spontaneousservices: no a6000? How's that?
BUT STILL!!! ;-)
o.k. i've searched the thread for 'a6000' - this wasn't a very original comment from my part.
justmeMN: Perhaps DPR didn't include the Sony A6000, because they have inside information about a A7000 coming soon.
BTW, I think the A6000 got an award for Worst Kit Lens. :-)
LOL yeah that award was well deserved
no a6000? How's that?
mpgxsvcd: The only difference between the LX100 and an M4/3s camera is the interchangeable lens mount. Otherwise the internals of the camera are pulled directly from existing M4/3s cameras.
The LX100 is probably the best mirror-less camera on the market today.
@barnet: not a single feature that the LX100 misses? How about a flip screen, and a EVF that doesn't tear? Maybe not for you but for me that IS quite an important bunch of features. On the other hand, 4K video is wasted on me.So there's toys for everyone ;-)
spontaneousservices: I lusted for a Fuji, but de LX100 was one of the contenders. Alas, the fiddly manual AF-point selection was a deal-breaker for me. Also, when the lens is extended to 'operational' position it feels quite fragile.
Came home instead with a Sony a6000, in many respects a great little camera. The shutter lag bothers me though, not yet sure whether I'll be able to live with it.
My understanding was the sony 35mm would focus faster than the Touit. Must say it feels almost old-fashioned solid. But not having real fysical end-points for the focussing ring at infinity and closest focus distance is a real bummer, - if the Touit has those and you can afford it, it may justify the extra bucks.
True. So maybe you could put it like this: the lens is what's so special about the LX100 - price, range, speed and sharpness (but not solidity!) The trade-off: lack of a bunch of features and megapixels.
For me, this camera lost big time against the sony a6000 which i just bought. IQ: no comparison. Features, viewfinder, solidity, I can go on. I avoided the new zoom lens that comes with it though, so it's not a clear comparison there. (got a 35/1.8 instead). I hated the X100's lens in extended position, felt too fragile.So maybe you don't see why anyone would end up with another camera, I can. And did. And obviously not because of the brand name - 'sony' is just as morose a brand name as 'panasonic'. (I'm thinking of blacking out the 'ny')
Nothing beats progressive insight, no? I didn't get the kit lens, still have the 18-55 of the old Nex5n kit - but I like that lens best when it's not on the camera. Bought a 35/1.8 as standard lens, love it. Amazing detail even wide open even at 1600 ISO, at 50 meter distance. Got a strong science-fiction feeling when peeping those pixels. Still getting to know the camera, got rid of most of the shutter lag by turning off pre-AF. The software update seems to improve only the start up time when using the smart remote control. And, they don't seem to have a Mac version? .
I lusted for a Fuji, but de LX100 was one of the contenders. Alas, the fiddly manual AF-point selection was a deal-breaker for me. Also, when the lens is extended to 'operational' position it feels quite fragile.
camfan1: @Marko Lauritis.Don't think for 1 minute Panasonic wants to protect anything in-house.Competition is much to fierce to do such a thing.Most probably this camera is indeed for enthousiasts but not (movie-)pro's.Costs have to be cut somewhere (otherwise most or all things you mention would be in there).Touch: not even Sony puts touch in higher end camera's, probably with reason.About keeping the camera for 10 years ? 2-3 years from now the sensor tech will be organic, foveon or other.That may prove far more important than any tilt, touch or faster lens.2-3 years from now any camera will be outdated, whatever it features now.
"Cameras from 3 years ago are still doing just fine " - I wish! Just had to say goodbye a 3,5 year old sony nex 5n and a 4 year old LX4. True, they didn't have easy lives but still. Very disappointing. The guy in the camera store was embarrassed to have to admit there isn 't any hope of repair. (what I already suspected)
Come on people, it looks cool! Bling bling over the top, way over the top! It's an über-sophisticated fashion statement. It's ironic. Shouldn't be taken seriously, it's too ridiculous for that. And the price tag turns this joke into a piece of art. If it said "Damien Hirst" instead of Brikk you'd have gotten the gist right away.
spontaneousservices: If it's really for "manual everything" photographers, where's the dedicated ISO wheel? Still the old film mindset, amazing, really. So many years after film disappeared from the camera body, changing ISO is still more involved than changing shutter speed or aperture. But what would really make me buy such a camera (more than flip screen or ISO wheel) is a fixed 50mm equivalent lens. Sigh. Maybe one day...
o.k. Kreislauf - and others - here's a challenge: let's swap. I'll leave my present walk-around cam at 35mm eq, and you guys, if possible, at 50mm eq. For say a week. Try it, you'll like it. Or not. Or maybe I'll be convinced of the pros of 35mm!
JMichaelsPhoto: I would have liked a dedicated ISO dial instead of ex. comp. I don't know why this bothers me about this camera. It's awesome in every other way, but if retro styling is part of the design, I don't know why there isn't one. But I suppose if I've put up with a lack of any such dials on my Nikon DSLRs, I can live without it on this camera. But why? It's retro. I guess I just don't see how an ex. comp. dial is more useful than an ISO dial on a digital camera. That's my only real complaint.
@peevee "ISO is a completely artificial construct" this must be the most ludricous statement on the whole forum. Remember, we're talking DIGITAL here. The amplification of the signal from the sensor, together with the shutter, is the only thing the camera body has to manipulate exposure. Back in film days, yes you put in a roll of film and the next 36 exposures were at a given ISO. That was then. This is now: every next scene you can - and often should - change ISO.
ah there we go again: manual dials for changing shutter, aperture - not iso. Let me guess it's as "easy" as in other "manual-flavored" cameras: Press button, look at screen, turn wheel, look at screen again, press button again to confirm- Presto! "Not at all that difficult!" say the fanboys.I'd rather have a dedicated dial with 100, 200, 400 etc printed on it. Change iso by counting the clicks (= stops) it makes, with your eyes on the subject.
spontaneousservices: no flip screen, no dedicated ISO wheel, no 50mm equivalent lens - but what the heck! it IS a very very attractive little camera... I must try one in store and maybe I buy it...After all you can crop till 50mm equivalent and still have, what, 12MP?
50mm is restrictive, that's absolutely true. Which is why I at least make better pictures with it. And yes 35mm is the norm these days. What can I say. I find it a bland FOV - not forcing you to make choices while staying at a safe distance from the subject. Or forcing you too close to the subject to avoid wide-angleish - distortion.And again the teleconverter is a huge, obtrusive, ehm, piece of non-starter.
no flip screen, no dedicated ISO wheel, no 50mm equivalent lens - but what the heck! it IS a very very attractive little camera... I must try one in store and maybe I buy it...After all you can crop till 50mm equivalent and still have, what, 12MP?
well yes it would - but only for lack of a 50mm equivalent X100. Which I'd rather have. With a dedicated ISO wheel. And flip screen. And superior O/E-VF. It'll come, in a couple of years. People will notice how boring 35mm eq really is, it'll be the next big thing. One day. Maybe. (maybe not)
In a telezoom I don't see the advantages of f2.8 over f4.0. But that's because I shoot landscapes and lizards with it, not portraits, not sports.
I usually need more DOF, not less, at moderate to long shutter speeds. But even if I were shooting sports, I'd rather be on the safe side at f5.6 than hoping the AF is accurate to the last centimeter.
Put differently I'd rather have a bit more noise due to one or two stops higher ISO, than the subject not in focus in that one killing shot.
Conversely, the weight and size advantages of my Canon f4 over the f2.8 are considerable.
(for the record I use it on an 'old' 5d so brightness in the VF is an issue. It's not when using modern mirrorless cams with "live view" EVF's which automatically bump brightness)
I didnt say it's hard: push button, look at screen, dial wheel, push button again. Not hard but a pain in the neck. I'd like a dedicated wheel for something I use many, many times a day.
The add-on lens partly blocks the view through the finder and anyway is a huge piece of look-at-me-having-a-cool-camera, totally negating the discreetness of the X100. But yes it's there.