RobLI

Joined on Apr 20, 2014

Comments

Total: 11, showing: 1 – 11
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX10/LX15 Review (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: I remember paying $599 for my Panasonic LX2 about ten years ago.

This camera looks ten times better, for around the same price.

ahem... times, cameras and prices have changed :P

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 14:40 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX10/LX15 Review (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

Escaping: In my own view, the original LX series ended with the LX7, because it gave me 3 key important features in one package: a large sensor in a small body platform, a fast zoom lens starting at 24mm, enthusiast controls and ergonomics including the ability to have a viewfinder (I can add an OVF to the LX3). The LX100 broke that original design concept by making the camera a tad too big for me (it no longer fits in my jeans pocket). Now, the LX10 goes back to the smaller form factor but lacks the EVF or even the option to add one. To me, this LX10 is pretty much a ZS100 with a faster lens without the EVF. I wish Panasonic did not take the EVF out. Very disappointed! At least, now knowing what the LX10 is, I can say I would go for the Nikon DL instead. Who knows, we may see a LX8?.. sighs.

@EwanMC, I am thinking the same thing. The LX100 is not perfect, but will fit my needs better than LX10... and I can get the LX100 at a lower price than for LX10. It is a no brainer.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 13:14 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX10/LX15 Review (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

Escaping: In my own view, the original LX series ended with the LX7, because it gave me 3 key important features in one package: a large sensor in a small body platform, a fast zoom lens starting at 24mm, enthusiast controls and ergonomics including the ability to have a viewfinder (I can add an OVF to the LX3). The LX100 broke that original design concept by making the camera a tad too big for me (it no longer fits in my jeans pocket). Now, the LX10 goes back to the smaller form factor but lacks the EVF or even the option to add one. To me, this LX10 is pretty much a ZS100 with a faster lens without the EVF. I wish Panasonic did not take the EVF out. Very disappointed! At least, now knowing what the LX10 is, I can say I would go for the Nikon DL instead. Who knows, we may see a LX8?.. sighs.

To me this sounds like Panasonic management has been taken over by marketing who are playing with brand awareness, using the reputation the LX series built up to sell unrelated cameras, and market segmentation, deliberately withholding certain features to fit a perceived niche and compete in said niche.

SILLY PEOPLE! This camera market segment is dying vs mobile phones and unless they deliver EXACTLY what customers want, the product will be ignored and fail.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 13:10 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX10/LX15 Review (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

DiegoRodriguez: My next camera will be either this one, either the Nikon DL 24-85. They are very similar btw. Featurewise they are more interesting to me than Sony and Canon 's offer. I look forward for tests and comparisons.

I find it strange that in the comments you guys seem to already hate it.

Not hate, but disappointment. I knew what I wanted in this type of camera and LX15/10 is not it.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 13:00 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX10/LX15 Review (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

Stollen1234: is this the successor of the world best premium compact Panasonic LX7 / Leica D-Lux6?

It is not. Not really as too much of the design has changed for the worse... apart from the sensor.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 12:14 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX10/LX15 Review (398 comments in total)

Disappointing: no inbuilt ND filter, no microphone input, no aspect ratio switch (and where did the 1:1 aspect ratio get lost?), very short zoom range. Absolutely NOTHING in this camera to make me choose it over the competition.

I could change my mind if the lens produced stunning image quality... but I doubt this possibility judging by the weak effort from Panasonic with the other features.

For now, for a carry everywhere small camera, I will go with the LX100 which can be had for a good price. If the LX200, or whatever it is called, adds inbuilt ND, microphone input, improves stabilization and improves lens image quality, Panasonic can have my money. Hoping the LX200 will come with a new m43 BSI sensor.

In short, on LX15: BOTH thumbs down from me, Panasonic should not have bothered.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 12:11 UTC as 153rd comment
On article CP+ 2014: Hands-on with Sigma DP2 Quattro (249 comments in total)
In reply to:

kimsch: Forget the design - show me the Pictures!

JPEGs are not a good inspection tool for the Merrills... unless you are careful. JPEG tends to record colour with half the resolution... so the Merrills lose the advantage (unless you use a JPEG encoder that allows you to set it to full colour encode).

Link | Posted on Apr 28, 2014 at 12:11 UTC
In reply to:

ericwestpheling: so they didn't fix any of the ergonomic issues, added no evf, and they abandoned the main draw of full-color sampling for each pixel...go team Sigma! You will make a great wikipedia footnote about bad product design.

I will definitely not buy a camera with sensor with a 4:1:1 ratio. What they should have done is make the bottom layers also 20 MP, but introduce a mode where pixels get binned (combined together) when ISO performance is required. Yes, this would require well designed read out sequence, probably a more complicated processor and a larger buffer... but would also allow ALL kinds of interesting combinations in how the lower layers are binned and colours interpolated. THAT would be a camera that gets me excited... my reaction to the quattro is "YAWN" and "I'll stick with Merrills" and maybe "I'd rather try the Fuji X-T1".

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2014 at 13:11 UTC
In reply to:

Gesture: We can spin things any way we want, but 15 down to 4.9 is not progress. If the Foveon issues could be solved, you go 10:10:10 at a minimum. That huge body begs an integral EVF or swivel design.

Kendall, NO... the Merrills, despite their problems, have a resolution equivalent to about 25 to 30MP Bayer sensor. Following this pattern the Quattro will have a resolution somewhere between 10 MP (2x5MP) and definitely less than 40MP. I do not think the quattro can reach the resolution in colour of the Merrills when it has 3 times less information in colour. Thus THIS IS a reduction in resolution. I am waiting to see what sensor will be used in the SLR version... I have a sneaky suspicion that the DP Merrills were better than the SLR in IQ and are now being hobbled. I could be wrong, but if the new SLR turns up with the same number of photosites for each colour, I will know I guessed a reason for this change correctly.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2014 at 13:02 UTC
In reply to:

Francis Carver: Wow, this is great. You mean to tell me I only have to buy THREE of these babies -- and presto, I can actually be capturing images in 28, 45, and 75mm focal lengths? Wow, that is so nifty!

Also, who designed this thing? Professor Baron von Frankenstein of the German Democratic Republic?

Makes sense if cost of each is the same or less as buying and equivalent quality lens. Plus the lenses can be customised and matched to each camera perhaps better than removable lenses.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2014 at 12:35 UTC
In reply to:

Lensjoy: The human eye is most sensitive to green. When calculating luminance (Y) from the respective RGB values for gamma 2.2, the formula is:
Y = 0.2126*R^2.2 + 0.7152*G^2.2 + 0.0724*B^2.2
Blue is only 7 percent of perceived luminance! So if I were to design a sensor doing what Sigma is purporting to do, I would put the high resolution four pixels in the center green layer, not the top blue layer.

Perhaps Sigma is doing something more complex than the schematic in the article above implies, but from the above description I expect this sensor design to have faults that we'll see remedied in a future version. I wouldn't buy the camera yet.

The problem is that they have no choice because of how light is absorbed, i.e. how deeply it penetrates. The top layer has to be blue because the blue light does not penetrate deeper and so on for the others.

Link | Posted on Apr 20, 2014 at 12:31 UTC
Total: 11, showing: 1 – 11