Interesting camera, but why are the samples so dull in color cast? I would expect Panasonic to respond with the successor to the LX7 soon, for Holiday sales, correct?But why is the image quality of the LX7 (in the studio scene), so soft in comparison to most others, almost like they made a settings error or had its IS on causing blur in a tripod shot? and the XZ-2 shot looks superior to most compacts, and some DSLR shots as well in the comparison tool?!
Stunning, lonely....cold....but I cant help but lust after all the beautiful antique hand carved furniture that we 'humans' used to make and keep for generations...dust settles.
Just speaking to the GR's features alone, it is a solid camera for landscape and vacation shots, but Why cant they afix a 10-12X (power) collapsable zoom to it and sell that as an alternate version. Considering the engineering now available, and the shrinking flange distance in APS-c format...maybe soon? Basically, I would Love a pocketable compact with a m4/3 sensor (or APS-C) and a good 10x zoom! Similar to an LX7 or GR feature set but with the big sensor....that would probably crush sales of low end DSLR? or would it?
pgphoto_ca: For me, the E-P5 has a slight better ISO over the GX7 at 800 ISO. approx 1/2 stop diff.
Image quality is prime for me. I just hope Panasonic will improve a bit the ISO before they release the GX7...
go go go Pana !
From the test images on Imaging Resource, The P5 seems to have a little better resolution and sharpness, at low iso, or perhaps less anti-aliasing or NR than the GX7, side by side (but that could be lens based or some setting. I was looking at eyelashes on the mannequin, so not sure if that is relevant, since the leaves on the trees on outdoor house shots look identical, perhaps a lighting response?
lxcellent: This is an ugly camera. I know that you should not judge a book by its cover, but why not make it look more like the classic rangefinder like they did in the LX1. Shoot. Follow Fuji's lead on this.
...and yes, the way a tool looks DOES make a difference!
Looks great to me, except the eyecup bulge....but if it feels anything like the GX1, which is by far the most comfortable mirrorless I ever held, it will be a great shooting camera and perfect for those us with large hands who can't safely grip many of OLY's offerings while climbing up a small cliff to grab a shot of some birds nest or baby mammals!
Lochgoyle: The eternal divide between the HDR enthusiasts/exponents and the HDR police goes on forever it seems. The simple fact is that regardless of the method, Erez has produced a stunning image which effectively allows the viewer to enjoy the same view that Erez had when creating his RAW files. To me the logic is simple . . . why not 'see' what the photographer saw when the means is available to do so? If HDR techniques were outlawed by the HDR police as 'not photography' then how would one ever visualise this scene? Would the blown out sky be appealing? Would the black foregound be appealing if the photographer exposed for the sky? No. Without Erez's technique this image would not exist.As for the choice of technique, everyone has their own ways, and if the outcome pleases them, then so be it. After all, there are many ways to skin a cat :-)) Just my 2 cents.
Very good points, I agree that the goal is to render that magic vision that the human eye and brain perceive, aka, the moment, as you saw it...and a camera just can't do that in one shot with such difficult lighting conditions, so we innovate to recreate.
Very nice image, well done, and shows what can be done with a good P&S!
pjsalty: I like it. It's basically a nex 7 for those of us that prefer the smaller m43 lenses, plus it has ibis and more external controls.
I don't know why dpreview isn't more excited about it. Perhaps they are in a refractory period after spouting with excitement over the latest Fuji. They mention "small tweaks" but I would hardly call the addition of ibis, wifi, NFC, a new sensor, and an evf (which articulates!) "small tweaks"!
" Perhaps they are in a refractory period after spouting with excitement over the latest Fuji. " Hilarious, best line of the day, Thanks!!
Well, the numbers are very impressive, especially at the wide end, and much more afforadable than the Canon in the same range. I feel this would be a great lens for me for indoor use, some street, and landscapes as well, with the deep resolution and (probably) nice bg. blur. Well, Tokina, it is your turn to impress, and it has been a while boys!
Very nice image, I love the etheral quality; but could you help us newbies and post any additional information about post-processing, if any, so we can learn? Thanks!
davids8560: I ended up going with the RX100. My life changed a lot soon after buying it. Women paid more attention to me. The local paper did a full-page feature about me in the Sunday edition. The mayor started inviting me down to city hall for lunch every couple of weeks. People I'd had differences with in the past came to me and asked for forgiveness. It's been really great!
Are you sure you bought a camera, or a Kilo of Bolivian marching dust?
Beautiful shot; bkg. blur, sharp skin, and punchy color are all a perfect combo!
DDWD10: This camera deserves a lot more attention than it gets. The first "real" camera I had was a Pentax ME Super that my 5th grade librarian gave me in 2000. Compact and sturdy, attributes apparently shared by the K5II.
I like that, in 2000, people were using and learning with film. I still see college kids using film and I sold my EOS Elan 7 to one, who loved it and was thrilled to be doing a retro art photo project for a class. You learn a lot about exposure when every shot cost you $$, before and after.
HL48: Does any camera have a macro bracketing routine? The photographer would indicate the front and back of the target using a touch screen for example and the camera would produce some small number exposures at intermediate positions?
Yes, It would be cool if the selectable focus points could be numbered and assigned to a series of shots, area 1 (shot 1) area 2 (shot 2) and so on, I'll bet some app developer is making it now!
Great article, and I agree with bobbarber that a P & S camera can be perfect for this kind of work. Lightweight, super shalow DOF, in particular, the Olympus XZ 1 and 2 are quite well suited and have sharp fast optics and good color. The issue is always taking even a few photos of the various regions of the insect before it moves, very frustrating, but pulling back or using a tripod can keep them calm; also good to have the magic hour afternoon sun at your back, blinding the creature to your advantage, works great with some furry ones.
tomservo33: Well, it is quite strange, how Sony can make such innovative, comfortable to use, generally feature rich cameras, that consistantly deliver SOFT images. I suspect that the issue is Software, not the sensor, lens, etc... Maybe I'm wrong, maybe it is not an "Issue" but an intentional feature/style. I have heard many discuss the AA, the agressive sony noise reduction; and compared to other APS-C cameras, and m4/3, the Sony shots all suffer from a general softness that seems to be caused by either aggressive and unnecessary noise reduction, or an odd JPEG engine. I feel that the RAW files are all quite good if I had to do Post-P. and I would have bought a Nex-6 if the Jpegs didn't look a little bit softer, consistantly.
Like many here, we rely on review data, samples, and user portfolios to inform our decision, since most of us cannot afford to spend big money on a new system without knowing if will be a satisfying improvement and a wise investment; over what we have sunk $$$ thousands into already...I would love to rent a Nex6 for a week but there are few shops left, and none of them rent anything other than Canon/Nikon system gear.
Well, it is quite strange, how Sony can make such innovative, comfortable to use, generally feature rich cameras, that consistantly deliver SOFT images. I suspect that the issue is Software, not the sensor, lens, etc... Maybe I'm wrong, maybe it is not an "Issue" but an intentional feature/style. I have heard many discuss the AA, the agressive sony noise reduction; and compared to other APS-C cameras, and m4/3, the Sony shots all suffer from a general softness that seems to be caused by either aggressive and unnecessary noise reduction, or an odd JPEG engine. I feel that the RAW files are all quite good if I had to do Post-P. and I would have bought a Nex-6 if the Jpegs didn't look a little bit softer, consistantly.
jonikon: I'm not impressed at all with the image quality of the Oly XZ-2. I see a lot of smearing of details, very poor IQ at high ISOs, a de-centered lens causing OOF areas, poor color rendition, poor micro-contrast, lots of distortion, etc.
Why in the world would anyone buy this camera when the excellent Sony RX-100 can be had for about the same price and blows the XZ-2's image quality away! This camera would not be desirable even if it was priced at the current XZ1 price of $200, IMO.
You must be looking at the wrong photos, or your monitor is defective; since most of the comments here, and Robin Wong's blog shots, seem to give strong evidence of the exact opposite! Seriously, examine http://robinwong.blogspot.com/
InTheMist: There are... Um... No people watching her "attract attention".
Exactly what I noticed, unless they just do the presentations all day, every 2 hrs and try to attract attention, like the feeding of the dolphins at SeaWorld ;) Still, I feel kinda sorry for her, and the Casio photo division as a whole....it can't be selling many units, can it??