MFT Pocketable solution?

[NZ Scott]

People who buy "proper" cameras nowadays are enthusiasts who want control of ISO, aperture and shutter speed.

This means cameras need to have buttons and dials that fall easily to hand.

For that market, the GM5 is better than the GX850.

It will be interesting to see how well (or otherwise) the GX850 does in the market after a year or so.

S

But those people didn't want to spend the $$$ that the GM's costs.

Which is why the GXxxx/GF lines actually sells.

I dunno, man. The price doesn't seem that different to me. At least, not in my part of the world.

 

[Tom Caldwell]

The GF9/GX850 is your simple, pitched at less involved user camera. Mobile phones have completely killed off simple compact cameras. There is no way that selling a phone at a good profit margin then giving a free camera with it can be beaten by a simple basic camera that costs "hundreds" of dollars and can be blown away by any half respecting mobile phone camera.

In effect the GX850 is a very capable camera - just a pity that it comes in sheeps clothing.

Cameras need to be proper cameras for those that are interested in them as a primary tool or die a death from mediocracy.

This is why the GX850, howeevr well it sells is sending out mixed messages. "Hey buy this fun camera, no real effort needed to use it ...."

People who buy "proper" cameras nowadays are enthusiasts who want control of ISO, aperture and shutter speed.

This means cameras need to have buttons and dials that fall easily to hand.

For that market, the GM5 is better than the GX850.

It will be interesting to see how well (or otherwise) the GX850 does in the market after a year or so.

S

 

[Tom Caldwell]

People who buy "proper" cameras nowadays are enthusiasts who want control of ISO, aperture and shutter speed.

This means cameras need to have buttons and dials that fall easily to hand.

For that market, the GM5 is better than the GX850.

It will be interesting to see how well (or otherwise) the GX850 does in the market after a year or so.

S

But those people didn't want to spend the $$$ that the GM's costs.

Which is why the GXxxx/GF lines actually sells.

Does it? Any sales statistics or is it simply based on the fact that you can still buy them?

 

[Tom Caldwell]

People who buy "proper" cameras nowadays are enthusiasts who want control of ISO, aperture and shutter speed.

This means cameras need to have buttons and dials that fall easily to hand.

For that market, the GM5 is better than the GX850.

It will be interesting to see how well (or otherwise) the GX850 does in the market after a year or so.

S

But those people didn't want to spend the $$$ that the GM's costs.

Which is why the GXxxx/GF lines actually sells.

I dunno, man. The price doesn't seem that different to me. At least, not in my part of the world.

I agree, for what is marketed as an entry level camera for the less involved the GX85 seems to be a far better buy for not a lot more.

 

[Duzza]

In good light, I find the Panasonic 12-32mm a great little lens.
It offers a very versatile focal range, provides image stabilization and very very good image quality. Plus, with its 12mm wide angle for me it trumps all the others 14-x zooms.

In low light, my lens of choice would be the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7.

 

[paul613]

With artificial bokeh, cell phones pose a serious threat. See Allison Johnson's article "Smartphones killed the compact and now they're going after entry-level ILCs":

https://www.dpreview.com/opinion/73...t-and-now-they-re-coming-for-entry-level-ilcs

The article has garnered more than 700 comments.

 

[Yannis1976]

After reading all your replies, as I said the 1" cameras seem to be the best compromise. However cost is an issue and I am still thinking that these body cap lenses might be a bit better than cell phone IQ. My options at the moment are the following:

1) GM1 used 170E

2) GF7 used 180E

3) GX800 used 280E

4) Sony A5100+kit lens 350E

For all these I will need a lens ranging from the 45E of the body cap and reaching to 150E used 14mm. One concern I have is that none of the pancake lenses (but the bodycap 9mm) are wide enough (12mm).

4) Canon G7X mk2, Sony RX100 mk3 used 400-500E

 

[peppermonkey]

People who buy "proper" cameras nowadays are enthusiasts who want control of ISO, aperture and shutter speed.

This means cameras need to have buttons and dials that fall easily to hand.

For that market, the GM5 is better than the GX850.

It will be interesting to see how well (or otherwise) the GX850 does in the market after a year or so.

S

But those people didn't want to spend the $$$ that the GM's costs.

Which is why the GXxxx/GF lines actually sells.

Does it? Any sales statistics or is it simply based on the fact that you can still buy them?

 

[peppermonkey]

People who buy "proper" cameras nowadays are enthusiasts who want control of ISO, aperture and shutter speed.

This means cameras need to have buttons and dials that fall easily to hand.

For that market, the GM5 is better than the GX850.

It will be interesting to see how well (or otherwise) the GX850 does in the market after a year or so.

S

But those people didn't want to spend the $$$ that the GM's costs.

Which is why the GXxxx/GF lines actually sells.

I dunno, man. The price doesn't seem that different to me. At least, not in my part of the world.

 

[peppermonkey]

With artificial bokeh, cell phones pose a serious threat. See Allison Johnson's article "Smartphones killed the compact and now they're going after entry-level ILCs":

https://www.dpreview.com/opinion/73...t-and-now-they-re-coming-for-entry-level-ilcs

The article has garnered more than 700 comments.

 

[peppermonkey]

After reading all your replies, as I said the 1" cameras seem to be the best compromise. However cost is an issue and I am still thinking that these body cap lenses might be a bit better than cell phone IQ. My options at the moment are the following:

1) GM1 used 170E

2) GF7 used 180E

3) GX800 used 280E

4) Sony A5100+kit lens 350E

For all these I will need a lens ranging from the 45E of the body cap and reaching to 150E used 14mm. One concern I have is that none of the pancake lenses (but the bodycap 9mm) are wide enough (12mm).

4) Canon G7X mk2, Sony RX100 mk3 used 400-500E

 

[paul613]

Does anyone know what percentage of people who buy a "no viewfinder" camera regret their choice?

I'd like to see makers of viewfinder cameras cite this as a selling point to raise awareness. If I recall correctly, a similar campaign was launched in American in the 2000s to discourage young people from becoming smokers: "XX percent of people who smoke wish they'd never started."

 

[TheDream168]

Does anyone know what percentage of people who buy a "no viewfinder" camera regret their choice?

I'd like to see makers of viewfinder cameras cite this as a selling point to raise awareness. If I recall correctly, a similar campaign was launched in American in the 2000s to discourage young people from becoming smokers: "XX percent of people who smoke wish they'd never started."

 

[vallecano]

I'm going to start a new thread same subject, but with viewfinder; as I cannot do anything without one. Have a M-10 but it is not really "Pocketable"

Earl

Madrid

 

[peppermonkey]

I'm going to start a new thread same subject, but with viewfinder; as I cannot do anything without one. Have a M-10 but it is not really "Pocketable"

Earl

Madrid

start a new thread but if you must have an EVF, your only real option, at least in M43 land is the Panasonic GM5. It's the smallest, most pocketable M43 camera in existence. The next closest possibility is perhaps the old Panasonic GX1 with optional EVF. After that is the Panasonic GX7 and GX85. After that is the Olympus E-M10 and it's ilk. But if the E-M10 is too large, just forget all other models except the GM5 (or possibly the GX1 but that's pretty old...).

 

[vallecano]

Looks like I could have saved a new thread. It seems strange that Oly does not have anything similiar.

Earl

 

[JakeJY]

People who buy "proper" cameras nowadays are enthusiasts who want control of ISO, aperture and shutter speed.

This means cameras need to have buttons and dials that fall easily to hand.

For that market, the GM5 is better than the GX850.

It will be interesting to see how well (or otherwise) the GX850 does in the market after a year or so.

S

But those people didn't want to spend the $$$ that the GM's costs.

Which is why the GXxxx/GF lines actually sells.

I dunno, man. The price doesn't seem that different to me. At least, not in my part of the world.

 

[Raist3d]

I think your idea can alaomqork as long as the controls are there and still fast

 

[Raist3d]

they were disappointed with the sales of the GM line (and this by the time of the GM5).

I wonder if they should have gone for a very specific niche, increase the price by $300 (in USA) but make sure it has the latest of everything sensor wise, speed wise, buffer wise (buffer like the GX850 isn't bad actually).

 

[Le Frog]

After reading all your replies, as I said the 1" cameras seem to be the best compromise. However cost is an issue and I am still thinking that these body cap lenses might be a bit better than cell phone IQ. My options at the moment are the following:

1) GM1 used 170E

2) GF7 used 180E

3) GX800 used 280E

4) Sony A5100+kit lens 350E

The GM1 is a real bargain, as far as I am concerned, definitely a better (and more pocketable) choice than the other ILCs in your shortlist; and 300 Eu cheaper than the 1" alternatives. With that money, there are plenty of lens choices, including the the 12-32 zoom, if you must go below 14mm.

For all these I will need a lens ranging from the 45E of the body cap and reaching to 150E used 14mm. One concern I have is that none of the pancake lenses (but the bodycap 9mm) are wide enough (12mm).

4) Canon G7X mk2, Sony RX100 mk3 used 400-500E

--
Yannis
https://www.flickr.com/photos/127079204@N06/
https://www.viewbug.com/member/Yannis76