Panasonic GX10 (rumoured, FT4)

From someone who didn't have a lot of experience with EVFs prior to a couple of years ago, I was  sorely disappointed that the EVF of my GX9 was so much inferior to that of my other camera with a EVF, my much less expensive FZ300.

Panasonic would really introduce a GX10 before a G10?

Keithpictures wrote:

So many comments here about the EVF. I really don’t get it.

The GX9 EVF is no worse than it’s true competition: the a6600, the X-Pro, the X-E3, X100F and the LX100 II. It has higher resolution than all of those, actually, at 2.7m dots.

I speak as a pure fan of rangefinder-styled crop sensor cameras. There are so many features I care about more than the EVF, including the LCD. I do want a camera that *has* an EVF (and OVF with it is great), and it’s especially cool if it *tilts*. But I also envy the a6600, which has a totally mundane 2.3m non-tilting, small EVF with even less magnification. It has *everything else* though. (Too bad Sony UI is atrocious.)

Field sequential tech is not the end of the world (unless it really does bother your eyes). Yes, OLED is preferred and I do welcome it. But I really don’t understand how so many GX fans complain and worry about this. Weather sealing, mic input, better IBIS, better 4K, compact kit size, autofocus - all of those are more important to me, and are needed to properly compete against Sony and Fuji. So long as I can use the VF in sunshine, it’s doing its job.

Frankly, I’m just happy the LCD is so good, since I can use that in the sun quite often. That cannot be said for the Sony cameras!

The GX series is unfairly maligned over this issue. 2.7m dots isn’t as high as the flagship G9 or X-T3, but if you really love flat top bodies, it remains very competitive. And frankly, making the EVF bigger, like the GX8, is also somewhat against the philosophy of the GX series. Fuji and Sony and Leica all do it right: keep left-corner VFs small and simple, to maintain the attractive body design.