lxcellent: Why is this not offered as body only!
My local Currys is offering this as body only. Sitting there forlornly cap off with its sensor soaking up the dust. You can see they are struggling to display mirrorless cameras which were an affordable option to the general public. For mirrorless they had 7 DSLR's well specified cameras which were Canon and Nikon and 3 mirrorless. The Sony 5100 and a Fuji, both more expensive than a few of the DSLR's and without EVF's and generally basic looking plus the G7 which was more expensive than all the other cameras but without a lens; with a lens it just would not have been competitively priced. I am sure there are reasons for the price but to the general public mirrorless must seem a lot of money for very little in return.
Edgar_in_Indy: So Panasonic lens firmware can be updated from the camera? That's kind of cool. Do a lot of other camera makers allow users to update their lens firmware that way?
@straylightrunI suspect my comment that they might like building obsolescence in to these lens fired off the conspiracy theory post. No company would of course think of such a thing so the idea that they might could constitute conspiratorial thinking.
The main purpose of lens firmware is to avoid having in the brave new mirrorless world lots of old legacy lenses floating around in use for donkey's years as with DSLR and SLR lenses. :(
brownie314: I think with the cell phone eroding the bottom end photographic products we are beginning to see the true size of what the photographic market of the future will be. 10 years ago you HAD to buy a camera to get an image. Today, you do not. So the people buying cameras today truly care about what their images look like. We will see how big that market is.
I doubt if it is just the bottom end is suffering as the middle end cameras improving will erode the ILC's in general. There are also a lot of kit only DSLR users who are just as likely to find their phone does the job.I think the camera market as a whole will decline. I doubt if any sector is safe apart from that selling to people needing the utmost high quality.
Ben O Connor: It took 12 Pen (E-P1,2,3,5 E-PL1,2,3,5,6,7 E-PM1,2) and 4 OMD (E-M5,5II, 1, 10) models to put things back in track since 2008!
Wow Olympus. Way to go!
The policy of Olympus to woo the DSLR owner to mirrorless by stripping down the camera to a shutter button and leaving only those basic controls essential to wade around the menus, plus dropping the viewfinder altogether, is still a great unsolved mystery.
Just a Photographer: Now all mirrorless camera manufacturers are profitable.Sony, Fuji and now Olympus all presented black figures recently for their imaging business.
While Nikon and Canon are suffering. Its not that these DSLR manufacturers make losses on selling systems, but they do loose heavily in profitability and marketshare over the recent years.
Times are changing.
A selective choice for all. I think your post reads more as all mirrorless brands making a profit are making a profit.I do not get the impression that Samsung are doing so well at the moment.
Franco8: Why do you call it a full frame its a 35mm sensor. A APSC sensor is a full frame APSC sensor.A 4/3 sensor is a full frame 4/3 sensor.Just call it as it is a 35mm sensor
Full frame is a marketing dream as it implies perfection. The emphasis on this format is probably because there is a ready made advertising slogan rather than any intrinsic benefits in the format. Who wants partial frame?
I wonder if the number of people who want to go through the process of swapping lenses on a camera is diminishing. Now that large sensors are going in to long zoom fixed lenses cameras this probably will be having an affect. These top end fixed lens cameras may be nibbling away at the ILC sector as much as smartphones are nibbling away at the entry level compacts.There will always be an appeal for ILC cameras but probably not the sort of mass appeal needed to sustain the current ever swelling different lens mount bubble.
Semperfed: Another Canon camera without the one feature I look for: a shutter button with a screw thread to hook up a shutter cable with.
There is a massive cost differential between a shutter cable and having to buy or rent a smartphone to do it. There is no battery on shutter cables to go flat either or a link to drop or a password etc. etc.
abi170845: 1000 buck with no charger included? I will stick to my 100D.
It is difficult to imagine how someone can pay out all this money on a camera yet find buying an external charger breaks the bank.
gillesvds: Please Sony, give us this Auto ISO enhancement (customizable threshold) in a firmware update for A6000's users.
I would not think you can expect firmware enhancements with the A6000. This camera shows Sony are dumbing down the aps-c range so they would not want to undermine the next release.
Elliot H: with such a high rating, jpeg(which most users will use) imagequality rating is not that high
@BarnETIf you spend $1,000 on a camera wouldn't you expect it to be able do the work for you competently rather than having to take the RAW image off the sensor and do it all yourself?
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.