LucaPCP

Wrong punishment. Make them climb it, rather!

I completely agree on the rear screen. On my Pen-F, I can at least close the foldable screen, so it's not in view and does not scratch. I wish I could do the same on the X100v.
My problem is that without reading glasses, those screens are useless anyway, so the more closed they are, the less they intrude, and the less they activate something by mistake.
My only reason for not getting the Pro 3 is that it lacks IBIS.

Yes, that's true. My iPhone 8 in a waterproof case takes better photos.

You can bolt it to your car roof, and provide data for your own version of StreetView. No problems with stitching things gotten from moving cameras; you have only one camera now, you can take a movie and then just undistort things.

Very nice video, many thanks to Wong! Very informative.
Yes, not much difference; I would probably go for the anti-aliasing filter camera.

Unit focus leads to better lenses. The problem is not focus responsiveness. Unit focus helps this camera compete with the GRIII. The problem of this camera, rather, is that the GR3 is so good and so incredibly sharp, and so much more portable, that it is uncertain what nice this camera fills.

Nice, but the one important thing is: is the lens sharper, especially in the corners, than its predecessor? The Ricoh II and III have unbelievably sharp lenses, and I don't see how this heavier, bigger camera can be competitive with them if the lens is not improved; the old lens was not super sharp in the corners.

I love, love, love CO.

First, the fundamentals. I can buy it, I don't need to import photos, and I can cause "developed" jpegs to be written to my output folder of choice, which I can then backup in various ways. In other words, CO does not hold my workflow hostage. I don't need to build a catalog of all my images. I can just store each import from my camera in a folder, look at the photos, and develop a few into jpegs that go in a chosen directory of results. If one day I grow tired of CO, there is nothing I need to export: all my RAWs, and all my JPEGs, are simply there, where I chose on my file system. This alone is a HUUGE difference to me.

The editing is also remarkably fast and intuitive, and the dynamic range tools, clarity, color contols, etc, are very well done. CO is what makes my photo processing enjoyable.

The images in this review don't seem to be very sharp! I much prefer my Ricoh GR2 and GR3.

Can it jump? Can the camera move around with the base jumping with both... legs?
Would be a fun way if a bit disruptive of approaching subjects to photograph!

I have both GRii and GRiii and the iii is amazing. The ibis and 24mp are great, and the colors in the jpegs are much better.
I also have an MFT camera, and the only lenses that come close to it in resolution (but do not improve on it) are the PanaLeica lenses; certainly not the Oly 17mm, which is quite poor, and also not the 20mm pancake. The Leica Summilux 15/1.7 is close, but the GRiii is still better resolution-wise. And a camera with 15/1.7 does not fit in your pocket.

So sure, when I go with an official large camera, I often choose my Pen-F for the ability to also use long lenses. But for a pocketable camera, or one that you can slip in your travel / work bag, the GRiii is fantastic.

I am getting out of my GRIII the same quality I used to get from my Fuji 645 rangefinder in the film days! Seriously, the resolution of this camera is nothing short of amazing. The price is not too high; it's an incredible instrument. It doesn't look like much, but think of it -- it's like 80 lines/mm on film days and with a lens capable of delivering it! It's sharper than most aps-c or mft lenses.

The fact is, they could at least shoot shots where one can usefully judge corner sharpness, flatness of plane of focus, color rendering, and so on. Not just totally random shots. Even when I step out of my house to take the few traditional shots I take with every new lens, I am a bit more careful. These shots don't tell us very much.

These photos are really rather horrible. Not the camera -- the photos are not technically bad. They are just esthetically rather horrible. The kind of photos you get when you do a "quick, let's get out of the door and photograph the first random 30 things at random I see", adding a pinch of bad taste to that.

I expected a bit more taste from dpreview.

I just love B&H, from the times in which I was ordering darkroom chemicals, to now with digital cameras.

Can we get a full review please? With comparometer and all?

Bah, I've had my LX100 for years and no dust issues at all.

It woudl be fun to have a wind-up camera. Good for long backpacking trips!

I have an LX100 and I like it very much. I have not much use for an LCD, as I much prefer the EVF, so I am glad they did not make the new camera bulkier with flip out screens and such. Indeed, sharing the same shape as the LX100 will save me ~$100 in a new leather case.
I always wished for an LX100 with better sensor (more pixels and sensitivity), and I plan to buy one as soon as available.

And if you stop paying, all the nude images magically reappear as wallpaper?
Sounds like a business plan!