Jacques Cornell: I wonder why Panasonic didn't use the same 20MP 1" sensor as the FZ1000, given that it seems comparable in high-iso noise and superior in resolution. It would have allowed a smaller camera and/or faster lens. The LX100 seems like a great camera, but it doesn't provide a pocketable option for current MFT owners. Waiting for an LF2 with a better lens.
The 1" sensor is behind in noise performance, about one stop. This camera allows much better DOF control than a smaller sensor camera.
Valentinian: What would be the technical reason not to release a 24-75mm(equivalent)/f1.7-2.8 for the interchangeable lens micro four thirds system?
Flange distance with interchangeable lenses.
Well, the 18-135 is not exactly the best lens for this kind of exercise!
Nice camera, but a very bold move in the current 'full frame craze'. I'm afraid it's a bit of a one trick pony: sports photography. That does not mean it's a bad camera for other types of photography, but it's clearly built with action in mind.
The approach is interesting: with full frame sensors coming to mirrorless cameras, it's not a DSLR niche any more, the only thing the good old DSLR has to offer over mirrorless is sheer speed and AF performance. And this camera sure delivers.
photofan1986: Meh, I have a Panasonic 20 f1.7, it's even faster, and so much smaller and lighter, that they managed to make it a pancake. Come on, Nikon, give us the pancake version :D Ps: That's humor ;-)
@dansclic,What strikes me dead is that they are some people who care to write a reply when obviously they cannot even read properly.
Thanks, Mato34,I suppose Latin is not so much in use any more :D
Meh, I have a Panasonic 20 f1.7, it's even faster, and so much smaller and lighter, that they managed to make it a pancake. Come on, Nikon, give us the pancake version :D Ps: That's humor ;-)
Kirppu: I personally don't get this concept. Buy a lens mount, that work by it self no matter that the ergonomics seem to suck. Use your lens mount with your smart phone that acts as you camera rear screen. Still you're far from ergonomic nirvana.Plus, you still have to buy lenses for your system.
Heck why not just buy the E-mount camera body?This is one of those things I just don't get it.
@howaboutrawYes, if You don't lose connection every couple of minutes.
Very honest performance from such a small sensor.For those looking for a high quality all-in-one camera with excellent ergonomics, it may fit the bill. However, it's just that: a small-sensored compact camera. Don't expect miracles.
Johannes Zander: The video doesn't show anything you can't do with native 4/3 lenses.Adapters are always a crutch.
@ suaveEven if it was, the 5d doesn't even come close to the gh4 for video quality.
tedolf: Here is my one upgrade question (from E-pl1):
Will it give a stabilized image on a half press of the shutter speed dial for magnified manual focus of long lenses? If so I will get it. If not I will stick with the E-pl1.
Also, could we please have a decent 4 way controller on the back with nice big buttons (a la E-M1) instead of that shiny silver thing?
Hi tedolf. Unfortunately, the E-pm2 uses the old 2 axis stabilizer, and it cannot be used in preview.
Mike FL: For $499, you get Sony NEX-6 with better IQ and MUCH better useability:1. Larger sensor 2. Wider kit zoom 3. Built in EVF4. Built in Flash
For Olympus PEN E-PL7, you get nothing above, but same price. Also Sony looks nice.
Or you can also get a lawnmower.
Mike FL: Most, if not all, M43 cameras are unable to compete with cheapest mirror-less APS-C such as $450 Fuji XA1 and $500 Fujifilm X-M1 in IQ.
BUT, Most, if not all, M43 cameras has IBIS which keeps M43 still alive.
If Fuji and/or Sony put IBIS in mirror-less APS-C, M43 will be DOOMED. The day will come...
And what if most people don't care about tiny IQ differences and concentrate on better handling, faster and more accurate focusing, bigger lens lineup, more affordable lenses, way smaller lenses,... You know, everyone is not spending his/her life on DxO comparing spec sheets.
Not a bad camera, actually what the E-PL5 should have been: 3/2 bigger screen, top dail (the back dial on Oly is horrible), effective IBIS (the 2 axis is useless imo)...However, it comes way too late: the E-M10 does it all plus it does have a viewfinder and a flash built-in for a couple bucks more.Nice camera...for 450$.
ethanolson: I own a 1" camera and let me tell everybody that the noise on the 1" is worse than on smaller sensors (even 1/1.7") as evidenced by my Nikon's noise profile versus the Pentax Q7. There's a couple of stops difference. It's that bad, and now that they're on V3, it's not really gotten better. So Fujifilm probably took a smart road in sticking with a better sensor for their X30.
That's because the Nikon 1 sensor sucks. We are talking about Sony 1 inch sensors.
photofan1986: I'm not usually a sensor size advocate, but making the camera so much bigger (compared to the X20) while not increasing the sensor size?? Fuji, small sensor: big problem.
True! Don't get me wrong: I owned the X10 and I found it was a very nice camera, a real photographic tool to use (besides the ORBs problem). But the output, which was OK for the standards of 2011, is not really acceptable on a 2014 camera (of that size). I also use a Canon S100 when I really want to travel light. And the IQ is basically in the same league as the X20 (X30?). And it's MUCH smaller.
Yes, it's too much, when cameras with much larger sensors fit into smaller body's. I'm using the GM1, and the IQ is miles ahead, even though ergonomics are not comparable.
I'm not usually a sensor size advocate, but making the camera so much bigger (compared to the X20) while not increasing the sensor size?? Fuji, small sensor: big problem.
stevo23: The A7s is the clear winner when compared to the GH4 for stills. The image quality is vastly superior and it's no wonder - we're not stretching the limits of lenses for pixel density when compared to the GH4. I had hopes for the GH4, but sadly I'm disappointed. And no wonder - that's a lot of bulk and weight to carry around.
How so disappointed? You wanted to believe that the GH4 sensor would compete in stills IQ with a sensor that has four times the surface and lower pixel count? Other than that, I assume you still believe in Santa Claus, right?