Fois Giovanni: Panasonic is sharper on the right side (lock at the lower brush) and Sony on the left side (top brush or lower grass). Are both camera with a missaligned element in their lenses or the cameras lenses are not at the same distance to the four corners of the scene (tripod out of perpendicularism to the scene axis)? Note that get the scene centered in the viewer don´t means the camera is perpendicular to scene plane.
Oh! I´m talking about the studio scene on page 12! I forget to mention it.
AmateurSnaps: I love the idea of a bridge camera but at this price what are the advantages of this camera over a Canon/Nikon/Sony with for example the Tamron 16-300mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD Macro?
This appears now that DSLRs get lighter and photos are show on large screen TVs! In the past, with massive cameras and lenses, smaller prints and no image stabilzation imposing every night shot was on a tripod make difficult to anyone notice the mirror induced oscilation.
I discovered a very good reason! Take a handhold shot of a night scene with 600 equivalent focal lenght and 1/30s or slower with this camera and with a DSLR. Look at the pictures in detail and you´ll notice that the DSLR give vertical lines on each luminous point from the city lamps while Lumix keep the lamps as points. This is due the vertical oscilation created by the mirror shock. You need a very solid tripod to try to minimize this on a DSLR. And I tell you, if in a nigh shot it moves, it moves in daylight too. This can be a reason for lack of sharpness on DSLR because in a daylight photo this oscilation will appear as blur. The Lumix OIS do an excelent job compensating hand shake, but no VR, OIS, IS or whatever can compensate de high frequency shock of the mirror.
Artistico: Just a question, as I assume there must be some FZ1000 owners out there too checking out this forum: I know the close-focus is 3cm at the wide angle of the lens, but what is it at full extension telephoto, and what is the equivalent magnification ratio at either 25mm or 400mm equivalent?
Despite a bit of googling, I've not been able to find the data for this anywhere yet.
Perhaps the DPreview team might know too?
On page 8 of this review, under SPECs Comparisons, we see that both are 3cm when wide and 30cm for 200mm equivalente of Sony and 100 cm (1m) for 400mm of Panasonic. On the same page, at the first Picture, you can see that real focal range of Panasonic is 9.1-146mm. Usually you need to calculate the increase of distance between focal plane and lens plane due close-focus, but these lenses do close-focus by internal shift, so I presume that they keep almost the same focal distance to near focus. I bet for Panasonic a magnification ratio of 9.1/30 [mm] for wide angle and 146/1000 [mm] for tele. If you take the captured image as being Leica format (full frame), you can use the equivalent focal distance. Then, 25/30 for wide angle and 400/1000 for telephoto. The same can be done for Sony, for equivalent wide is 24/30 and tele is 200/300 (all values in mm). I think this give a good approach.
Panasonic is sharper on the right side (lock at the lower brush) and Sony on the left side (top brush or lower grass). Are both camera with a missaligned element in their lenses or the cameras lenses are not at the same distance to the four corners of the scene (tripod out of perpendicularism to the scene axis)? Note that get the scene centered in the viewer don´t means the camera is perpendicular to scene plane.
eiguoc: After reading over & over Figured it out, Have to take shutter off auto & stick in Mechanical for flash. 2 things to remember now to reset before heading out before sunrise.
Did you try 'forced on' for flash settings?
eiguoc: Does anyone else have problems with the flash Not going off each time. I really need to know. Is it some settings I don't have right or is it a glitch in the camera?
Vitruvius: Weakest link relative to Oly OM-D E-M5 is the lack if IBIS. Weakest link of the E-M5 relative to the G6 is the video.
The PANASONIC / LEICA opted for OIS for allowing a faster response to movements, prospectic correction to the angular change and ability to get closer to the sensor with the lens giving more freedom to the designers of the optical assembly. The disadvantage is that each of OIS lens must have one, thus more expensive, and the rotational motion of the lens axis (Z-axis, perpendicular to the sensor) is not corrected, although this movement is very limited in practice. The IBIS allows cheapen the objective and make the correction of the rotational motion on the axis ("Z") of the lens (including correct the horizon angle) but does not address the prospectic variation due to angular changes in the X and Y axes of the sensor. I believe that the sensor will not move as effective as moving a small block of lenses when it comes to compensate for high frequency instability. I also think that in terms of durability is better shake a small block of lenses than the sensor with its flat cables.
lensberg: One thing is abundantly clear... Canon still is the king of JPEG's beyond a shadow of a doubt...
As always with Nikon's new iterations... RAW remains a muted affair... A fractionally cleaner image by the D600... but details are quite blatently smudged away... I guess thats the price one has to pay for having a cleaner RAW image at high iso's... Canon's 5D III slightly noisier, but visibly superior detail retention... especially at 12800 & 25600
I´m not so confident! Did you compare JPGs high iso with Lumix GX? I see a big cloudy image for Nikon and much more details in Lumix GX crop, even been Lumix GX image smaller... I stay with Lumix GX, even in RAW! Compare!
whiteheat: It would be really great if Pentax and Olympus both produced a nice Full Frame camera as an alternative to the standard Canikon fare. A little competition would be good for the consumer, giving more choice and balancing price levels out much more equitably. Come on Pentax, come on Olympus - you can do, you both have the smarts and pedigree to do it, so do it!
By Albino_BlacMan (2 days ago) Olympus has exactly 0 AF FF lenses. Why would they even attempt that?
And most important, 0 money...
Stollen1234: simply as with all technology trend the FF will become cheaper and more widespread..this is good news
the future will be without any doubt an affordable FF cameras..fast FF cameras for sport and birding..etc
By itsastickup (2 days ago) ..."and that one day APS-C and maybe even M4/3 sensors might surpass the performance of FF sensors."
Perhaps but as a rule whatever is discovered that improves APS-C can then be worked in to FF but with larger photo sites, so it seems to me unlikely.
That is not true for everything. Larger photo sites means large charges, so large drain of energy and generation of heat. This is a big trouble to do movies as Full HD at 60p and make batteries last. Even a m4/3 needs to be cooled to withstand continue use. So, if the consumer demand more capabilities in movies from the cameras, the FF can be abandoned.
Well... what about picking your password when using a bankomat and spread it to cell phones? Will you remember to switch off before go to WC? Big Brother works by the fact that after some time, you forget that are on line! IMO this device is intended for forbidden use!
Artpt: I have three boys (7, 5, 9months) and have taken plenty of pictures over the years with a GH1. For a consumer like me, the mix of AF video and great images make for a compact system that I can later use to montage vacations for the grandparents....looking forward to the review and checking out a local store in the Chicago area that has this soon!
How did you manage to get three boys just two months apart each other! Do you have three wives? You are faster than Lumix auto-focus!
Jacques Gilbert: I think 90% of the comments can be replaced with this one:
This is a very confusing article. You list a number of cameras, in a well defined category, and place them in groups according to criteria that you explain. But, somehow, you manage to ignore the one I just bought and I have crowned my favorite after extensive research. To add insult to injury, you list cameras that I absolutely despise - again on the strength of my extensive research on the web - as if they were worthy of mention. I cannot understand your motivations, you must either be incompetent (as shown by the errors that I can catch), or bribed by all the companies that have to resort to such shady practices to compete with my favorite brand.
If this is what you wanted to say, please just copy and paste, the rest of us can then save time and skip your comment.
God Job! If so many people are here discussing about this roundup means that there´s a lot of interest in this area! You get a HIT !!! Now, complete with missing points, give more detais and you´ll get a herd of people visiting your page! Congratulations!
jeffharris: The GH2 is "a pretty capable stills camera in its own right"?
Pretty capable? That's a pretty funny quote, since it's the best stills camera of all the Micro Four Thirds cameras to date. It's very high quality video is a bonus feature, not it's primary with stills tossed in, just because.
How about a little mention of the multi-aspect ratio sensor, which really is one of it's primary features and separates the GH2 from the rest of the M4/3 line-up.
Quick, if a bit rough, description: it's an 18MP "oversized" sensor that adjusts the area of the sensor that is used for shooting different aspect ratios (4:3, 3:2, 16:9, 1:1). It maximizes final image resolution with this technique, rather than cropping a full-sensor image and losing resolution to simulate differing aspect ratios.
Good and informative article! Thanks.
We say that Lumix GH 2 doesn´t crop because the sensor corners goes beyond the resolution circle of the lens, this is the reason why no format selection give you 18 MPixels. The others use a sensor inside the resolution circle of the lens and get diferent aspect ratios by cropping. I hope someday Panasonic give the option to save the entire 18 MPixels data and let me do the crop. If I have blue sky on the upper corners and grey asphalt on the botom corners, I would have no concerns about CA, distortion, blure or vignetting... Could even be interesting pictures...
Tariag: What's the advantage over SD? Larger capacity?
But actually SD can be faster...
Doug Pardee: CFast was never intended for consumer applications — it's intended for industrial equipment — so I guess this is CFA's attempt to get back into the consumer world. Given the almost universal adoption of SD/SDHC/SDXC in current consumer devices, CFA's got quite the up-hill struggle. Maybe in some of the pro equipment. I guess we'll see.
And I have to agree... "SD" was inexplicable but at least pronounceable. "XQD"? Really?
Maybe "XQD" stand for "ExQuisite Device"
Jogger: "XQD" .. did they use a random letter generator to come up with that
Maybe stand for ExQuisite Device