Would be nice if worked straight from iPhoto instead or export import
Does the flash bounce?
Does the flash tilt up to the ceiling for bounce?
clicking on download update nothing happens
From a refrigerator company that keeps track of how long the milk was out
photofisher: I don't mean to be silly, but did the pictures with a single human subject have spot metering used to correctly expose them. For example, the girl on the couch seems overexposed with a white background and the skaters on the ramps seem to be underexposed with a really dark shadow in the foreground. I know preventing clipped highlights and lifting shadows in PP is all the rage these days instead of metering the subject of interest while taking the shot............just wanting to know what was done with these pictures to determine what was the users intention vs the camera's performance.
"really dark shadow" i think x-trans gives one that, shadows that are too dark
Finally a flash smaller than a SUV
tigen: I think the review doesn't spend enough time looking at image quality. It's mostly limited to a couple of paragraphs. Actual images compared to its peers don't seem to hold up as much as the review indicates.
Yes I agree with sjogro, low light pictures look awful. Even ISO 1600 in pushing it. A GM1 with a Pana 20mm 1.7 can give you super clear and sharp pictures at1.7, the LX100 does not.
I returned this inferior camera. The EVF wheel was stuck not giving adjustment until I rocked it by force. The jpegs are pathetic, not in focus. I took 400 pictures and less than 5 were sharp. And I have not one complain of my other 40 cameras including RX100, RX100III, Fuji X100, D700, D7000, D40, Coolpix A, GR, E-PL7, PL5, PM2, Stylus 1, GM1, etc., not 1 complain. I have heard of a bad batch in the forums, but I just never saw a more pathetic camera.
OK I am not a pro, but I have taken 90,000 pictures and only the LX100 was OOF jpegs OOC. Many have also complained.
Can't you at least make the flash bounce with the finger? Does one have to blind all?
Some call it a phablet, or too large. Here is the real truth:
1) IF the phone is OFF, then it IS too large. Painfully large.
2) If the iPhone 6+ is ON, then it is simply gorgeous. Amazing screen changes into a Retina iPad Air quality (much better than the Retina Mini). Everybody that sees a picture or a movie gasps with a wow!
3) After using the 6+ a few hours, the 5S looks like a toy for a 4 year old. The 6 looks balanced, but by then you are aware that losing the + is making you lose the whole point of the product.
Bottom line: if you play with it 2 hours in the Apple Store, you will buy it or suffer the depression of compromising with the 6.
goblover: Is it just me, or the Canon G7x sample was motion blurred? And the LX100? If you see the top left and bottom right, the red water colour paint, and colour circle on the bottom left, the letters are blurred. The circle also not a full circle, a bit distorted. I'm not the expert, maybe DP Reviewers can help clarify why is that?
Yeah looks like recent cameras are on a moving tripod
Flashback: Not sure what is going on here?
The in-focus hair is very sharp. Impressive for iso 1600, but the out of focus hair is very mushy.
Looks like confused selective sharpening or maybe JPG compression artefacts.
But overall, bodes well for indoor photography without flash.
I think these fast zoom lenses are touchy when open
Skin tones like dead chicken
tkbslc: I honestly don't get why everyone is so disappointed. I think you all either had absolutely unrealistic expectations or you just like to complain. Well it's probably both, isn't it?
You put a Panasonic 20mm 1.7 on an Olympus PM2 and you get clean ISO 1100 with IOS, Oly jpeg quality, great colors. That 20mm has perfect optical quality. Perfect, like a $ 7000 Leica lens. Less money, same size. Just saying, sometimes the older cameras are even better.
photo perzon: For the same money and weight and size, the APS-C Fuji X-A1 and the perfect 27mm pancake produce immaculate samples.
GR does come to mind its jpg reds are orangebut the Nikon A is now $ 600 with perfect jpegsand the nikon has a tiny hot shoe bouncerthe X-A1 is the same size as LX100 and you can later don some glass on it like a 35mm 1.4 with optical perfectionX-A1 unlike X-M1 has perfect RAWS and perfect skin tonesLX100 jpeg for skin tones still not there
Let me put it this way. The X-A1 and the 27mm, if you walk into a Leica store and ask for the same IQ, it is $ 14,000. The LX100 IQ would be laughted out of the store. The LX100 is an excellent Swiss Army knife, does it all, so does the Sony RX100iii at half the weight.
For the same money and weight and size, the APS-C Fuji X-A1 and the perfect 27mm pancake produce immaculate samples.
More Panasonic jpeg skin colors?