Reading mode: Light Dark

New compact cameras not as good as last year's

Go to last post
P

photo perzon

Veteran Member
Messages
4,501
Reaction score
733
Location
US
Pana LX100 - 90% of comments are disastrous, calling the LX100 full of IQ problems, compared to Sony RX100iii which had a lot of compliments...at half the volume and weight. LX100 has no built in flash. Panas before did.

Fuji X-Trans gets a lof of criticism, whereas the original X100 and the X-A1 with standard sensors can produced editable RAWS and better IQ. Most prefer the older sensors. Personally X-trans makes face wrinkles super dark, whereas I call the X100 the rejuvenation machine, makes my wife look 20 years younger, the X-trans 10 years older.

Canon G7X lost the EVF, forum posters note poor IQ. G15 and G16 had compliments.

Nikon and Olympus were unable to bring truly new portable cameras this year.

Buit in flash would bounce before Sony RX100, Fuji X-A1, Pana GM1. Now LX100, G7X do not. Fuji X100T still does not.
 
I think it is premature to knock the IQ of either the LX100 or the G7x.
 
So buy one of last year's cameras! They do not have expiration dates.
 
A new model is typically judged compared to the previous one. If 2013 model visibly improves on 2012 model, it is 'brilliant', 'awesome', 'innovative', etc. If 2014 model is a minor rehash of the 2013, and delivers identical image quality, it is 'disastrous', 'a dinosaur', and a 'final nail in the coffin of whoever made it'.
 
RaymondR said:
I think it is premature to knock the IQ of either the LX100 or the G7x.
Click to expand...
Imaging Resource studio samples from both G7x and LX100 look fine.

I think most people were simply surprised and shocked to discover that the real world images, taken under the real world conditions, do look nothing like controlled studio/brickwall on tripod shots.
 
The most versatile pocketable camera is the GM5. Put the 20mm F/1.7 on it and it beats the pants off the rest for IQ.
 
Lab D said:
The most versatile pocketable camera is the GM5. Put the 20mm F/1.7 on it and it beats the pants off the rest for IQ.
Click to expand...
Um.....A Ricoh GR beats the pants off of that, and it can actually fit in your pants.
 
Cane said:
Lab D said:
The most versatile pocketable camera is the GM5. Put the 20mm F/1.7 on it and it beats the pants off the rest for IQ.
Click to expand...
Um.....A Ricoh GR beats the pants off of that, and it can actually fit in your pants.
Click to expand...
Except the Ricoh GR has an F/2.8 APS lens. The GM5 lens I mentioned equals an F/2.2 APS lens, so the Ricoh will be worse. (specs like 4 fps and lack of 1080/60p don't help either).

The Ricoh body is larger too, but the GM5 is thicker due to the attached lens.

http://camerasize.com/compact/#454,570,ha,f
 
Last edited:
Lab D said:
The most versatile pocketable camera is the GM5. Put the 20mm F/1.7 on it and it beats the pants off the rest for IQ.
Click to expand...
By virtue of having a 40mm FOV prime lens makes it very non-versatile.

the most versatile would have to be LX100.

As far as IQ goes, X100t would easily beat GM5+20/1.7.

And then there is a Leica X Type113, F1.7 lens for APS-C.
 
photo perzon said:
Pana LX100 - 90% of comments are disastrous, calling the LX100 full of IQ problems, compared to Sony RX100iii which had a lot of compliments...at half the volume and weight. LX100 has no built in flash. Panas before did.

Fuji X-Trans gets a lof of criticism, whereas the original X100 and the X-A1 with standard sensors can produced editable RAWS and better IQ. Most prefer the older sensors. Personally X-trans makes face wrinkles super dark, whereas I call the X100 the rejuvenation machine, makes my wife look 20 years younger, the X-trans 10 years older.

Canon G7X lost the EVF, forum posters note poor IQ. G15 and G16 had compliments.

Nikon and Olympus were unable to bring truly new portable cameras this year.

Buit in flash would bounce before Sony RX100, Fuji X-A1, Pana GM1. Now LX100, G7X do not. Fuji X100T still does not.
Click to expand...
This year's cameras are not as good as Last year's cameras, and no one bats an eye, makes me feel a severe case of time displacement. As a person who can remember (not THAT long ago) an era when a camera model might be actively sold for 5 - 7 years before being retired, makes me wonder if the camera industry is relying too much on gimmicks, and not enough on REAL technology.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top