GT500M: Well the main reason I would consider this and other superzooms is for the focal length range. Try capturing Red Parrots high up in the trees in Costa Rica with a 200mm equivalent focal length. I just managed it with a Sony HX400 though the results were very grainy on an overcast day.
I have an A7r and the cost, size and weight of long lenses for such a system mean I like to complement it with a decent bridge or superzoom which I am on the lookout for again....
I love the RX10 but its' reach at the long end makes it less than a total travel all-rounder.
The Canon is on my list and I would get the viewfinder as I can't shoot using the LCD only.
nicoboston: that Luminous Landscape review is impressive. I'd say teh G3X looks ideal for me to audition as my next travel compact (ish) camera....
Tried the Nikon p900 super super zoom and returned it as the menu system/firmware was defective. I wasn't completely satisfied with image quality either. I'm sticking with E-M1 and 100-300 (200-600 equiv.) for birding and wildlife as it is a reasonable size and IQ is quite good. I am not willing to carry a 600 zoom on an A7 series body.
Mister Joseph: The P900 at $600, I thought to myself, "I should buy this instead of a hulking lens longer than 300mm for my SLR." Then I saw the 100% crops and I said to myself, "I shall just crop my SLR's 300mm images."
Tried the Nikon P900 for one day before most of menu system stopped working - so I returned it. For me, the image quality of my E-M1 plus Panasonic 100-300 gave clearly better birding images though it maxes out at 600mm FF equiv. (but there is some room to crop in post). Though not heavy, the P900 is extremely large. My preference is to crop MFT, Crop, or FF sensors at more reasonable tele lengths.
MPA1: I hope the next iteration of the EM-1 gets much better high ISO performance and two card slots - then I can finally get my DSLR kit sold off.
I'm now using 2 systems: E-M1 and A7s and just sold my 5D3. I feel light and happy.
AngryCorgi: Glad to see a conventional sensor option in the lineup. Will be nice to see some results from a good-old Bayer-filtered sensor. :)
Agree. I've never liked the colors or razor sharp look of the X-trans sensors.
Hugo808: LOL Ken Rockwell has done a review of the XA-1 and claims it has an X-trans sensor! He should have read the press release....
I've followed Rockwell for years but he often shoots from the hip with his opinions like when he origunally blew off the X100 (which subsequently became his favorite everyday carry) and blew off the Sony RX1 without ever discovering all the external controls or how to adjust the white balance (which he certainly does on big Nikon and Canon DSLR cameras). Too bad, because his site does contain a lot of usefull information.
Nikguy: I can understand the two leading cameras excellant and state of the art. However as we all dream of a pocket camera that can statisfy 80% of the needs of a big camera heavy (I know the Oly is somewhat small) my vote is with my RX100 the fun begins with pocketabilty and great photos. There are no losers to me in the list but we keep trying to pit one system against another, That keeps them all making better equipment and WE enjoy the results. Isn't the free market great!
Glad to see I'm not the only one who did not like the RX100 (like my X10 way better). After my experience with the RX100, I'm wary of the RX1 as it might provide a similar (unpleasant) shooting experience but just with more pixels. Very happy with the OMD and happy with the 5D3. LX7 sounds interesting.