Nobody need me to say that in the film era Leica was great: first class lenses, terrific range finder body.However, now, it is not cost-effective to make perfect lenses, because the modern camera software will correct distortions and aberrations; and the camera body doesn't have to last forever, because the digital evolution makes any camera almost semi-obsolete after a few years compared to the new developed ones.Sorry, Leica: you were a dream..... Now you are a memory of excellence. But to take photos other cameras are more fit.
ThePhilips: The LX100 made me realize what's missing.
No matter how hard I look at it, I see LX100 as nothing else but a m43 camera with a premium 12-35 zoom glued to it. There is no point for me to buy the LX100 as a camera - (if I decide to buy it) I would be buying it as a "lens" for my m43 collection.
And that made me realize: the missing are an LX101 with 100-300mm eq lens and an LX102 with 7-20mm eq lens. If Pana engineers have managed to cram the 12-35 into such dimensions, I'm pretty sure they can also do some magic with the longer and the wider lenses. LX100 is targeted at pro/semi-pro/enthusiasts. But to cover the market better, they also have to differentiate with the lenses: some users like it wider, some users like it longer. I'd definitely buy the LX102. And very likely the LX101. But LX100? I have already two lenses covering the "standard" range...
I "liked" your first paragraph: it was a great thing to say that the LX100 is actually .... a lens !actually, a very good lens: why would you buy a 12-35/2.8 when you could buy the LX100 and have a second body?I don't agree on your second paragraph: while a lens like the one on the LX100 could not be made for the innterchangeable M4/3, a "good" 100-300mm equivalent can be made, and I wish it would be made, or, even better, a prime 250mm/f4.5... (just dreaming)
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?
Valentinian: and a TC 1.4 compatible with this lens only!
I am upset.Just waiting for LX100 reviews: if wide-angle distortions prove being well corrected, then I will sell my 10mm/2.8, 14mm/2.5 and 25mm/1.4, will buy the LX100 and keep the E M-5 with the 75mm (unfortunately w/out TC 1.4)- No I do not need the Huge Oly 40-150 -
yeah... it really makes sense not to make it compatible with the 75/1.8
and a TC 1.4 compatible with this lens only!
Upset seeing that Olympus answer to Samsung's impressive NX! is.... E-M1 firmware version 2.0 and silver body version !
Miron09: All SanDisk cards I ever used fell apart after a few months of usage. Samsung product much better. Never managed to break a Samsung card. I'd never spend so much money on such a product with such a short life span
your SanDisk cards fall apart? what do you do to them, bake them?
Valentinian: another month, and we'll see how the coming Panasonic LX8 will compare to this camera.competition is good...
well.... it took 3 months....
aandeg: They must have wanted to film a black camaro in a cave.
black cat in a cave at night
neil holmes: Spy meets and befriends simple person, spy gets said person to push the button for photo of forbidden military base......who gets charged???
Paparazzi outside celebrities place ......gets passing kid to climb tree and push shutter for pic in breach of law....who gets charged??
I believe that Mr. Slater owns the copyright, but not for the reason you say: copyright law is one thing; being charged for causing someone else to do something illegal is another completely different thing (IMO).Mr.Slater (IMO) owns the copyright for 4 reasons:1) he is the producer - went to the apes, set the equipment, 2) he turned on the camera, took some pictures - so initiated the process.3) after the ape took the camera, Mr. Slater allowed the ape to take hundred of pictures4) Mr. Slater postprocessed and edited the pictures.
"Copyright law states that works not originated by a human author can't support a copyright claim" The picture originated in the owner's camera; also, because he owns the camera and the memory card he also own whatever is in it. Wikipedia doesn't own it. 'a work owing its form to the forces of nature and lacking human authorship is not registrable.'But if he (presumably) edited the picture, then shouldn't his editing work be copyrightable?Also if he allowed the monkey to take pictures (or didn't stop it by taking the camera rightaway from the monkey) then he "used" the monkey as an assistant photographer...So the picture should be registrable.Anyway, a monkey is not a "force of nature": it is a living inteligent being, capable of this kind of behaviour..
ARB1: I wonder if I can just purchase the little red Leica sticker and put it on my Olympus OMD.
Nah.... I wouldn't do that to my good old E-M5
Biological_Viewfinder: This review is nothing new at all.
I have purchased Panasonic cameras because of DPR reviews, and EVERY SINGLE TIME I WAS EXTREMELY DISSAPOINTED.
I'm never going to fall for it again.
pls give an example, with details
my longest m4/3 lens is the 75mm. I had the 75-300 but sold it waiting for a prime tele.Now, considering how much the Olympus 300/4 will cost (when....), and given the DPreview 82 score for this Pan. FZ1000, am wondering if I should buy this camera instead of waiting for an improbable accessible 300mm prime....
When Nikon released originally the system 1, were they trying to undermine the m4/3 ? or were they experimenting with the mirrorless system (without interfering with their APS-C ? In any case, Nikon's System 1 did not undermine the m4/3; however, they succeeded experimenting with the mirrorless system (and probably made a lot of money as well). So, now that the system 1 is showing its inherent high end limitation, is Nikon ready for a FF (or APS-C) mirrorless?
another month, and we'll see how the coming Panasonic LX8 will compare to this camera.competition is good...
Valentinian: is it correct to assume that a curved sensor should be more useful with wide angle lenses than with tele?
IMO some company will make a professional full size curved sensor ultrawide fixed lens camera
is it correct to assume that a curved sensor should be more useful with wide angle lenses than with tele?