nice idea, but the LED lighting looks like a weak point. High quality LED lighting (with good color and sufficient brightness) is expensive, and having a heavy duty battery or power supply will make it no longer 'portable'.
If you just need a softbox / photo tent there are plenty to chose from on Ebay around this price level; including larger and more practical sizes.
DogsareGodsgifttous: GREAT VALUE! This Olympus OM-D E-M1 is the best camera I've ever owned - BLOWS AWAY MY CANON 5D system in terms of size, functions, image quality, and ease of handling. I'm a professional studio portrait and wedding photographer for 31 years and started back in the film days. Don't let anyone fool you- sensor size, prime lenses, go ahead and spend on this and spend on that. This is the best bang for the buck in years for the amount of quality you get for the price. Go ahead and spend thousands more on a "better" system, only to be outdated in 2 years or less anyway. It's not the equipment- it's how you use it folks! Great images do not have to come only from spending 5k or more for the body and lenses. Thank you Olympus for giving us high quality on par with the Canon spenders!
of course it SHOULD blow away the 5D due to its old age...And although I don't doubt EM1 is a very nice camera, IMHO the 'bang for the buck' ratio is really wanting compared to e.g. mid level APS-C DSLRs.
Quality on par with Canon? Definitely not on par with a current FF Canon with quality glass...
jcmarfilph: From what I have seen, XQ1 is better than S120 especially on high ISO. Why recommend a smearing machine?
The XQ1 sensor may be better, but S120 has the better lens. For me noise is less of an issue than blurry corners, and I take most of my images in decent lighting anyway ...
mad marty: quote: "It (the S120) can't match the RX100's larger sensor for image quality, but it's a lot less expensive"
In Germany the s120 isn't really less expensive as the price difference of the Sony and the Canon is 20 Euro.The canon S... always have been to expensive. In my opinion they aren't worth more than 300 Euro.
S120 is relatively expensive because it is new. If you buy the previous version they are a LOT cheaper than the Sony. In Netherlands the price difference between the cheapest S120 and RX100 is about 50 euros, which indeed is very little given the spec of the Sony. But S110 is now EUR 244, half the price of the RX100. Within about half a year, the S120 price will be around 300 euro too.
samfan: Let me put it this way. As advanced as Sony or Canon are, or as sympathetic as Fujifilm is, or as much as I like lots of other cameras...
The viewfinder, such as it is, on the LF1, gives it a million mile headstart against anything else in its class.
I will never, ever understand how can so many people shoot with their arms stretched, using cameras that are completely unfit for such a goal. I can make due with a positionable LCD (such as on my EX1), but fixed LCD? Never. Even though I have such a compact. It's just a terrible way to take pics (except macro/closeups).
I never liked Panasonic cameras, but recently it seems they're the only one that 'get it' in compacts.
Heck, if I want to carry a small pocket camera, I carry a FILM COMPACT just so I can have a viewfinder in a small camera. Maybe I'll consider such a Panasonic some day.
Fully agree, these cameras need either EVF or swivel LCD and Panasonic is one of the few who are listening. But I think this is mostly a serious issue for people over 40-50, due to aging eyes. Most younger people seem to be comfortable using the LCD (they buy mostly smartphones anyway, while the older generation has the money to spend on better cameras?).
Unfortunately the LF1 seems a step behind the other top compacts in image quality (due to long zoom range with small size?), and for a 'quality compact' that is a significant downside. I hope we will see more compacts with internal EVF, even if it is just a simple one like in LF1; too bad that that other 'compact' from Panasonic, the GM1, has just an LCD.
JEROME NOLAS: I hope Ricoh have already a slimer version of this camera (drawing board) with fixed zoom 24-50mm, 2.8-4.0.
Ricoh doesn't use m43 sensors AFAIK, so that would probably have to be an APS-C camera. Because of the sensor size and the f/2.8-4 you want, that lens would be a LOT bigger than the GM1 zoom ...
the-dude-75: here are so many people writing without having a clue1. sony has not 4 to 4 mounts, they have two, one for the dslr line, the old minolta one and one for the mirrorless, the e-mount. and guess what. all other habe the same amount of mounts, canon has even more, one for full frame, one for crop and one for mirrorless. 2. sony is not stopping the nex line, there will,be new nex coming next year, in aps-c size3. yes you can use leica lenses and all othere lenses. no other FF can do this4. there is a roadmap for lenses untill 2015
WRONG ... you are the one who has no clue. The Canon mounts for FF and APS-C DSLRs are exactly the same. I can use ANY Canon FF (EF) lens on my Canon APS-C DSLR.
However, EF-S lenses (for APS-C) are keyed to make it impossible to mount them on FF Canon DSLRs. Using them on FF would not make sense because of the small image circle, and for some lenses the back elements are too close to the big mirror of an FF camera. But if you want, you can modify the back of the EF-S lens to mount it on FF, and in some cases risk damaging your mirror ...
iudex: I am very glad to see that manufacturers finally put EVFs to compacts. Tunnel-type OVF is a dead thing (only Fuji has tried to improve it by putting some info in it) and (a decent, i.e. min. 1,4M dots) EVF is the future and a must for compacts to distinguish from (more and more decent) smartphone cameras.So now Canon bring a G2x with an EVF (and letar also G17 with EVF) insterad od useless OVF.
... but these aren't really compacts (small cameras), Panasonic LF1 is one of the few current compacts with an EVF.
If you meant 'compact' in more general terms, there is nothing new here: ten years ago many prosumer cameras had long zoom range and EVF ... But I agree that an EVF is one of the features that is needed to distinguish cameras from cameraphones.
photofan1986: If IQ was on par with XZ-2, it would be nice, but from the samples here it does not come close. I wonder why the images are so soft.
it is the price to pay for having a 10x zoom lens in a small package (small for the sensor size and aperture).
davids8560: I think we have the emergence of a "new" camera class: the "prosumer zoom compact" or something like that.
Actually I'd say this is more of a re-emergence. The Canon PowerShot Pro1 and the Konica Minolta A1/A2/A200 had 28-200 lenses. And they came out in the last millennium, albeit with much more primitive image sensors, by comparison.
And here we have the same choice that had to be made between, say, the RX100 versus the XZ-1. Basically, it's image quality vs. ergonomics.
Let's face it. The choices have become too numerous. There's no clear winner. And people have grown weary of doing side-by-side comparisons, debating pros and cons, and seeing their cameras become obsolete in a matter of months after all the fisticuffs, bickering, and debate. I say it's time for the marines or the air force or some kind of special black ops unit to step in, seize the camera companies, and force them to produce one single awesome generic camera. A Canikolympusentaxonyasonic, or something.
Agree, technology from about ten years ago revisited. Include Sony DSC-F717, DSC-F828 and a few others for a complete picture; those cameras were basically a big lens with a small electronics package attached to it ...
These cameras were relatively big because of the lens and the sensor size (2/3 inch in the Pro1 and Sony F series). And they were expensive and relatively slow to AF/shoot, so they disappeared from the market when DSLR cameras became affordable.
Sony RX100 and RX10 are in a way the modern version of these prosumer superzooms; Olympus Stylus 2 is more a modern incarnation of the Olympus UZ series with its smaller sensor.
AbrasiveReducer: Nice. It's too bad current technology does not allow for a larger sensor in a package this size.
A much larger sensor with this zoom range and aperture, in a camera with the same (lens) size is impossible, the laws of physics simply don't allow it. Some advances in optics are theoretically possible e.g. with metamaterials (negative refractive index lenses), but that is still at the lab stage and probably 5-10 years away for consumer devices. Such optics would allow a more compact, shorter lens for the same focal length / aperture spec. But it isn't going to change the fact that a much bigger sensor requires a much bigger lens ...
Digitall: Nice looking camera, very nice specs. but the tiny sensor vs. body size do not make my day. Sure that Olympus could put a sensor M4:3 here with this fixed lens camera. maybe one day...
@Digitall: 'sure Olympus could put m43 sensor in this fixed lens camera', are you joking?
The fixed lens covers a 1/1.7" sensor, covering a much bigger m43 sensor with the same (sized) lens is totally impossible. Just look at the size of RX10 lens, and that's with shorter effective focal length and smaller sensor than m43. Keep dreaming ...
Rob Sims: Would be interesting to see a side by side comparison with the RX100 (I and II) as this looks to be the target competition of this camera.
And also a comparison with some of the better smaller sensor models. In reality, all kinds of design compromises can influence the final quality. RX100 has a great sensor but the optical quality is a compromise. The previous compact 25-100 zoom from Fuji wasn't very good either ...
technic: note to DPR editors:The spec comparison table on the introduction page is a bit unfair; the size and weight should include the mentioned zoom lens, but for GM1 the size is just for the body. It now looks like the GM1 is thinner than RX100. Pentax Q dimensions are probably also without the lens?
Why mention the specs of the lens like zoom range etc. if it is removable and not include it in the measurements / weight? Definitely a skewed comparison with the RX100 in the table; it just doesn't make sense like this.
I get it that people want to know the body size/weight (possibly compared to some other MILC's), but in that case they should not be compared with RX100 numbers that include the lens.
shademaster: what was wrong with the PZ 14-42? Could they not fix the shutter-shake =/OIS issues? Seems like it would be as small as the 12-32.
probably the PZ 14-42 has a slightly larger diameter than the 12-32?
starting at 24mm equiv. is a clever move, when most of the competition starts at 28mm equiv.
note to DPR editors:The spec comparison table on the introduction page is a bit unfair; the size and weight should include the mentioned zoom lens, but for GM1 the size is just for the body. It now looks like the GM1 is thinner than RX100. Pentax Q dimensions are probably also without the lens?
Menneisyys: $750, that is, the same as RX100 MkII, while "only" having the major advantage of 24mm WA (apart from, of course, lens exchangability) while having much worse video and the lens being much thicker? Well, the price SHOULD drop quite a bit.
GM1 should have better image quality thanks to the sensor and hopefully a less compromised lens. There is plenty of room for improvement in corner/border quality compared to RX100.
And the difference between 24 and 28mm WA is pretty big IMHO (GM1 tele reach is limited, but you can always use another lens).
Piggy the bad: I think for the vast majority of people the dmc LF1 is a much better buy. 28-200 equiv zoom, built in v/f which is actually very good and I really doubt if anyone can tell difference in iq due to sensor size.
The sensor size difference is huge and outweighs the nominally brighter lens of LF1. But agree that the LF1 viewfinder is a major advantage - with the GM1 you have to take pictures in 'cameraphone mode' (arms stretched), if you are a bit older ...
rikyxxx: 1/16000 silent shutter is great. Isn't awkward that Sony and Panasonic, two companies w/o a photographic history and background, try (and succeed) to innovate more than Canon, Nikon and Pentax?
Panasonic NEEDS to innovate more to stay in the camera market. Competition is good, Canon needs to get serious with the EOS M2 (and suitable extra-compact lenses).
rtogog: This tiny camera is very cute & interesting, but till now no successful effort to miniaturize any zoom or tele lens. Refer to Sony Nex series. Camera becomes in-balance when lens with long focal lens attached on it. So,the existent of hand grip to counter the weight is very important not just like as shown on this model, it fit only pancake lens which is very limited on numbers.
if you are going to use big long lenses, why chose the smallest m43 body?