Image courtesy: Quesabesde.
Sources from SLRclub Korea (found via Dicahub) said that Panasonic will launch a surprising new fixed lens camera with FT sensor on July 16! We are talking about a second fixed lens camera after the LX8! There are no other details yet but I hope to get some more info soon.
Two years ago MR-Uematsu told in an interview at Quesabesde that there could be a “possible future fixed lens camera with larger Four Thirds sensor”. He said that it would have to be smaller than the [shoplink 26836 ebay]GX1[/shoplink], feature a fixed and bright f/1.7 or f/2.0 lens and price could be around 700 Euro. But Uematsu does n0t know if there would be a high demand for a model like that.
Let’s see if Uematsu’s camera will become real in 3 weeks!
—
For sources: Sources can send me anonymous info at 43rumors@gmail.com (create a fake gmail account) or via contact form you see on the right sidebar. Thanks!
For readers: Don’t miss any news. Join our group on facebook and follow our tweets.
Rumors classification explained (FT= FourThirds):
FT1=1-20% chance the rumor is correct
FT2=21-40% chance the rumor is correct
FT3=41-60% chance the rumor is correct
FT4=61-80% chance the rumor is correct
FT5=81-99% chance the rumor is correct
155 Responses
It would be interesting to know how the X100-X100s sold when compared to the X-System cameras. I have the impression that it’s been more successful (but I have no numbers). I think there is demand for such cameras. Most people don’t want to carry around lenses and change them.
While it seems true that most people don’t want to carry around and change lenses (even most SLR buyers never buy additional lenses), I also think most users want a zoom lens. While a big sensor and fast fixed prime would appeal to some of us enthusiasts, its a niche product.
I really think if Panny wants to focus on the high end, they should focus on having a model for each segment based on size: SMALL- a compact, pocketable model to compete with rx100, s120, etc, MEDIUM- a larger, more capable model with faster lens and more controls to compete with x20, G1x, entry level mirrorless, etc., and LARGE- the new FZ1000 can compete with the high end ultrazooms (rx10, Stylus 1, etc.)
Sony already has the small and the large but nothing in between, it looks like panny will have the medium and the large, but nothing pocketable. Good thing there are so many brands to chose from!
i am still pretty happy with my gx1 + 20mm f1.7 + LVF2 combo
Judging from the screen presentation Panasonic is concerning quitting megapixel war and questioning how many pixels is enough for general purpose. That implies making pixels larger to boost low light performance. That’s the RIGHT direction.
They already tried that, remember? There was a time when Olympus stated that 10MP was the right amount of pickles for an m43 sensor, with 16MP being the top. So they stayed at 10-12MP for how long, and the “market” (ie, pixelpeeping trolls who seemingly display their photos on sharing sites at 100% resolution at all times) bashed them for it. That’s how we got to 16MP. Now Sony is going that route with the A7S and although it shows great promise in low ISOs, with the crazed trolls already smelling 36MP blood, we’ll see how long that sticks.
it will stick a long time, no point reading 36MP and down converting to 12MP for a 4K video stream.
I agree 100%. A current tech 12MP 43 sensor with a high quality fast 35mm equivalent lens mated to it is the way to go. Give it an EVF and make it between the GX1 and GM1 in size, and I’m in for sure!
That would be beautiful. A nice m4/3 competitor to the Ricoh GR and Nikon A. The faster lens would make up for the smaller sensor, and I would prefer the 35mm FOV.
I’d be interested to see the evidence that fewer pixels equals better low light performance. From what I’ve seen as the number of mp has gone up, the noise has got less. Unless you’re pixel peeping at 100% when you’re comparing two different size crops there is no disadvantage in terms of IQ when they’re downsized to the same size.
I have no real need for more mp personally but it is wrong to say that these sensors are noisier. It is one of those myths that has been going around for years.
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4613822764/high-iso-compared-sony-a7s-vs-a7r-vs-canon-eos-5d-iii
I read that, and what I took from it was that there was a negligible difference in noise at standard “high” resolutions like ISO 3200 or 6400, while it was obvious that there was extra resolution at full size still on the table for the A7r. If you have very specialized needs and are going to regularly use your camera at ISOs of 12800+, then the A7S started to show some benefits. But even then, it was only at 51200 (in my opinion) that the A7S yielded a barely usable image, where the A7R started to produce bad garbage in shadow areas.
I guess at a push it expands your envelope in truly terrible conditions…but I would still go for the A7R, personally.
Exactly. And that Sony example is the only one that I have seen that shows a marginal advantage at extremely high ISOs. I’ve seen Nikon D800 images downsized and compared with a D4s image and there is no real advantage to the D4s.
The D4s (and similar cameras) has a lower mp so it can operate at faster FPS and have a bigger buffer. Not because it has a low light advantage.
The most densely packed sensors are those on small p&s cameras. Yet if you crop a large sensor camera image to the same size as the p&s there is less noise on the p&s despite the much higher pixel density.
Panasonic is currently the most innovative camera company around (with Sony being a close second). Olympus is selling special edition versions of its cameras with pretty colors. We expect more from you Olympus!!!
Panasonic is innovative and Sony develops the technologies.
But Olympus is the only company that has mirrorless CAMs on the marked (E-M5,E-M1) that are developed for the needs of photographers, not only for the datatable of the spec.
Huh, pana cameras are as good if not better (gh4 focus tracking) than oly for photographers too. What is wrong with gm1, gx7 and gh4?
Making cameras that look like they’re from the 1960s makes them more photographer friendly? Seriously?
I love mythology!
Olympus invented supersonic wave filter and the 5 axis in camera image stabilization. Sony just keeps improving sensor tech and tests different body shapes, Panasonic built the first autofocus pancake zooms, Canon and Nikon focus on sensors, auto focus and in lens stabilization. All these manufacturers invest in lens research.
Olympus also made the first non centered DSLR in the E300 and they made the first DSLR with Live preview whilst using PDAF E330 but these models failed because the general audience didn’t like that it didn’t look like a DSLR, and so it failed poorly. The next model a normally shaped E500 sold much better than both E300 and E330 even though it wasn’t better, it used the same hard ware as E330 and was actually worse (sensor and no PDAF with live preview). This is why Olympus haven’t tried to make a Panasonic GX-7 which actually looks and feels good to me, but then I prefer good ergonomics and functionality (I owned the E-300 which still works well).
So I reckon the public voted with their wallets and didn’t buy so Olympus decided to discontinue them. Retro works because of familiarity, modern and new works with people who haven’t got the familiarity. Generally though the younger generation interested in photography only look at specs (numbers sell and not features like dust protection and advanced image stabilisation) and not ergonomics, and the older generation want something that looks familiar, and the retro looks much more charming than nikon camera or sony mirrorless, so I assume that women who are more interested in the aesthetics of the camera would buy them for these reasons.
Generally though if I could I would have two systems Nikon/Canon for the sensor quality and mirror viewfinder (nothing like light hitting your eye directly). And micro four thirds for the times I don’t need the Nikon (which is most of the time) unfortunately i’m not made of money so i’m sticking with my Olympus E-M5.
That was exactly my point. It’s been way too long since we have seen innovation like that from Olympus. We expect much more than “let’s cover it with orange faux leather and charge extra!”. Olympus is turning into a fashion brand which offers very ordinary cameras at an inflated price.
M43 used to be horse race…. Oly in front, Panasonic in front, Oly in front, Pana in front. Now it’s just Panasonic in front. Olympus in a pretty dress. We expect more.
Generally the problem is what would you like Olympus to do, if they improve image stabilisation by 1/2 a stop extra it might cost them 10x more than changing the dimensions, but generally most users won’t care. Olympus don’t really design sensors, battery tech is kind of done now.
Viewfinders are like image stabilisation in that its actually very important to video/photography but is “good enough” for most consumers that only a small niche will care, the lag, colour accuracy are improved in the E-M1 but most users don’t care.
To me Olympus do need to keep finding pushing the boundaries but the boundaries they are pushing at the moment viewfinder and image stabilisation are worthwhile improvements, they just take time for noticeable improvements.
Panasonic is pushing the envelope, but then they have much more money to play with and therefore can afford to have more flops, I think Olympus’ main risky product has been the E-PM range of cameras which failed to catch on, the E-M5 was a risk in its own right but by playing the hand to make sure it was a success : retro styling, DSLR shape, weatherproofing, decent electronic viewfinder, good sensor and optional battery grip. These things made it noticeable better than the E-P range and so even if it failed to grab the notice of non-Olympus users it would succeed at getting E-P users to upgrade.
Had Olympus put in a worse viewfinder and sensor, to bring out the camera faster then users would say all they did was cater to the forum whiners, but it was good enough for most users. But because they tried to make it special it has worked.
Currently in the current crop of cameras they have added something new but because you only look at the obvious improvements you overlook other improvements which matter quite a lot :
E-M5
– 5 Axis IS
– Sony Sensor
– Built In Electronic Viewfinder
– 2 Part Battery Grip (never seen in mirrorless prior)
– Weatherproofing (never seen in mirrorless)
– 9 frames per second in raw and jpeg
E-M1
– PDAF
– 10 frames per second in raw and jpeg
– Larger and less lag Electronic Viewfinder
– Freezeproof (never seen in mirrorless prior)
– 1/8000 (never seen in mirrorless prior)
E-M10 was just a E-M1 for people who wanted a camera with a viewfinder but didn’t need weatherproofing and small
E-P5 was just a camera for people who needed a compact camera but didn’t care about the viewfinder
So in every iteration Olympus has been able to add something new or do it for a business reason. At the end of the day if it doesn’t sell there’s less incentive to spend more in research.
Both Olympus and Panasonic are pushing the technology in real, meaningful ways for photographers. You can’t deny Panasonic’s excellence in terms of touch-screens and ergonomics, and DFD seems like a very promising innovation.
Sony and Fuji, and yes, even Samsung are also pushing camera technology. Everyone is innovating, and consumers benefit. None of the systems are truly “better” than the others – it’s just what you prioritize.
I think it’s crap. The only real cameras stil come from Canon and Nikon. The rest are toys.
Now now, no need to be touchy that people are getting more interesting results out of their smartphones than you are out of your DSLR. Absolute technical quality is the last bastion of the photographer who can’t be an artist…
…or even civil.
because you are an artist?
Ahaha, well I’m a professional designer (not a photographer). So technically, yes.
but you do post quite a bit of rubbish. any clues about optics/photography/physics?
Mostly aeronautical physics, but enough about photography. It’s not really that complicated. Please, feel free to try and educate me where you feel I’m deficient. Ideally with some credible sources. I do my best to learn – leaving bias aside – and to recognize the compromises the different systems make.
The “credible sources” are what you should know full well, if you really were an physicist and not a dumb troll. We could say you are 2 PI deficient.
Canon hasn’t innovated anything since, well, ever. They are content to rest two-four years behind the competition, refreshing their dated tech with more dated tech with no new exciting features.
Are you wearing a lamp-shade on your head?
Panasonic is definitely serving pro photographers well. I am one.
It is the most innovative hoover producer. Wait, not evene that.
40mm 2.0 Leica Mini Digital! Woohoo! Hopefully it won’t be as thick as the original — beautiful rendering, but it won’t fit in a jeans pocket.
LX8 for me is a 35mm fixed lens with Gh4 sensor and all gh4 video features and mic input. All for 1000$. There is a unique reason of these supposed panasonic camera announced on 16 jul
“35mm fixed lens”
not going to happen
You can buy a small MFT-ILC already with a fixed lens.
I only want a new mft camera (july 16) aha GX7 that have all gh4 video features. Only this i want
with mic support of course.
How can a MFT-ILC have a fixed lens?
ok. prime – fix focal lens
People usually forget the advantage in performance of a lens paired to a sensor. The same interchangeable lens on the same sensor will deliver a lower IQ.
Why is that? I’ve heard several others say this and I’m wondering the reasoning. Wouldn’t the interchangeable lens be designed only for that format of sensor, same as the fixed lens?
It’s a new internet truism. The matching part is left aside.
Improved tolerances and integration, no need to make any optical compromises for the sake of mounting, whatever flange distance is optimal for the lens (not an interchangeable lens system)…I’m not sure it’s necessarily a big difference, but it just makes the engineer’s job easier.
You can optimize the placement of the micro lenses in front of the sensor if you know there is only one way how the light “travels” from the rear element of the lens to the sensor.
Not sure how to explain this properly (doesn’t help that English is not my native language), but here goes:
A ray of light in the very center of the image hits the sensor dead on (at a 90 degree angle), no matter what lens you use.
Rays of light off-center will strike the sensor at an angle smaller than 90%. At what angle precisely depends on the distance from the center and the design of the lens.
When the angle gets smaller, more light will hit the wall of the well instead of the bottom of the well. The bottom records light.
Putting a micro lens in front of each well (= pixel) will help guiding the light to the bottom of the well. If you know the exact angle that the light will hit the micro lens you can increase its function (getting more light straight to the bottom of the well) by moving the micro lens slightly off-center.
Contradiction. ILC (Interchangeable Lens Camera) is the opposite of a fixed-lens camera. “Fixed” does not mean single focal length (also called “prime), it means you can’t remove the lens from the body.
Sure this isn’t the LX8? After all, earlier rumours said that the LX8 sensor would be “very different” from the FZ1000 sensor. And while a 1 inch-sensor LX8 would be just chasing after Sony RX100, a 4/3 inch-sensor would leave Sony behind. For a while. Until Sony makes an APS-C compact with a bright zoom, that is.
Agree, I think it is not two but one camera. LX8 with bigger than 1inch sensor= 4/3 sensor!
Maybe my fever dream is coming true! 😛
LX8 with an m4/3 sensor and 24-90 2.0-2.8 lens = sign me up day 1, as long as its under $1,000.00.
This is the exact kit I’d like to bring with me on the motorcycle (and most travel trips in general)… no more lens swapping, just keep it up front in the tank bag ready to go. I really hope this one becomes a reality (w/4K video too!).
If you are carrying it in a tank bag on a motorbike does the weight of a proper mFT with built in EVF + the 12-40 really matter that much ?
That lens would be big… I mean HUGE. It would likely be as large as the m43 12-40 2.8 is already (whereas, since it is fixed it could be smaller than an ILC version but the f2.0 wide end would make it even bigger). This is a pipe dream… one that I share, but know it is impossible to make in a size that would be considered even remotely compact.
Think about that for just a second you want a 12-45mm F2-2.8 lens and A camera for less than the price of the Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 alone. The 12-40mm on even the smallest mFT body the GM1 { with no EVF, fixed rear screen, very slow flash sync etc } is huge in comparison to the 1″ camera bodies
The image quality advantage of the GM1 at ISO’s under 1600 are dubious compared to the Sony RX 100 sensor.
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Sony-Cyber-shot-DSC-RX100-III-versus-Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-GM1___957_920
M43 would be great, but not at the expense of staying pocketable please! A new one inch will get pretty close in IQ and the added DoF of the smaller sensor is an advantage for a camera like this for street shooting, family gatherings and landscape, urban or other. 🙂
I hardly believe that Pana will make an RX1 like camera with fixed lens in the near future as the demand (the number of people who REALLY would pay for it) is low. I think the diff between the FX1000 sensor and LX8 sensor is that the later will have only ca 12MP not 20MP. However an MFT sensor (GH4) with a relatively slow zoom (24-90 / 3.5-5.6) would be possible.
I disagree. Look at the success of the X100 or Ricoh GR, or the Coolpix A. If the GR had a 35mm lens instead of a 28mm, I would have already bought one. There is a big market for a pocketable large sensor fixed lens camera. If it is small, with a 35mm equivalent lens, it will be my everyday, carry everywhere camera and likely be used by me more than any other camera I own.
x100 is big success …the GR …yes success even its without evf …but Coolpix A ? … its in shadow of those 2
It’s more than a week that I’m using also a Ricoh GR and that camera is a little surprise, from the tiny size to its IQ. I was concerned about the 28mm lens, but it’s perfect for street photography and landscape. Useless for macros. Cool for some kind of portraits. It’s 100% customizable, and you can assign a button to crop to 35mm and 47mm. In this case cropping is leaving enough details and resolution to print photos (I was chatting about it with Ming Thein today)
The GR has crops for 35 and 47mm fields of view and the 16 megapixel APS sensor has plenty of detail and Rez to make that work just fine. Add the 24mm field of view wide converter and you’ve got a pocketable little powerhouse. Leaf shutter too!
Plenty of details….has it?…. compared to Sony A6000 (24mp)?
A compact camera with MFT Sensor with slow zoom already exists, it’s the GM1.
yeah but it’s crap.
The only thing that is crap about the GM1 is the flash-sync, everything else is quite good considering the size.
considering the size? It has the usability of a mobile phone. we need cameras, not toys.
I own about 15 Panasonic and Olympus M4/3rds lens’s and none of them need to be “fixed” 🙂
You are really rich. I was able to obtain only 2 better lenses in 3 years. But, they are great, I’m the limitation 😉
If you didn’t fix them, they would have reproduced like whensly’s. 🙂
There is only 1 problem with the pixel count – dpi calculation. Generally if you take a photo mainly if you have a fixed prime lens you want to _crop_ the image before printing. Because of this you need a much higher pixel count.
I agree. Digital photographers have been trained to try and frame in camera perfectly due to the limited resolution that used to be available. Now we have so much resolution that a little cropping isn’t a bad thing…and in fact is really valuable for creating truly great images.
Shooting slides/transparencies was pretty good training, too.
What you shot was what you got. 😉
New photographers in the past 10 years have been spoiled by choice and auto-everything. I see students in the INTERMEDIATE photo class I teach at a college who don’t know how shutter speeds and apertures work. That’s the curriculum for the first two days. My first camera was an all-manual Yashica FX-3 with a 50mm prime. The big luxury was that it had a meter built in. Not AE, just a meter. When you’ve got to set everything yourself and each mistake costs $0.50, you learn fast.
Perhaps your students should have a little piggy bank in which they deposit a quarter for every wasted shot. You can use the money for a class party or equipment for the school, or they can put it toward a new lens or a new memory card.
Cropping was not invented now. It was extensively used in the analog film age mainly because in that time zooms were rare and low quality and the film had enough resolution.
Yes, that was my point. Early digital was more constrictive than film – people used to crop and enlarge more with passable quality.
I rarely crop photos, almost never, so it’s not a problem to me. On the contrary, I find a fixed lens more funny/challenging to use. Not to mention that’s a nice way to train composition.
But how do you compose properly with that crappy evf?
Never had any problem!
You are simply satisfied with the result you get with a given fixed lens. If the topic would exceed its capability then you don’t shoot.
Usually I can easily figure how to compose a photo given a field of view. Strangely I have some problems in figuring the 28mm angle of view, but I’m getting use to it with the Ricoh GR. So when I “limit” myself with a prime I already know how to look at a scene in the street. It’s just a matter of practice I suppose
You could give up using cameras and start using pencil and paper, this is more challenging
What’s your problem Dmitry? (Drawing is not photography)
If they can take out 20mp resolution from a 1″ sensor – then it should be no problem to have 24mp in a 4/3″ sensor.
this is intresting …eager to know the full spec
make it a fixed zoom and m43 is buried forever.
Crazy talk .
well it is already buried…
Maybe it can hoover dust? I hear the GH4 cannot, which is a pity.
Most reviewers report that since they received their GH4 their Canons and Nikons are “Hoovering” dust. No, you will not hear about GH4s collecting dust, not anytime soon.
Really? Most reviewers? LOL I would trade a GH4 for a Nikon 3100 any day. Most people actually do, except a handful of sukkers…
Actually, NO ONE has traded their new GH4 for a Nikon 3100 yet. Whats more? Nobody ever will. You are a liar. FOAD
Sounds like a dumb idea to me.
Give me a 50mm equivalent with f1.8 fixed lens coupled with a good sensor please! (You, Panasonic or Olympus)
Harking back to the old tradition! 🙂 Olympus 35, Yashica Electro, Canonet…
Not to mention the Konica Hexar, which had a superb lens and was a huge hit.
Except that the “old tradition” were all 35-45mm. In fact, I can’t recall a single 50mm 1.8 fixed lens compact. Anyone? Olympus 35 series — 35mm 2.8. Yashica Electro series — 45mm 1.7. Canonet — 35mm 1.7 or 1.9. Others are variations of the same, either 28mm (relatively rare), the more common 35mm/38mm/40mm/42mm, or 45mm (also rather rare — the Yashica is the only one I remember that had one).
50mm 1.8 fixed lens compact? Hmmmmmmm. Closest I can think of are the 50mm 2.8 Voigtlander Vitos.
I guess the Kodak Retinas, but those were f/2, so point taken.
I would welcome also a 40mm equivalent (and given an already existing 20mm f1.7…)!
No ones mentioned the Minolta Hi Matics, I still have an F only issue I’d had with it is the flash contact, but now Battery is almost impossible to source. Another sad omission the Rollie 35 with it’s variety of 40mm lenses.
I skipped the Rollei 35s because they were f/2.8 and 3.5. As were Olympus XA, Nikon Ti, Petris, Contax T, Minox 35, Contessa… too many fantastic cameras to list.
They say Point-and-Shoot are dead. The real hey-day of point-and-shoot was the last days of film, just before digital took off, when people were willing to pay 1,000 1990’s dollars for a fixed-lens point-and-shoot. I guess this camera, and others like it, will be the last, great generation of the digital point-and-shoots, to be supplanted by camera phones… Or not?
and weather sealed, articulated screen, ois in size of gm1 would be great.
There will definitely be demand for such a camera, especially if it has 4K video recording.
There are already excellent APS-C and FF fixed lens cameras on the market. What’s the advantage of a smaller sensor? With a mount FT is okay, but fixed lens without zoom? Not for me
Size and price could be better.
It’s all wrong, I don’t reckon m43 will be around very Long.
Haven’t people been saying that since it came out 6 years ago?
There are already excellent dogs and humans on Earth. What’s the advantage of having you here? If you invent something or cure cancer is okay, but just whining on forums that are of interest to you? Not for me.
You are a weird sensor size fanatic. Don’t have any argument for a 43rd camera but come up with comparing me with dogs and complain because I can’t cure cancer. I don’t know if funny or just retarded.
By the way, cancer can already be cured but some people unfortunately don’t support it. As long as money rules the world they’ll use chemotherapy or other expensive medicine:
http://themindunleashed.org/2013/12/34-medical-studies-proving-cannabis-cures-cancer.html
http://themindunleashed.org/2013/12/34-medical-studies-proving-cannabis-cures-cancer.html
cheers
You might want to actually take the time to read those “studies” from a scientific viewpoint. There is many a slip twixt cup and lip between random lab tests on cell cultures and a cure. These ludicrous claims would make a politician blush
Junk format fanatic? Olympus employee? Plain brainless teenager? Which one are you?
Agreed. If reduced size is the point, you already have very tiny M43 bodies that give you the ability to interchange lenses (GM1). I just don’t see the point of coming out with a fixed lens M4/3 camera.
Just take the already excellent Panny 20mm 1.7, fix the AF issues and glue it on to a camera. That would be awesome.
And make it folded, like Ricoh GR.
It will have to be much bigger to support the bigger AF motor to speed it up.
Not necessarily. in 20/1.7, entire lens barrel moves. For faster focusing, designers make so only part of lens or even one element moves.
make it with a 12-70mm f1.8 lens and i buy it for $1500
LOL.
Just make the lens 12-70mm f/1,8 for M43 and I will but it for 1500$
Make it a 12-60 f/3.4 and I would buy it for $1200 (assuming it has EFV, battery chargeable through USB and a user interface I like, ie rings on the lens barrel for zooming and aperture)
Interesting, but a smidge larger GM2 with a tilt screen, EVF, weather sealed and some tiny new lenses (like an ultra wide) would be better.
Yehoo. Please size about GM1.
That’s what I was thinking, GM-1 size, 17mm/20mm f1.8. Must have an EVF built-in though, otherwise people will go with the X100S.
The slide is missing the biggest complain: waaay too expensive.
The problem is that if you look between the P&S ($80-150; or $0 for your smartphone cam) and enthusiast compacts ($450 to (now even) $800), the zone in between is a trap where entry-level DSLRs live ($350-$400).
The net effect of the pricing policy, make most people consider first entry-level DSLRs and enthusiast compacts second.
600 USD on a nano sensor? No thanks.
I think such a camera can only be a success when it’s small with a lens that collapses into the body.
Yes, the pocket ability would be the essence (with high video performance built in)
Wow another point and shoot with small sensor. Nobody wants this. Whe already got the APSC and FF fixed lens camera’s.
Why do you come here?
He has no life. Have pity.
because we can, nincompoop.
You do realise that the usage of “nincompoop” revealed your age, right.
4/3 adventure cam please! Have you seen the GoPro IPO price?
I loved my TS3 (until I smashed it stumbling on a volcano)
My TS4 just died (a leak fried the display, although it still shoots intermittently)
I want something slightly more rugged & with much better photo and video capabilities
Given my tendency to beat up these devices, the Nikon AW1 is not for me.
Panasonic would do very well with an ultra-rugged 20-160 zoom 4/3 device, particularly if it offers solid mounting options, good time-lapse capabilities, and an optional rugged wireless remote display/controller (with connectivity to tablets and phones)
GoPro IPO price just means the market is starting to overheat again. We are 18 months from rampant complete irrationality and 3 years from another crash. You read it here 1st… In the 43 rumors comments section. Remember that!!!
I agree about the GoPro IPO price. Completely irrational.
I still don’t understand why established camera companies (yes, even Sony and Panasonic) can’t make a much more successful adventure cam (I know Sony is trying, but they have not come up with any breakthroughs). I think that a few high-end cam should give a halo effect to cheaper rugged cams for the kids,
I suspect that the economics of selling adventure cams is pretty good.
They come at a small cost compared to travel and adventure-related equipment
They are abused and replaced often 🙂 (I may start buying an extra one for back-up)
There are lots of options for add-on accessories (even rugged aluminum mounts are cheaper to develop and manufacture than lenses)
With the right design, they can become cult objects
Small, fixed 20mm lens, and you got yourself a deal, IF it’s not expensive.
Off topic: Finally got my Fuji camera! WHOO-HOO!!
Which Fuji? Are you moving out of M43 or maintaining two systems? Or using each for different scenarios? I’m drawn to Fuji too but have not gone in other than X100s and X20 rentals yet.
I was going to get the XT1, but the sale for the XE2 was too great at Adorama. Got a class 10 32gb Fuji card, an extra Fuji battery, and some storage thingy for $1199.
sale ends tomorrow though.
I’m still looking to get a Lumix G6. I love my 20/25mm lenses from Panasonic to just dump them.
But man, I can already see a difference in IQ.
difference in IQ XT1 vs G6 ? …thats normal ..but you should compare latest against latest 😉
To interest me it would need a 17.5mm (35mm ff equiv) lens with an f1.4 aperture, that would give approximately the same depth of field as the x100. The question then would be why not just buy an x100? Well I’d be hoping they might go the 12Mpixel route for low light stills and some impressive video quality with stabilisation.
That spec would indeed interest me too! It would be smaller than X100s with superb video performance. I would buy it without hesitation.
I’ll take one please, but make sure it has time lapse mode, I am sure it will.
I keep thinking I may want one of these… but honestly the em5 plus 17mm 1.8 is so close why spend another $799… Maybe a unique lens combining marginal flexibility with a reasonable aperture such as a 14-25 f2.8… but I would probably not get it…
We are so spoiled today with choice, and by what we own… to be honest why produce something their m43 cams can do. I still think they could grab the sony 12 or 24mp ff sensor and do something with that… seriously I mean the gm1 is tiny, throw a black olympus 17mm on that Nd it is realy very small… or an em10 with 17mm and you get a good viewfinder.
Still, I dont run a camera company… there may be a lot of potential there.
if not interchangeable system camera, I will never buy it regardless of sensor/lens quality of it. I much prefer the size of the GX7 over the size of the GM1 or the GH4, but for now there is nothing better than the GH4.
GH4 is HUGE. No thanks.
The market for point and shoots has already collapsed.
So the manufacturers get in their meeting rooms and talk and talk and finally come to the conclusion that the reason point and shoots aren’t selling is because they aren’t expensive enough. If we could only double or triple the price, say to $800, people will buy more and more.
Admittedly there is a tiny niche that will see value and pay for a very expensive high quality point and shoot. These people today buy Ricoh or X100 or Sony inchers.
Who will be attracted to $800 point and shoots? That same tiny niche that either already has a camera or else feel it’s a good decision to buy another such that will take pictures no better than the one they have.
On the other hand, manufacturers see competitors making a tiny bit of revenue from this tiny niche, and say, me too. They say, we can’t not try to address this.
This segment is about to be oversaturated. Within the next year, as these new expensive point and shoots are forced by overproduction to slash prices to 50% of their launch sticker, the segment will grow a little.
Another marketing meme with which the manufacturers fool not the public, but themselves. Like the one that says people will pay much more for a camera that costs us less- one with a small sensor, a TV viewer, and cheap uncorrected lenses that are fixed only by software- because it’s a little smaller, and somehow by that token you don’t have to ‘lug’ it.
Or like the meme that says there is actually a mass ‘move up market’ from point and shoots.
Very true. I also think that quality compacts will take away m43’s only raison d’etre: the slightly smaller size. I see trouble ahead for this suc_kers system.
If “slightly” smaller size is the only reason you think m43 is successful, you have no clue, really.
The compact camera market has collapsed from its former state, true enough, but it’s still larger than the DSLR and mirrorless markets. In 2013 the Japanese manufacturers shipped 45.7m fixed-lens cameras, 13.8m DSLRs and 3.3m mirrorless ILCs worldwide.
The collapse has mainly been caused by smartphones replacing regular low-end compacts. Superzooms, enthusiast compacts and rugged compacts are still selling as well as ever, though, and as long as they do, you can’t blame the manufacturers for producing them.
LOL! Shipments are not sales stupid!
Yes they produce and ship 3x as many compacts as DSLR/ILCs, but how many do they SELL? Probably only half a million in the whole world, so there’s more than 45 million compacts sitting on the shelves!
How STUPID of them to loose money like that! Why make something that you can’t sell?
Obviously, you do not have children. I do have grandchildren and have been to many of their events lately. I was as surprised as anyone here to see that the “soccer Moms” are taking video from what looked to be glorified Point & Shoot cameras, (even more than cellphones).
I don’t know what they are using (smaller than our DSLR’s yet larger than RX100. I’m not so sure compacts are as dead as you imply.
I’d be interested in hearing where your info is coming from, because even though you’re clearly using hyperbole to make your point and I can’t imagine you believe the figures you stated, your whole point is wrong. I work in the industry. Low-mid range compacts are mostly dead, but compacts that offer a distinct improvement over a smartphone still sell quite well.
If it has a bigger or better sensor, a long or fast lens, or ruggedness built in, it’s selling (unless marketing failed, which you can find with a few fantastic cameras that just don’t move).
Compacts are not dead. Compacts that don’t offer a distinct advantage over the camera in most peoples’ smartphones are dead.
I’d gladly pay $800 for a mid-sized sensor, fixed wide-normal lens camera. Oversaturated? There’s currently NOTHING in this segment. Well except Sigma.
Oh yeah, and that Fuji.
The title is misleading. I throught that Panasonic was going to release camera-lens module (a-la Ricoh GR) for m43
a possible camera with fixed (as opposed to interchangeable) lens and 4/3 sensor.
nothing misleading about that title.
43 large 12mp sensor fixed 35mm and GH4 video features for 999$ would be a dream and a killer of all things
If it’s going to be video-centric, I’d rather have a 28mm or even a 25mm equivalent focal length with digital crop or zoom.