Canon G1 X, Samsung EX1, Pentax k20d, Oly E330, Canon AE1P, Nikon 990
mermaidkiller: Why not an APS-C sensor for a rather bulky 'compact' ?An EOS 1100 or 700 is cheaper and not heavier. Or an EOS-M.
....with 2.36 million dots (a 1024x 768 pixel display)....They cannot calculate: 1024x768 = 786432 dots and not 2.36 million !
Unfortunatly you cannot edit it again
steve ohlhaber: If this shot 60fps at 1080p, I would be more interested as a solid backup to an SLR for still and video. Sony does it on many models.
It would be nice to see a 1inch sensor that has a better zoom range. I would love a camera that can cover 24-300mm AND shoot raw with a big sensor and pocketable. That should easily be doable given a 1 inch sensor is much smaller than this camera. Its like it forces you into a narrow zoom range AND no movie mode. So if you need tele or video, you need 1 or 2 other cameras. That just makes no sense to me. It seems hard to own this as your only camera due to those missing features. My father just got back from a trip around the world with the rx100 and his big complaint was predictable, not enough zoom range on either end. I think 24mm is enough on the wide side, but 120mm just isn't much for long zoom.
Ahh, people, people!!
select: I would never buy a Samsung camera... it's crap
It was my opinion too; until Ibought the samsung ex1. Great build quality.
Joel Benford: If very shallow focus was my great interest in life, MFT is not the system I'd buy into. So I'm not really sure who this is for.
Maybe it's for people who don't do shallow focus much, but when they need it they need it bad?
Are there people like that?
Or is for people who like a Leica badge...
@jennyrae. I see your point and it's valid. The problem is with people who cannot understand that other people have different views. The nokton .95 is a much better value-for-money lens than this panasonic 1.2. But the latter having OIS and AF would be a dream lens for GH3 videographers.
"So I'm not really sure who this is for."Dear friend, can't you really think of people who can use and enjoy the benefits of this lens? You mean that you saw the samples and your thoughts are 'what a waste of time and money'?
thx1138: The ISO 6400 is really mushy at least as a jpg. I would hope the RAW are vastly better.
Yes, it's the first thing I do when I saw samples like those here. I tried a 3200ISO printed ona laser printer. I asked from FastStone to print 1.2m X 0.8m and the A3 crop was amazing
Yanko Kitanov: Good lens as long as these shots are concerned, but nothing spectacular.
Why is there a subtle NR engaged at ISO100? Is it possible to switch it off and make less flat shots with a less plastic feel to the fine/low-contrast detail?
I had in my mind to write the exact same thing. About plastic feel, oise reduction but mainly the loss (or the feel of loss) of microcontrast