BozillaNZ

tomtom50: I think Richard Butler goes off-track when he understates the usefulness of APS-C lenses on FF bodies.

The 36MP sensor has a completely useful 16MP APS-C crop. The FF sensor doesn't make the body much larger (Isn't an a7R smaller than an E-M1?).

So as soon as 36MP FF sensor prices drop enough so the price isn't enormous FF bodies make all the sense in the world. For a long time many claimed FF sensors would always cost way more, but do we still believe that as FF bodies edge ever closer to the magic $999 body price?

Butler makes the case that buying FF lenses before you have a FF body distorts decisions. Correct. But how about the opposite: buying (smaller, lighter, cheaper) APS-C lenses that you will happily use on FF makes a lot of sense, and it is an upgrade path rather than a big jump.

Limbsjones: There is very little difference in image quality going from M4/3 to APS-C...i don't see why people are flocking to fuji...fuji have a larger uglier bulkier system with lenses that are just growing in size, and they are trying to match the speed and quality to what Olympus and Panasonic are putting out...it's insane really...go full frame or go m4/3...aps-c is still this awkward middle.

munro harrap: Nice, possibly well-made. Are its electrical circuits using proper tin/lead solder, or will it stop working like all the others do?

Come on it is 2015 and I think it is about time that photographers equipment became again as long-lived and reliable as it was before the EU and others decided to RoHS everything we spend money on, forcing us to repurchase over and over again. My kids are in their teens now, but in their lifetime they will have to replace their DSLRs and lenses 7 or 8 times unless something is done, killing the planet and exhausting natural resources in the process, not to mention the west becoming utterly dependent on those of China and Taiwan and Japan in the most unhealthy way.

km25: A Canon 24-70 wt is 805g, 1.77 lbs. The Fuji only is 655g, 1.44 lbs. All fast and wide lens are goinr to large, but this is a one lens for just about everything. Remember, the X-PRO is APS-C and some cameras like the Nikon 7000 series is nearly as big as nomal FF Nikon. The lens factor is 50% less, the wt factor will about the same. Did you exspect an 16-55mm F.95 should only wiegh as much as an 35mm F/1.4. They make other lens that cover this range that lighter, buy one of those. This a Pro level and they work for a living.

Zorak: 1/80s, 200mm, handheld I presume ?
Impressive, as is the picture of the man walking at 12800 iso... I don't think my A7 can put off this result, I'm quite surprised... Have they changed anything on the sensor or internal processing, or is it just my eyes?

Zorak: 1/80s, 200mm, handheld I presume ?
Impressive, as is the picture of the man walking at 12800 iso... I don't think my A7 can put off this result, I'm quite surprised... Have they changed anything on the sensor or internal processing, or is it just my eyes?

Morpho Hunter: Presumably, in return for the superb IBIS, Olympus will get a superb sensor for the E-M5 replacement from Sony....?

graybalanced: That sensor is so sensitive, you have to be careful what you say around it.

Sidath Senanayake: I think my RX100 (version 1) does considerably better than the samples here. And that's with looking at 20MP at 100% rather than 12MP.

I was hoping that the image quality in this camera would justify it's noticeably larger size (compared to the RX100 series). Sadly it looks as though that isn't the case :(

mick232: Once people start getting laughed at because they are shooting with Canon gear, the alarm bells should be rining.

BozillaNZ: ePhotoZine has published more photos, the first one has raw:
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/panasonic-lumix-dmc-lx100-sample-photos-26312

And I've downloaded the P1050403.RW2, converted to CR2 using my project CR2Pana, and developed it using Canon RAW Image Task, the result is here:

http://s000.tinyupload.com/index.php?file_id=49920817883891967283

The color and sharpness is very good! It's funny that Canon's software helped this camera to unleash it's potential but neverless it's doable and I will finish the CR2Pana's LX100 support by the time it's on the market!

dethis2: RAW conversion with Rawtherapee ..
Looks like LX100's sensor is very much alike GH4's regarding color filters and raw white level.
You need to add the following paragraph in RT's camconst.json file

{ // Quality X, preliminary support
"make_model": "Panasonic DMC-LX100",
"dcraw_matrix": [ 7122,-2108,-512,-3155,11201,2231,-541,1423,5045 ],
"ranges": {
"black": 16, // 16 is BL offstet calculated from exif data.
"white": [
{ "iso": 100, "levels": 2700 },
{ "iso": 125, "levels": 3100 }, // gh4 data
{ "iso": [ 160, 200, 250, 320, 400, 500, 640, 800, 1000, 1250, 1600, 2000, 2500, 3200, 4000, 5000, 6400, 12800, 25600 ], "levels": 4080 }
]
}
},

jpeg
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0NqktTgc54sa1JCWGhWNXM1dWc/view?usp=sharing
Settings
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0NqktTgc54sYmxmU2ZKbEh1Um8/view?usp=sharing

BozillaNZ: I've got a developed raw image of the studio shot from Image Resources. This file is converted to Canon CR2 format using my own developed tool and then converted to JPG using, hold on to your seat, the Canon RAW Image Task. The color rendition is a lot more Canon-like and the sharpness is very good.

LX-100 SOOC:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/panasonic-lx100/LX100hSLI00200NR1.HTM

LX-100 to Canon CR2, developed in RAW Image Task:
http://bozillanz.minus.com/i/y3rkp5ZGXXBY

BozillaNZ: I've got a developed raw image of the studio shot from Image Resources. This file is converted to Canon CR2 format using my own developed tool and then converted to JPG using, hold on to your seat, the Canon RAW Image Task. The color rendition is a lot more Canon-like and the sharpness is very good.

LX-100 SOOC:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/panasonic-lx100/LX100hSLI00200NR1.HTM

LX-100 to Canon CR2, developed in RAW Image Task:
http://bozillanz.minus.com/i/y3rkp5ZGXXBY