DualSystemGuy: The slow lens is really a bummer on this camera. Only F2.8 on the wide end (RX 100 is F1.8) and F5.9 on the long end is brutal for a P&S. I realize it goes out to 250mm but by 50mm it's already at F4 which is pretty terrible. By 100mm you're already at F5.1 - clearly they cut lots of corners with the lens, and you aren't going to get much for DOF isolation on the already small 1" sensor at such small apertures. If they are targeting enthusiasts with this I think the lens kills it.
The ZS/TZ series has always had longer zoom and slower aperture. That's the tradeoff. Then they had the LX series with fast aperture and very short zoom to complement it. If they made it f2.8 straight through, well look at the RX10 for that configuration. It's NOT pocketable.
Macist: Without GPS, this is NOT a travel camera.
Not in 2016, anyway.
I don't get it. You can't remember where you went on vacation or what?
And now there is almost no reason for superzoom lenses for DSLR and mirrorless to exist. Pending some reviews on lens quality, I'm pretty excited about this one.
sneakyracer: I though most people use SmartPhones nowadays instead of this type of cameras...
not if they want zoom.
Suntan: I can only imagine the price overhead to get a slightly smaller enclosure (compared to any 2.5" based portable HDD.)
And a plain old vanilla 2.5" 2TB SSD is $700-800 already.....
Don Diafragma: Nice, but what does it cost?
it would have to be $1000 wouldn't it?
I try to keep an open mind, but these really need an EVF!
Neodp: Look this is a low ISO camera if that. It's also slow, as to the lens aperture and that means more blurry pictures. That all adds up to far less keepers and that’s before many other things that can get in the way. Therefore, even a practiced photographer is going to get around 25% usable pictures out of a session. You'll be binning 75%+ or you'll wish you had. You WILL miss unrepeatable shots that are very important to you.
What that means is it is NOT working as a CAMERA very well. Why? Lower cost does not explain that.
None of that is fun nor better than todays best cell phones. Phones being the bottom of the barrel and with their problems.
So what are these cameras for?
NOTE: I did not say there isn't a place for a pocket camera that’s not a phone; but these are not it.
I've got an elph 330 with a similar zoom range and aperture. We get an excellent keeper rate and good image quality. It's got a great lens and sensor. I don't doubt the same will be true of the new 360 above.
J A C S: The armchair market analysts have spoken...
I thought we were talking about photography. Being able to surf the web on your camera isn't that handy when you are trying to zoom in on your child on the baseball field from 50m away.
Richard Franiec: Still waiting for the day that all the efforts of "leader in imaging solutions" will result in:1. best imaging sensor technology,2. best mirrorless camera fully compatible with EF lenses,3. best innovative enthusiast compact at reasonable cost.The efforts required to build a small sensor compact (as is) seems wasteful to me, taking into account the smartphone development.For # 1 Canon has the new lenses and bodies more than ready.#3 would make sense if they can establish the lead within competition from Sony.In a couple of years there could be no appeal whatsoever for small sensor compact at all. Not sure if that time has not already become a reality.
I think the Canon of 2000-2010 that 60% of photographers fell in love with has had a bit of a midlife crisis, quit his job, and gone on a long drunken bender.
I'm surprised how many forum camera experts are absolutely clueless to the fact that not everyone needs or wants a RX100 level compact.
mpgxsvcd: I would use a good camera phone over these cameras. Even with a fixed focal length lens you are going to get better video from a good 4K camera phone that allows you to crop much more.
However, I am sure a ton of people will buy these cameras and then never use them because they always forget to charge the batteries.
These are 8-12x zoom cameras. If you crop 4k to an 8x equivalent zoom, you end up with 0.06k. Good luck with that!
3 Cameras above: 25–300mm 24–240mm 28–224mm
Smartphone = 28-28mm
Tim Gander: I couldn't give a flying fart at a rolling donut about these cameras, but why bitch about them? There are still plenty of people who don't want a smartphone or who want to keep their telephone separate from their camera. Still lots of people who just want point and shoot with a zoom. These cameras won't sell in the quantities they might once have done, but the beauty of cheap electronics is that the likes of Canon can fill just about every imaginable niche without breaking the R&D piggybank. Anyway, what is it all the "professors of photography" like to say on this forum? "The best camera is the one you have with you." You can't say that and then start prescribing exactly which camera everyone should have with them.
aramgrg: CCD? LolCanon started digging its recycle bins!
Pretty much everyone still uses CCD in their lowest end PnS. Not just Canon. Must be $2 cheaper per unit or something.
tkbslc: After using PSP X4 for a few years I decided I needed an upgrade. My wife wanted to try Photoshop Elements 13. I was shocked at how stripped down that is vs Corel PSP. When a deal popped up over the holidays, I jumped on a license of Corel PSP X8 Ultimate. It is so much better for less money! The Ultimate version even comes with a serviceable Lightroom alternative - Aftershot.
For one thing - simple curves adjustment.
I didn't think Aftershot was as powerful as many $100+ RAW editors, but it is $20 alone or free with PSP. Pretty good for the price paid. Does a decent job. Certainly more useful than the single image RAW editing in elements.
After using PSP X4 for a few years I decided I needed an upgrade. My wife wanted to try Photoshop Elements 13. I was shocked at how stripped down that is vs Corel PSP. When a deal popped up over the holidays, I jumped on a license of Corel PSP X8 Ultimate. It is so much better for less money! The Ultimate version even comes with a serviceable Lightroom alternative - Aftershot.
farcanal: This range is just to limiting, besides there's plenty of similar products, may as well just make 11-12mm 2.8 :(
Think of it as two wide primes in one lens and consider that none of the major systems have f2 lenses this wide for crop sensors.
AshMills: With a 0.71 speedbooster on m43 this is a useful 20-28mm 1.4 equivalent (yes yes with the DoF of a 2.8) which is interesting, if not groundbreaking..
Could be the best Astro lens for m4/3!
Joed700: The first picture was a disappointment when looking at 100% magnification. Hardly any sharpness even at f/4. My Nikon 50mm f/1.4g @ f/1.4 has better sharpness than that; mind you the the Nikon 50mm f/1.4g is known for producing soft images; too soft for some...The 4th pix at the dinning table is practically useless at f/2; image making a large print...
@Joed700- You are talking pixel level sharpness and the point of the lens is to create a special kind of image level softness and glow. Yes it is soft. That is the point.
@techjedi - I don't think so. The last line of their comment is "useless at f2"