Catalin Stavaru: 1/2.3" sensors just don't cut it these days. The image quality is just lacking as there are also too many pixels for the sensor size. At 8MP with larger pixel they could make a point, especially that cropping is not always needed with this kind of zoom. I don't really understand why all this craftsmanship put into a 1/2.3" camera. However it may probably work very well for video.
Some people (myself included) simply don't like the ergonomics of taking photos on a phone. Plus that is quite a zoom! Horses for courses.
Glen Barrington: I wish this company and this camera well. But is this REALLY gonna sell in numbers large enough to last more than a year and get a few collectors excited?
It might function well enough to spur other manufacturers to explore this quasi-rangefinder focusing mechanism, (I'd love to see something like this in m43s, it could revitalize the moribund Pen line, for example); but I would be very surprised if this particular camera was in any way successful.
Also the Lytro is a nice gimmick - reasonably rich people can justify dropping a few hundred on it. Dropping [presumably] at least a thousand on this and then a few more thousand on some lenses is an altogether different proposition.
I agree with Glen; there is almost no chance of this coming to market (at least in the form shown here), it's a tech demo hoping to attract a whale. It smacks very much of the "digital film" vapourware that did the rounds near the advent of digital.
joyclick: A barebone FF with either 50mm/35mm/28mm /1.2/22.214.171.124/2/2.8with aperture ring,focus ring and a needle for under/over exposure,1/4000 shutter speed,ISO upto 6400,flash sync of 250/500 is all that we need
Needle for exposure; now you're talking! I miss my OM-1n...
AlexisH: I wonder what is the point of an APS-C version. The 1" has a fixed lens, so it may be interesting as a compact. The FF would be interesting as an alternative to Leica M. But what would the APS-C one offer? Unless it's a much lower price that would put the FF model in losing competition with other FF cameras.
Reading the VERY short news item would help... "...a Konost Junior, with a 1"-type 10.8MP sensor later this year. The Junior will have a fixed 35mm f/2 lens in front of a 13.5x9.2mm CMOS sensor."
saiko: Does anyone know how do they cut these lenses in halves? Do they cut each component separately and carefully assemble them back? Or do they slice up a whole lens at one go? Always been in mystery to me.
Amnon G: Still happy to get the X-E2 upgrade, but look carefully and face the truth - X-T1 is getting a ton of updates, X-E2 a few and X-E1 even fewer.This means that either Fuji is still (albeit less than others) doing market segmentation, i.e. artificially limiting products according to their market segment band (top, mid, bottom), or development is structured as verticals like other camera makers, where unlike PCs where the same binaries work on an Intel i3, i5 or i7 (or even the Q6600 of 9 years ago), here the firmware is very much married to the camera, making updates to 3 cameras cost 3 times more than to 1 camera.It's probably something in-between.Again, I got more updates to my X-E2 than 4 years of my Nikon D90, and it's not because there was nothing to improve on the D90.
Let me see... So the AF in the mark II is 1.5x better than the mark I, thanks to... "'proprietary image analysis technology' using more information from a scene to keep focus locked on a subject." So entirely software.
I doubt mark I owners will receive an update to their less than 1 year old cameras to improve the AF. Unlike us X-E1 and X-E2 users (not to mention X100) who received vastly improved AF thanks to firmware. But you just conveniently overlook that...
40daystogo: If the LX100 could have fit in a normal jeans pocket, then with its m43 sensor and Leica lens it would be my dream camera.
But once it cannot fit in the pocket, I have a lot of small-ish cameras that are better with more features.
If the LX100 cannot fit in a pocket, I prefer my Sony A6000 with interchangeable lenses, and access to ultrawides.
I am REALLY hoping that Lumix can scale down the size of the LX100 in future releases to fit in a pocket.
The GM1 can just fit in a pocket, so I hope they can do the same size of scale for the next LX100.
And that is doesn't fit in their skinny jeans...
RedDog Steve: The lack of a built-in flash will be missed by the vast majority of users who will use the LX100 as a compact (high end or otherwise) was originally intended ... Quick, ready and capable - no muss, no fuss.No flash puts a serious damper on that.
The fiddly enthusiast oriented manual control layout will further slow many non-pro users who are better served by the now traditional PASM modes.
To my view the LX100 is aimed at a very narrow user base (possibly to test waters).
Anyone who can manage the AS and M parts will be able to master the dedicated control, and anyone who just wants the P can just leave it all on A, what could be simpler? Total non-argument. Why must everything be dumbed down to the lowest common denominator?
fedway: I find it interesting why Panasonic named it the LX100. Could it be that Pany thinks that it will provide stiff competition to the Sony RX100 series? The LX has a bigger sensor and on paper a better lens, manual dials that might be better ergonomically; whilst being less pocketable. I predict that test images will show an image quality advantage for the LX over the RX especially at higher iso.
Trivializing the X100 viewfinder as a "trick viewfinder" demonstrates someone having never actually tried the camera. As a happy owner of the original, I can confirm that the OVF is certainly a lot more than a "trick".
Zvonimir Tosic: The new LX100 has a appeal over other Panasonic m4/3 cameras because of the influence of Leica is far more prominent in it: from the new lens, to the layout of the controls.This is indeed a collaboration of the sort they once had in the DMC-LC1 era, and I am glad they have renewed the spirit of it. And considering the LC1 which employes 2/3" sensor was priced at $1599 at its delivery in 2004, today's LX100 with all its features is a bargain.
@NetMage Perhaps - the question is how high are those QA standards. As a camera salesman in the early days of digital I can remember a few horrendous Fujis that were rebranded as Leica (Fuji Finepix 4700 as an example). I think people may attribute too much to this relationship. Certainly the "Leica" lens was always a good way to sell the camera to people...
EinsteinsGhost: @Damien (author): Why is there no mention Sony RX100 at all? It is LX100's most direct competition (the article wasted way more space providing irrelevant history lessons).
Hands up those who missed the whole point of the article...
Also, this is an "opinion piece", not a full technical comparison. I'm sure the internetz will be flooded with the comparison you want.
raztec: I'm still perplexed why people choose a FF camera and then slap a wide zoom like the 24-240 on it. It will be optically impossible for this lens to be sharp. I doubt the final image will be any sharper than an RX10, so why not just buy that instead for the price of the lens alone?
And not to mention how unbalanced it will be on a A7body.
@AbrasiveReducer So very true! There seem to be an awful lot more "photographers" around since the advent of digital. I also don't seem to recall such fierce battles over whether you preferred Tri-X or Delta 400 either. Funny that.
Nukunukoo: In one fell swoop. Panasonic killed Nikon's 1 series.
It certainly competes with the X30 (and makes it look a little silly), but it won't touch the X100S/T for image quality. Much larger sensor and also a prime lens, not a compromised zoom.
Not to mention the lovely optical viewfinder...
Jazz1: I like some of the new features. But none of them make me in a hurry to replace my X20. Does this mean the X30 is a failure? No. It just means the X20 was pretty solid in the first place. I'm also thinking of keeping the X20 and buying one of the Fujifilm's bigger brothers!
By the way I've got a Wood Grip for then Fuji X20 X10 by J.B. Camera on the way to further enhance the retro look of the X20. No I don't work for J.B. Just letting X20 owners know you can funk it up a little more.
A camera is no use to me without a viewfinder. Plus I bought the X-E1 as soon as it came out, way before the X-A1.
Using the X10 made me buy an X-E1 when it first came out. Since then I've added an X100 (original). I use them all for different things. Call me a fuji-holic.
I don't think I'll bother upgrading the X10 (as nice as the X30 seems), but do plan on upgrading the X-E1 to an X-E2 or X-T1 when the prices look good, mainly to make my life easier shooting my toddler.
Paul Farace: No OVF, no like... no purchase!
-- owner of XPro1, X100, XT1
I have a feeling you wouldn't like the OVF of an X10/20; especially if you're expecting something comparable to the X100. As an X10/X100/X-E1 owner I can assure you that an EVF of X30 proportions is much preferable to the dinky X10 OVF.
Micky Finn: When is Fuji going to actually bring out a new camera instead of essentially the same one with the same technology and sensor in several different bodies? I wouldn't mind, but the viewfinders in the X series, especially the electronic viewfinders, are lousy and the lcd's are not up to scratch, add to that the annoying handling of everyone of them I've tried and they are heavily disappointing. I tried hard to like the X-Pro1 and the X-E1 but they were terribly disappointing in reality, and for me this camera has to be far, far better and a massive improvement over everything else Fuji have produced. Yes IQ is good and the cameras look great, but it's no good if they are hamstrung to the point of being frustrating.
Let's not waste any more time on this troll. Judging by this being his only comment, I would suggest it is not worth anyone's while replying...
Re: EVF - try reading the preview before commenting perhaps?
Also, if you find the handling annoying on all of the previous X series, then perhaps you should look elsewhere, the X series is not for you.
d3xmeister: They made something wonderful and they screwed it up with the stupid dial locks. What kind of an idiot bump a dial out of position and does not notice when the dial is right in its face ? The kind of idiot who has no ideea what is doing, but somehow these idiots have managed to screw things for all of us.
I'm not sure if you realise how the locks work. Look at this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hw2b-RITrJ8
It seems the shutter speed lock is only for taking it out of auto. Choosing between speeds manually does not require pressing the lock button.
The ISO dial required unlocking on every change, which I don't think is too much of a problem, given how ISO is generally something you set only a few times (or less) during shooting.
Most importantly, the exposure comp dial doesn't have a lock at all, but is nice and stiff to prevent turning it by accident. In my opinion, Fuji have done this exactly right.
RichRMA: Be embarrassing if it has the same AF performance as their mirrorless cameras. Why even go the DSLR-look route?
The "hump" is in order to accommodate a bigger, better EVF, according to the rumours. You could either make the whole camera larger, put a hump on one side (which would look really weird) or use the traditional design of a camera and put it in the middle. It's clearly a no-brainer.