Andy Westlake's hands-on preview has a useful chart comparing the equivalent lens speed of the latest premium compacts. It shows, among other things, that the RX100 has a 1-stop advantage at the wide end, falling to a 1⁄3-stop disadvantage at the long end.
I have to say, I'm keen on neither the MOS sensor (instead of CCD, where Panasonic was competitive with the best) nor the lower sensor area (they should have gone up a size, if anything). As Mescalamba says, we'll never get what we want.
But for the record, I wanted an LX6 with a return to the iconic 24-60 mm-e range of the LX3, the available lens volume being used to reduce lens distortion instead of increase the zoom range, a slightly larger CCD sensor, and a built-in GPS receiver (like the Canon S100). Still curious about the LX7 we got, though. The aperture ring looks great. And that lens – 11 elements, 10 groups, 9 aspherical surfaces, ED glass, nano-coating – is seemingly state of art.
Samples are up on dpr. Rather impressive if you ask me. Even ISO 6400 seems useable for web or moderate print sizes (not many years since the D3 was sensational with useable ISO 6400). The portrait photo is actually quite impressive. Except for the lack of a built-in VF, this looks like a very nice camera. Love the aperture dial on the lens too.
It's amazing how much noise has improved in a few years. ISO 3200 on a 1/1.7" sensored at once time was a ludicrous proposition. It's still not great, but it's halfway decent and it wasn't long ago that's what you got at ISO 400.
FlyPenFly wrote:
Yeah but how is it at ISO100-400, much better than the original in color gradations?
Could have some progress made, but with the sensor actually being smaller than the LX5 was it almost seems like a one step forward, but two steps back type proposition I would think.
In my experience the larger the photo sites, the better overall tonality and graduation. You can pack a ton of photosites into a very small sensor these days, and it can even deliver surprisingly good resolution, but typically the tonality never seems as rich as a larger sensor.
"The Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 has an internal Neutral Density filter, now easily accessible via the new ND/Focus button on the back of the camera. The ND filter proves almost essential given the LX7's maximum f/1.4 aperture. In bright sunlight conditions when shooting wide-open to get the minimum depth of field, the fastest shutter speed of 1/4000th second can easily be exceeded - simply press the ND button to slow down the shutter speed by 3 stops and avoid exposure problems."
The FZ200 with a 35-600/2.8 should be a popular bridge option. Those charts are the most interesting part of the article, though. The mirrorless interchangables are huge in Japan and have made a big impact elsewhere, if the numbers are to be believed.
My sense is that the Lumix LX series has, very sadly, jumped the shark with the LX7. I was an enthusiastic user of the LX-3, and though the LX-5 was in some ways a downgrade, the added lens range made me grudingly switch. And despite its foibles, I quite like my LX5. But I'm very dissapointed in the LX7 specs--and I very much wanted to be excited with the next upgrade.
Moving to a smaller sensor--Panasonic, what are you smoking? A larger sensor (so long as the camera size did not increase, and the lens did not lose range or speed) might have enticed me to upgrade. The small sensor of the LX3/LX5 was one of these cameras' few drawbacks. Panny is going entirely the wrong way on this.
Going from an f/2.0 lens to an f/1.4 lens suggests that Panasonic views this as a gimmick camera. Did marketing ask, "What feature--useful or not--can we add that will make our compact stand out from the pack?" And did someone answer, "What say we cater to the recent fad for razor thin DOF?" Though if anyone thinks an f/1.4 lens on the tiny LX-7 sensor will give it the shallow DOF and creamy bokeh of a good, fast portrait lens on an APS or full-frame camera, they are going to be disappointed. When I want carefully controlled DOF, I pick up my Nikon D700 and Nikkor 105mm DC, not a point-and-shoot. My LX5 is for hard, fast hikes and tough mountain climbs where I don't feel like carrying a big camera.
The Sony RX-100 is a near-miss for me, in that its lens' widest setting is 28mm equivalent. If they come out with a 24mm equivalent version, count me interested.
What features could Panny have put in the PX5 successor that would have my finger hovering over the "buy" button? A larger sensor, for one. Or an wider lens--anybody for a 20mm-90mm equivalent zoom? That might well please the gimmick-seekers in marketing, but would actually be useful. Or how about the return of the focus buttton, or reinstating burst shooting to a button on the body, instead of burial in the menus? Or bringing flash compensation back out of the menu morass? Or--oo-lah-lah--how about including three mechanical dials--one each for aperture, shutter speed, and ISO?
And instead of a near-useless internal ND filter, how about a switch-in, switch out internal polarizing filter? With that, I wouldn't need to carry a clumsy adapter. That feature alone might have made me a buyer, if Panny hadn't loused up the rest of the camera.
? A larger sensor (so long as the camera size did not increase, and the lens did not lose range or speed) might have enticed me to upgrade. The small sensor of the LX3/LX5 was one of these cameras' few drawbacks. Panny is going entirely the wrong way on this.