all around Camera.
Well done Panasonic.
@JákupI expect you have fun with photography but in these compact reviews we are always privileged by the visit of large numbers of seriously superior photographers from the higher realms of the hobby who know what we all need and wish to point out how foolish we are. I have a whole pile of small and large sensor cameras which seem to all have a valid function in some situation but Mr Timbits knows better.I would ignore it but these reviews are so disrupted by these people, with absolutely no interest in the specific model being reviewed, persistently re-posting the same general point on sensor format. These sort of posts are really a general issue and not relevant to the review.
Timmbits: Is this manufacturer out of touch with reality? This is 2015 after all. Not 1995, not 2005, but really 2015!
I just don't know what question to ask:
Why are we here talking about, reading about 1/2" sensor cameras? Why is a Walmart camera being featured here? Why do they even make this camera with a 1/2" sensor?
Why are you all so enthused about tiny-sensor cameras, still, in 2015, when we know better? If they were so good, they wouldn't have lost half their marketshare to smartphones. 1/2" sensor cameras aren't exactly flying off the shelves anymore, and for good reason.
DPR is a serious website, about photography and great cameras and gear. Maybe there needs to be something front and center, to better educate teh neophytes, so as to put pressure and better influence manufacturers. Pushing for better quality from the bottom up, instead of just accepting this outdated configuration pushed top down.
Do not forget that if people did not have small sensors you would not be able to brag about your big sensor. Where would all the large format users do all their pontification and there would be no one to look down on and you do post at great lengths on these compact reviews. You do need the people with compact affordable kit to show off your superior kit.If this is not the reason as you say why are you here? DPR is not a serious site but a lightly moderated forum open to all. These attacks on specific smaller sensor formats are not part of the DPR ethos at all but just big spending end of the market kit bragging.
steviewa: Are people on here really that stupid that they can't see these types of cameras aren't ment for amateur photographers, it's mainly for all those non photographers who want a long zoom and in their eyes do everything including making them think their a pro photographer an to some degree bragging rites to their mates, they don't pixel peep and just want a step up for their holidays and family etc, I would think world wide sales of this type of camera out sells any ilc
What exactly is a person taking a photograph a non photographer as opposed to an amateur photographer? These classifications do get very confusing.
Bhima78: Would rather they address shutter shock and at least announce that they are working on a fix for it.
Possibly the high frequency vibration is causing the ink to fragment and fall off.
breivogel: Very poor ergonomics on the G7 in two critical areas. This was so bad that I returned the camera, which I otherwise liked.
The Video button is totally flush with the top surface - it is impossible to tell by feel where it is. They should have at least have put a raised ring around it or made it stick out a bit. The 4-way controller is also very hard to use, as the buttons don't stick out enough either and are hard to actuate. Maybe these work OK with small Japanese hands, but not mine, They would be totally useless if wearing gloves (as in wintertime).
I tried and Olympus OM-D E-M5 II - the difference in the same controls was night and day. The M5 4-way controller much better, and you could locate the video button.
The Panasonic TZ40 I have is even worse as the flush video button is 3mm away from the flush on off button on the top of the camera. The latest TZ70 looks pretty much the same so it these poor design decisions just persist from generation to generation. Saying it takes 30 seconds to learn how to find the buttons does not help if you are switching between cameras and good design and placing of controls is helpful. Video buttons must be a Panasonic weak point.
Faspotun: The G3X may be ridiculed for its price or for not having a viewfinder, but by making the G3X weather-resistant, Canon has brought a genuine enthusiast feature to the 1inch market. I'm surprised no one has done that before. A photographer's camera is supposed to be a tool you shouldn't need to worry about if the weather is rough. I really hope Canon will bring weather-resistance to the G7X's successor. For me personally, that would trump Sony's pop-up EVF.
Problem is that without an EVF a camera is not fully weather resistant as the capacity to cope with bright sunny weather is lacking. I suppose that you need the cloudy conditions that often come with rain to compose a shot.
Lassoni: Really don't see point in bridge cameras when you can just get ILC + lens. Compacts otoh are a whole another thing.
I have both a Panasonic FZ72 and ILC cameras. The superzoom just affords a flexibility from 20mm to 1200mm that the ILC cameras do not have and the FZ72 cost less than an ILC kit lens. The problem in photography is that there is such a snobbish tribal brand/format cult mentality that these sort of cameras are just so easy to attack and DPR makes no effort to stop format bashing even though brand bashing is against the rules. Look at all the compact forums as the richer large format buyers drive out the more affordable camera users.DPR is really going to struggle trying to cater for everyone and these superzoom test comments just become a war zone where people are mocked for wanting or owning these cameras. Even one of the reviewers joins in with a Ridiculouzoom comment.
mostlyboringphotog: "... whose small sensors collect very little light and therefore are generally noisy to begin with (here's why)." is rather misleading.For example, if one need to enlarge the large sensor image to match the 2000mm equivalent FoV, it may look worse in terms of noise and/or sharpness. Of course one can put 2000mm lens on a FF camera and get a better result.BTW, small sensor image is no more noisy if it's not enlarged anymore than a larger sensor image.
It must be tempting to produce these 1/2.3" cameras just to wind up people like Mr Carver who who get in such a frenzied rage over machinery whose existence makes absolutely no difference at all to them. It is difficult to see any reasoned point of view in all this passion.
Bach Photo: When I switch to the tungsten light view the camera switched from the Sony mark 4 to a canon 5d, and you can't switch it back. Odd glitch
Just switching in to an old technology mode possibly.
Francis Carver: Who is actually still BUYING useless garbage-cams like these, my, my?
Small sensor cameras are more of a challenge to get good results from, so probably the people buying these cameras are the ones who are not so reliant on having to buy expensive high specification kit to get the job done.
These latest cameras will need to be very good as you can buy a Mk I in the UK for £249 at a third of the price.I have never seen a situation where there is a Mk IV version of the camera at such a mind boggling price of £849 when the market is still awash with first release cameras washing around undercutting the latest model by over 2/3.
Jylppy: The future is mirrorless, that's clear. But let's not confuse all the parameters.
Sensor size: You pick and choose from m43 to FF based on your preferences on system size vs. image quality. The lack of mirror in MILC is not gonna make the lenses any smaller. It is the sensor size and required (FF-equiv) aperture that dictates the size of lenses.
Mirror vs Mirrorless: The latter architecture offers massive opportunities - mostly thanks to computational imaging: EVF Zebras, WYSIWYG, fast fps, lack of mirror shake. However, not even the very best EVF are nowhere near the best OVFs (e.g. Nikon D810) and this can be a major issue for a photographer - based on his preferences. For me the differences is massive.
I find the Sony's system most promising (since I prefer FF sensor and dislike Fuji's sensors) and with their improving lens portfolio it is getting ever better. However, still only Canon and Nikon offer ~24-105/4f IS lenses - Sony's 1/4f zoom is only 24-70mm.
The future is Centigrade but the US will still probably be using the clumsy obsolete Fahrenheit system in to the next century so the future of DSLR is probably safe enough, just because it is the old way of doing things. The UK is not much different.
zodiacfml: Looking even more forward, ILCs will become a smaller market and most will prefer fixed lenses as they will become cheaper than a separate lens, tighter precision/ridiculous resolution, smaller, and lighter.
@AdrianNothing specific against Sony just my fear of having all the eggs in one basket.
The problem with fixed lens cameras, especially now they are hittiing $1,000 is that dust in the lens or on the sensor compromises the whole kit. It is a bit like hi-fi separates and all in one audio with the former much more tolerant of unit failure..Do not understand your point about fixed lens cameras being cheap as the 1" cameras with fixed lens can cost 3 times as much as an aps-c ILC equivalent. The 1" sensor is a major cash cow for the producers. You drop that Sony RX100 MkIV and that is a big write off. Not for the faint hearted in my view.
PerL: There seems to be a lot of excitement on the mirrorless forums about red dot sights, bypassing the EVF altogether for tracking action. That tells me that EVFs still lags OVFs in speed, by an amount enough to be an issue.
Why then do so many astronomical telescopes use red dot finders rather than the little optical finder scope? I find the red dot so much easier to align and use and lag does not even enter the decision. I even have glued a mount for one on my Kowa spotting scope.
EddyKilowatt: These zoom ratios are beyond ridiculous, they almost sound like self parodies. Is there no performance metric that marketing forces won't distort beyond any point of reasonableness, and that the (stenographic, apparently brain dead) press won't breathlessly report as "progress"?
Seems like the lemming rush off the deep end of zoom ratio has opened up the middle ground again... for a small-sensor (1/2.3 or 1/1.7) compact with a 10x or 12x zoom, that is actually usable and not an optical freakshow.
Usable for what? The problem is that we are deep in the realms of irrational obsession for many people on this site and the 20mm to 1200mm available at an instant on my £200 FZ72 is just not available elsewhere and it cost a a fraction of any comparable kit. The way people get so excited, upset, insulting and contemptuous about other people's camera choice when they are not under any obligation to buy them and their availability really makes no difference to them is pretty scary.