Panasonic you son of a bitch, you did it. Took them long enough to release something interesting for m43 again

>>4508975
I dont get it. Hows this a different concept from ghe LX100 that came out 12 years ago?

>>4508975
>Finally not a re-release of something
But it's just an updated LX100/II, bigger too

>>4508986
Yeah I had the impression that it is bigger from the videos I saw which really confirms what I have been thinking for a while which is that everything is getting bigger and it being impossible to squeeze more tech into smaller bodies.

>>4508982
>something interesting for m43 again
it's not m4/3, sweaty, it's a 4/3 sensor but fixed lens.
"m4/3" is the interchangeable mount.

>>4508975
>Are we impressed?
No. If it was something crazy like a 16-70mm i would be impressed. This is just a standard point and shoot digicam with a $1500 price tag because ???

bravo to panasonic for releasing this without gimmicky dials (like art filter on pen-f, film sim dials, etc), not even any scene modes on main dial
MASP/Auto/Cx is solid, I appreciate appealing to enthusiasts

>>4509007
I'd be sold on it if it had a joystick.

>>4509004
>This is just a standard point and shoot digicam with a $1500 price tag because ???
4/3 size sensor?
Significantly cheaper than Fuji's similar offerings (which are APS-C)

>>4509011
4/3 sensors are almost a quarter of a century old. Isnt tech supposed to get cheaper? Are camera sensors the new RAM now?

i might actually buy it, growing up is accepting that you don't need full frame and accepting that this camera is good enough for social media.
>>4509014
it has ram in it

>>4509016
Nobody actually >needs< foolframe

>>4509016
>Buy costly high megapixel camera capable of recording in 8k
>upload footage/photos on social media
>Compression that would be reasonable over a decade ago is still in place because gotta maximize the profits
>Footage/photo ends up looking like crap

File: 53388925598_e093078142_b.jpg (164 KB, 769x1024)

164 KB JPG

>>4508975
Fuck man, I've had my LX100 forever, it's the one camera I'll never sell. Love it to bits.

This upgrade is long awaited. They didn't fuck with the secret sauce, they just boosted the meaningful stats.

Will eventually buy it when my lx100 dies.
Yes you'll get dust on your sensor.
Yes it's just micro 4/3 but the sensor is well known to perform just fine in low light.

>>4509018
Great point desu. Social media crushes the fuck out of any image you upload. If you print, it does matter, and I do encourage people to print.

>>4509014
The sensors have certainly advanced.
From 5MP CCD
to 25MP BSI CMOS
And probably so has the cost efficiency of making the sensors.

I think the main problem is that the market for dedicated compact cameras is only a fraction of what it was 20 years ago due to smartphones. Volume in mass production is where the savings happen. I think we can only expect prices to increase as dedicated cameras become more and more niche.

>>4508975
impressive. canon needs to release the rumored photo version of powershot v1 within the week or I'm ordering this

>>4509011
>>4509004
A Foolji doesn't come with a Leica(tm) lens.

>>4509091
More like a (Leic a) dust pump, but OK. The Panaleica digicam zooms are all prone to this in my experience. Wonder if they improved it on this camera because surely it is a known issue, question is if it is possible to improve.

Why would any enthusiast buy a camera with a fixed lens? Maybe I am just retarded and tasteless but surely just putting a regular mount would not be such a huge compromise right?

>>4509170
Have you looked at the size of comparable M43 midrange zooms? I'm not sure there even any that are faster than f2.8, like this is on the wide end

This is more like a better RX100

File: dust_removal_20ee665115f9(...).jpg (65 KB, 560x420)

65 KB JPG

>>4509145
just give it a little suck suck

>>4508975
>4/3 sensor
>no ibis
??? the whole benefit of having an ant-sized sensor is being able to put superior stabilization that allows longer exposure to compensate for its potential loss in quality under low light condition. But instead they went with antiquated dogshit ois of last century? This camera has lost the plot

>>4509211
Lens based IS has always been better than sensor based IS that are always more ineffective. What aggressive marketing tricked you into thinking otherwise?

>>4509224
Yet in testing, the stabilization for this L10 is far worse than the IBIS even on an old model like the GX85, so clearly the OIS is not good enough to offset the lack of IBIS. Making this negligibly bigger to include their latest miniaturized IBIS (if Fuji can do it in the X100, Panasonic who have always been the best at IBIS and had plenty of old small bodies with it can do it even better) alongside OIS would have been beyond worth it. It would've also increased the appeal for run and gun video zoomers.

>>4509021
The problem is the free market. The price is what companies can convince people to pay and to be frank most people “into photography” are clueless and susceptible to cheesy marketing tactics like paying off youtubers (also see: nikon) and product placement deals. Canon has been scamming people by selling gimped plastic styled as professionals cameras forever. Now retro styling has joined the scam.

>>4509250
Yeah, that's another problem. The "influencers" are basically bribed into doing infomercials on youtube.
There are no "independent audits" of cameras - that should be the role of professional reviewers, but every major reviewer is also selling the gear, so they are incentivized not to flag products as sub-par when they are.

For example with DPReview there has not been a review in like 10 years that was under 70%.
The bar has not been raised and therefore products have barely improved in the last 10 years.

>>4509313
You ever think maybe you're the one looking at things wrong?

File: moire_suit.jpg (1001 KB, 1920x1080)

1001 KB JPG

>>4509316
No.
It's 2026.
Digital cameras have been a thing for 30 years.
There's no excuse for all cameras not having core functions working well.

Not only are things not working well, they are getting worse. For example, removal of AA filter is increasingly common, resulting in interference patterns like in pic related.
Also, deletion of mechanical shutters, resulting in reduced dynamic range and rolling shutter deforming images.

These are cost-cutting measures in the race to the bottom facilitated by fluff reviewers and youtuber glazing.

>>4509316
>t.shekelsteinberg

>>4509322
Interesting perspective, I'm sure you take wonderful photos

>>4509324
Not an argument.

>>4508975
What's the point-and-shoot?

File: Panasonic-Lumix-L10-vs-Pa(...).jpg (33 KB, 720x324)

33 KB JPG

Fascinating how none of the reviewers immediately showed visible disgust. Not only is it ugly, but also rather large which just confirms what I have been saying for a while and that is that they can't improve upon yesteryears compact cameras without adding bulk.

>New full frames gimped if in the same form factor
>Compact Micro Four Thirds all discontinued
>Ultra compact digicams just re-releases of 10 year old cameras.
The only thing that can save us are solid state batteries.

File: Cooling_fan_FAN-001_4.jpg (35 KB, 450x400)

35 KB JPG

>>4509334
>they can't improve upon yesteryears compact cameras without adding bulk.
Video is the problem. Truly compact bodies overheat fast with 4k / open gate.
Other manufacturers should copy Fujifilm and make a bolt-on fan accessory for the dedicated video shooters.

File: xbox.jpg (30 KB, 921x328)

30 KB JPG

>>4509334
Camera technology has been regressing backwards for years

>>4509334
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vm3y3GtvrxY
honestly the only good take

>>4508975
>4/3rds sensor
Arent the Canon Power GxX cameras carrying a larger sensor than that? Why would you get this? And whats up with the imitation titanium colour? Why not actually make a titanium one.

>>4508975
why zoom? that's retarded. would buy with a 35mm eq prime

>>4509350
Normie convenience.

>>4509334
Maybe they don't care about things being tiny as much as you do?

>>4509322
Also, deletion of EVF, which means you no longer have a portable light-controlled environment, so you can't make informed decisions about exposure, white balance, highlight/shadow. You get locked into relying on auto-exposure / metering, AWB, shooting RAW and finishing the photos later on another computer with another software. Basically defeats the purpose of mirrorless.

>>4509324
Corporate sycophants belong on reddit.

>>4509375
>>4509337
>>4509322
All correct. Its fucking insane how the old 5DIV has better actual image quality than basically every mirrorless. Canon’s AA filter is - was - magic and the lens is always giving the AF system as much light as it can instead of mandatorily prioritizing DOF preview (fuck nikon btw)

Once I tried out my 5DIV I sold 200% of my nikon Z gear (professional use) and my travel snoy. Canon EF L glass is unironically better than the best for mirrorless. OOF/IF transitions are way smoother and coma wide open and edge sharpness at f5.6 are fucking irrelevant.
>BUT DE AF COVERAGE AND TRACKING DETECT
Useless when not shooting sports. Yet frustrating when it doesnt work perfectly because MILC DSLR-AF emulation modes are prone to hunting, hesitation, and sticking on the background (even with stickiness set to the minimum) while the real deal in an OVF is marginally less accurate at near macro distances and needs calibrated beforehand, but works much faster.

>>4509379
>Corporate sycophants belong on reddit.
Oh sorry
Hurr durr modern cameras bad, don't ask for photos I won't share them, editing is bad too so I can't participate in editing threads, I can't name what cameras I use or even how many MP I care about, I must deflect and never answer simple or direct questions

Is this better for here?

>>4509381
>>4509379
Oops forget, also here's all these examples of about how things look different, I definitely won't ever share an actual example of the differences and how dare you for asking it's so obvious, even though most of YouTube and professionals disagree, because they're all no talent shills and choosing to use the wrong cameras

>>4509381
Modern products are broadly getting worse with an increasing focus on marketing/hype/status driven sales backed by making the cheapest “improvements” that MBAs believe people can be convinced of. Not just cameras.

Removing AA filters entirely really stands out. It can’t possibly be more expense and R&D than making these idiotic sterile astrophotography lenses like the niggor z 50mm f1.8 s(tupid fucking piece of shit) the new standard. But consoomer cattle have been thoroughly convinced that sharper edges when zooming in is more doubleplusgood which means they now need more megapixels to smooth out the aliasing artifacts and jaggies, which means they have to buy the new model even though 30mp with an AA is already higher resolution and sharper than the previous professional standards (645 and 6x7) in real world use and excessive for modern screens up to 8k.

Most of what else sucks is trying to force product stratification and pursuing video needs that don’t exist in reality while paying youtubers to tell people they actually do exist, even for making YouTube videos.

It is literally all about making money. Not making the best cameras. Convincing the most people to spend as much as possible as often as possible while putting so little effort into innovation that successive models are often identical or the recipients of trickle down tech (that was already slightly dated when they decides to finally start selling it - worse than debeers and their diamond supply)

>>4509384
You do a good impression of that anon lol, nice one

>>4509382
>YOUTUBE SAYS ITS BETTER AND UHHHH THE PROFESSIONALS
Which professionals? The AP? The news has different needs. Fucking wedding photographers AKA losers that cant do physical labor or pass a piss test?

Professional photography has been one of the least respectable, most loser coded professions on earth for a good couple decades now and is 0% relevant to art and hobby photography. It’s so bad art photographers shoot film JUST to distance themselves from it. Who fucking cares about news photographers that blast trump snaps at 120fps and then have an AI pick the sharpest and crop away 2/3s of the image to compose it in post? Really, who gives a single fuck about those people?

>>4509386
This is a great impression too, love the satire

>>4509386
>who gives a single fuck about those people?
Why should anyone care about your schizo rambling?

>>4509382
>>4509381
>some trust fund kid who lives with his parents, got his dad to buy him a leica to take photos of the dog, and stole most of his portfolio collage has an opinion
>and it’s literally “leave the multimillion dollar company alone”
yeah how dare ye judge the marketing driven decisions of consoomer cattle and their masters
the exact same people that apple can convince to pay more money for a less capable, less cross compatible computer that needs to phone home or freeze with every “app” opened
like really why would you be dumb enough to just assume the free market is right when the free market is essentially a giant retarded child, paying out the ass for ozempic, gambling on crypto, and smoking pot instead of just laying off the bacon donuts and getting a job?
in a way i guess the free market reminds you of yourself

>>4509389
>youtube said my snoy is better and so did the professional who spammed trump snaps at 120fps and cropped 2/3s of an AIs favorite video frame away to compose
DSLRs were strictly better for photography.
Mirrorless is strictly better and reducing the expense of hiring a skilled photographer and a learned videographer separately.

>>4509392
>and
*at
Dont forget to buy 4x more batteries than you would need for your DSLR btw
Reusing the old battery designs that are physically too small to hold enough cells for a MILC was 100% a money making decision.

>>4509392
>>4509393
>>4509390
This are so funny, do some more!

>>4509396
>leave the company alone
>how dare you doubt youtube and brand ambassadors
>how dare you say the needs of the AP do not align with other fields of photography
>how dare you not have respect for wedding photographers
>the newest mirrorless IS better >:(
>stop asking questions and buy
>oh, you NEED better but say its worse? prove it to me (i’ll steal your photos for my portfolio once i test the waters to see if you’re gone)
You’re quite a recognizable poster, corporate sycophant/photo thief/corgi snapper. But you confuse me with at least one other. Funny stuff.

>>4509400
I'd say what a good job of articulating statements I've made, but these are all just strawmen
>photo thief
Thank you for the compliment bb, this is a title I wear with a badge of honor now, photos so good you think they are stolen
>corporate sycophant
Ok Karen

>>4509401
Lol you are the, capital the fuy who furiously defended the nikon z50s trash autofocus and spent 3 hours arguing with some random retards about it while insisting they prove they deserve more than shitty autofocus. Meanwhile the best photos you can supply on demand are of your family’s dog on leash at a public park. You’re seriously sad. Just stick to posting your real, non-stolen photography (your parents pets, local trees, the brick corners at your highschool) and stop trying to be a loc gearfag personality corporate sycophant/corgay.

The billionaires of tech do not need you to defend their products from people who think they are no longer worth it. I repeat.
The billionaires of tech do not need your help fighting internet commentators who say value is falling further behind cost and the wants and needs of people outside of sony’s massive agency contracts have been forgotten, and possibly, perfectly satisfied and nearly impossible to meet any better without making leica a budget brand (china will likely do this in the future btw).

>>4509408
>historical revisionism
To be expected
>The billionaires of tech
This board doesn't need your nophoto gearfag commentary either

Post 3 of your best photos now please

>>4509411
You are a known photo thief who puts up trash yet claims some half decent (and never reproduced) stuff, and getting you just to put up trash is a serious struggle. I’m not padding your fake portfolio. I know you want to slip 3 of my best photos into your collage the day you can repost one without getting a “HEY!” but it aint happening.

>>4509415
>Post 3 of your best photos now please
Did you forget? Why aren't you posting on demand?
> yet claims some half decent (and never reproduced) stuff,
Oh really? What were the half decent shots? Always happy to share proof I took them, like I did multiple times in other threads
Remember when I asked for goalposts because I felt they kept changing, and then they kept changing? And when I asked for which specific photos people wanted me to prove, and no one said any? At least I tried

It's sad to hear your a nophoto

>>4509417
>I’m a pro! Listen to my gearfag opinions! Buy that fujifilm! Look at this collage i totally took these!
>this isnt your real work. You steal photos. You post collages of random shit stolen from flickr all the time why wouldn’t you sometimes lie about them being yours? Post some real work.
>*much trying later* heres 10 angles of my moms dogs ass.
>This isnt even close to the shit you stole. Wouldnt you have posted the photos from the collage you knew were the best? You would if you took them
>here’s 10 more angles of my moms dog sleeping. which exact photos did i steal? prove it. muh gearfags. nophotos!
sigh

File: collages.jpg (3.72 MB, 4500x2500)

3.72 MB JPG

>>4509419
>Buy that fujifilm!
My literal last comment on buying Fuji cameras on this board:
>The only thing I say about Fujis cost is that they offer the worst performance per $, but I bet you'll forget me saying it this time too
The more you know! 1 less strawman for you to use
>You post collages of random shit
Most of them are combinations of individual shots I've posted, or collages tailored specific threads
>random shit stolen from flickr
I do post collages of other work when relevant, like all of these, but I never claim ownership and typically mention where stuff comes from.
Everything you see in the other "big" collage, like in the last gear thread, is all mine, the more you know!

>>4509423
>another collage of other peoples photos
If you were ever real you’d be posting your own work with a lot of
>fuck you i didnt steal this heres the real fucking 14 bit raw not a renamed jpeg faggot
Like, a while ago, gh5birder style but no you just post another thumbnail collage of other peoples photos ffs

This is why i post photos from my pc but i never post if you ask. I’m staying off your future collages, shitty gear defender.

>>4508975
I'll wait for the interchangeable lens version, hopefully. My trusty GX9 needs a replacement.

>>4509426
>another collage of other peoples photos
Yes, this is literally what I said.
>If you were ever real you’d be posting your own work with a lot of
Well I asked before which photos you wanted to see, and you didn't answer. Just like I asked last time and anons didn't answer.
>fuck you i didnt steal this
I might care about that angle if I were a small child. I've provided what I thought was sufficient evidence in the last thread, and have offered to provide more in good faith in the last thread, just like I have here. Not my fault you can't honestly engage with someone and have to resort to these kinds of shenanigans.
>This is why i post photos from my pc but i never post if you ask
Why do you care what I think about them? If I were really a photo thief, and they were good enough to steal, wouldn't I have stolen them already?

>>4509392
>>4509393
>DSLRs were strictly better for photography.
I have used a DSLR exactly once when some boomers asked me to take a picture of them with their camera on a hiking trip.

The dark hole of the Canon's OVF is forever etched into my memory.

A beautiful, bright OLED EVF is easily worth the battery power it consumes. Mirrorless means freedom from the exposure meter which is a meaningless guess at what the exposure should be.
Instead you just shoot in Manual, seeing exactly what the image will look like in the viewfinder, dialing-in as needed.

Whats the point of this camera? Why not get something cheaper with a larger sensor and interchangable lenses? I realize I sound like a troll but my confusion is genuine

>>4509434
>Why not get something cheaper with a larger sensor and interchangable lenses?
Size for the most part. Any m43 equivalent lens would be a much larger carry, and your other options for a smaller compact with larger sensor are mostly APS-C with fixed lenses (Ricoh GR, X100, etc).
You can go smaller sensor (RX100, G7x, etc) and save on size even more.
It's a weird middle ground for sure.

>>4509434
The point is emptying parts bins and consumer pockets to keep a flailing and failing business venture going while they struggle with the fact that they have ran out of ideas and don’t have the talent on staff to rush forward and take a risk. This is not a photographic tool. It is a calculated business decision.

It is bigger and does less, photographically, than its predecessors. Literally buy an olympus em5iii, pancake kit zoom, and 20mm panacake and you will have this camera but way better.

>>4509443
What would your ideal version of this camera be? What changes would you make for it to be better?

>>4509448
not doing your job for you, panasonic marketing department

>>4509448
L-mount with full frame.
rotate the battery making a good projecting grip and make room for IBIS

Basically I want an A7C minus Sony.

>>4509345
no powershot g series use 1 inch sensors which is far smaller than a four thirds sensor

>>4509510
Not powershot g, powershot gx. The cameras with x in the name from the g1x onward do have larger sensors. Bigger than 4/3rds but smaller than aps-c

>>4509499
>the camera is shit and I hate it
>no i wont fucking tell you what i want you have to guess
chuddies are remarkably similar to teenage girls

>>4509517
I told you what was wrong and so did many others but this isnt a college writing class, herr professor, it doesn’t need to be in MLA format
there is critical thought and then there is the culture of critique which demands wordier and wordier explanations which open the door for semantic games that make biblical interpretation/pilpul look sane

curses upon the greeks and heebs who contaminated the west with this.

>>4509522
do you plan on dropping the cringe ass debate lexicon once you turn 18 orrr...?

>>4509509
Sensible good ideas

>>4509510
Brainrotted nophoto

>>4509527
i’m old enough to be your dad in iran (20)

>>4509510
Powershot G1xiii uses APS-C actually, which is FAR bigger than a four thirds sensor. : )

>>4509224
Depending on focal length maybe, because comparing my kit with my dad's, an m43 body with IBIS was making cleaner shots than an APS-C body with a stabilized lens.

Stabilization quality is immediately visible on indoor shots (because of dim lighting), it's just that you have to do the tests yourself, no reviewer shill will be honest.

>>4509011
That's because Foolji put an absolutely ridiculous ragefinder tax on X-E5. Otherwise, X-E5/X-T50 are much better cameras than what m43 offers for the same price.

> 20MP m43 zoom without IBIS
This will end up being worse than E-P7 with the kit zoom, won't it?

File: file.png (76 KB, 212x199)

76 KB PNG

>>4509423
is that zizek?

>>4509735
Welcome to the board newfriend

>>4509509
>Basically I want an A7C minus Sony.
I will instantly buy whoever makes one first out of Panasonic/Canon/Nikon.

>>4509638
Ok, the trick is that the zoom on L10 is f1.7-f2.8.

>>4508975
It takes its name from Panasonic's 2nd 4/3 DSLR, which introduced the design language of the original g and gh series

>>4509766
An RX100 III-V has a lens with similar range and aperture, but it also has IBIS which more than makes up for the difference in sensor performance. The difference is the Sony can slip into a trouser pocket. I suppose it doesn't look like a Temu Leica though.

Releasing intentionally gimped cameras in order to create demand for the inevitable mk2 is disgusting. Somehow they will find the space to put in IBIS (which the EM10 had 12 years ago) on the L10 mk2 and an EVF and hot shoe on the S9 mk2. Of course, it will have the same sensor, shutter, AF system, etc. They can't fix EVERYTHING. They will only have the capacity to add IBIS and charge full MSRP again. Maybe even a few hundred more with inflation.

And then like all Lumix cameras, it will go on 30% discount within a year, because they only make products that look attractive sitting in the bargain bin. "Well, it's gimped and not as good as the competition... but with a 30% discount, who can complain?"

>>4509338
They had to do it, so you can record 8K 60 open gate pro res RAW with 200% crop with a 5 minute record limit because the camera overheats, with no IBIS which obviously you don't need for "vlogging" with the flip out screen - just stabilize it in post! It's the perfect hybrid content creation setup for Youtube content creators who make videos about buying cameras and using those cameras to record camera review vlogs on Youtube!

>>4509021
I think the market is recovering a bit.

Zoomers are buying digicams en-masse. Partly because of the hype, partly because smartphone photos produce alien looking result nowadays. They are however cheap as shit mostly, but I think the market is somewhat there.
Built in flash is a must for this kind of camera though IMO. It’s supposed to be all in one offering.

>>4509170
Same body with a m4/3 mount would definitely be popular I think.
>why would enthusiasts want fixed lens
I think success of Fuji x100 beyond hype shows that many enthusiast and professional photographers appreciate having “good enough” results in a small body. It’s a decently bright 24-70 equivalent that covers 90% of things most people would be doing.

>>4509509
LUMIX S9 with a EVF and a mechanical shutter is my dream camera. They were so close

File: g054S6900P-o_stand.jpg (27 KB, 869x652)

27 KB JPG

>>4509846
I'm sure one of the manufacturers can nail down the perfect lil' zoomzoom digicam at some point.
>Has to have a flash obviously
>moderate zoom
>15ish megapickles
>Easy to connect to smartphone because using cables and memory card readers is difficult and confusing
>Got to be endorsed by a celebrity (not a white man)
>Bonus points for exotic colors (zoomzooms love collecting special edition pokelemans and sports shoes they will never use for their intended purpose)
picrel is 500 bucks all day on ebay, it is probably one of the most perfected cameras for the zoomzooms, ironically a decade ahead of its time.

>>4509881
RX100 spec wise would pretty much be a perfect compact if it didn’t cost 15 thousand dollars.

>>4509885
It will be interesting to see if they decide to make a new model and what we will get in terms of improvements and price. I predict sky high pricing and minimal improvements (usb-c port and perhaps better touch sensitivity on the screen).
I actually though the L10 had the same form factor as the lx100 and that the whole "nothing new unless gimped or larger" era was over, but no so I guess Sony is struggling with the same, there just isn't room for improvement.

>>4509852
I would be surprised if they don't release such a camera in the next year or so.
Their strategy seems to have been making the S9 the cheapest full frame on the market as bait to lure masses of people into their system. Apparently people living paycheck to paycheck are still buying luxury goods like new cameras, so a few hundred $ in savings goes a long way to persuade them to buy.
They made it cheap by omitting things like EVF and mechanical shutter. Now that they have a bunch of S9 owners they can release a mk2 with those features present and FOMO the existing user base into upgrade, and also snag those who didn't buy the mk1 due to those missing features.

File: 1754079018923910.png (443 KB, 1071x411)

443 KB PNG

>>4508975
>re-release of something or gimped
the thing was already gimped with a 2.2x crop factor, and now the size increased by 30% while not improving on that. It's now larger than the X100 which only has a 1.5x crop factor and is on par with FF cam sizes.

>>4509981
>let me just compare body sizes only
do you like.. not care about the lens size and capabilities at all, comparing it against fixed prime or ff is silly. Not saying this is a great camera either but you're comparing different fruits

>>4509981
based retard

>>4509019
>If you print, it does matter, and I do encourage people to print.
I do A2 prints form 20mpx m43 babysensors and it's no issue at all.
Ofc I don't crop in post but get composition right in camera. If you cant do that I guess the 50mpx sensors are for you

File: 1764758426599290.png (282 KB, 1083x420)

282 KB PNG

>>4510000
>>4510036
Proof that Panasoynic shills are rampant on this dead as fuck board. Not only did the lens not improve, but it actually got THICKER than before. You shills have zero excuse.

>>4510043
every time i use a baby sensor its obvious compared to ff thar a lot of color gradations are just missing. cameras dont run off signal to noise ratio charts. the actual image sensing is analog so it probably has to do with FF almost always using either simpler or ultra high end lens designs that either dont perform well on or aren’t even made for crop sensors and FF always having larger pixels and counting more photons (aka light themed vibrations manifesting as particles through god’s grace) and having deeper colors from deeper light particle catchers.

equivalence doesnt even work except for approximating dof, fov, and background noise. the superior gradients stay even with FF at a high ISO. light obeys quantum physics/procedurally generated reality rules so i can see how putting a larger array of larger pixels in front of the same physical aperture size (like 50mm FF f/8 to 25mm m43 f/4) can still receive more information.

>>4510048
I don't like something, should I:
>not buy it
>reee like a retard because I don't want beans in my soup

>>4510055
>every time i use a baby sensor its obvious compared to ff
What a good opportunity for you to share the comparisons you've done
>equivalence doesn't work except for when it does, and it also doesn't work if you don't use it properly
Big brain

>>4510056
No one ordered bean soup. No one asked panasonic to make a shitty camera from 2010 larger than a fuji x100vi.

Panasonic isn’t serving some neglected niche here. They’re just releasing shitty products nobody wants except clueless amazon shoppers who trust AI generated/indian scammer generated/bribed influencer reviews and all six of their fanboys. Hence why almost no one buys panasonic products and even low tier brands like fujifilm and nikon vastly outsell them.

Sometimes it’s ok to admit a tech conglomerate that mostly makes batteries and washing machines doesn’t really make good cameras. They often don’t have to. Camera manufacturing can be done at break even or negligible profit and save the company money by keeping production lines and staff needed for more important, but even lower volume products (ie: UAV components, security systems) on retainer.

>>4510063
>No one asked
You're literally doing the bean soup thing lol

>>4510059
I did the same test as another anon with a gay looking dog here and a second anon also with a gay looking dog who called it tonality and used digital medium format. Everyone screeched at each anon and accused them of faking it by changing the light, and insisted that full frame could never look better without base ISO and a wide open f1.2 (blatantly wrong) so why would I bother? I’m not autistic enough to have test shots on hand and I’m not redoing tests other people already did.

Since you’ll just screech and accuse me of secretly changing the lighting or lying about the settings, it’s way more satisfying for me to enjoy my tonality improvements despite “equivalence”, which doesn’t actually exist and runs on classical logic that conceives of light like flowing water, when cameras run on quantum physics and a larger sensor gets more information even when placed in front of the same aperture size, even when grain is roughly the same.
The real world and I will enjoy the better tonality and color rendering of larger sensors and you will live in a fantasy land based on equivalence delusions where people are only buying larger sensors because of a “snoy conspiracy to brainwash the consoomers skill issues” or whatever nonsense. It’s that simple.

Just remember, the old panasoi lx100 is so cheap its basically free, it fits in a pocket and it’s better than your phone. It’s still a useful camera.
The new one isnt really worth it.

>>4510064
Bean soup is a parable about something for someone being disliked by people outside of the target audience.

That doesn’t really apply to panasonic. Panasonic has no target audience. They are the bottom brand. The next brand up (fuji) sells almost four times more cameras than panasonic, nikon almost 8x, sony 10x, canon almost 20x more.

Fuji sells bean soup.
Panasonic sells cow dung curry cooked in a garbage can as a low effort cash grab.

>>4510064
hes right though

panasonic makes stills cameras as a business decision. their video cameras are more popular and profitable and they make UAV parts and security cameras, but these are all lower volume markets. in electronics manufacturing shutting the machines off for significant periods of time basically can’t happen and would make their camcorders etc more expensive, so it’s cheaper for them to make parts bin stills cameras when they aren’t making more important shit, get what little profit they can, and then liquidate them at cost (notice how often panasonic has crazy sales and rebates)

panasonic stills cameras are literally value engineered scraps left over from their main business. if you can tolerate subpar performance and generationally worsening specs (like reducing miniaturization - one of the most expensive things in tech) any new panasonic will eventually go on sale for barely any more than it cost to make.

>>4510069
>people outside of the target audience.
Yes, not every camera is for everyone
Different cameras appeal to different people for different reasons, its not my fault you are unable to comprehend that fact
>Fuji sells bean soup.
You don't even understand the analogy lol

File: 1748635707126436.png (529 KB, 1195x880)

529 KB PNG

>>4510069
look OP, your dumbass engagement baiting ass posed the question (Are we impressed?), and I answered you dumb fucking ass (No we fucking aren't).

The L10 is a regression from the previous gen quite a bit. The original may have been """pocketable""" if you were a trenchcoat-wearching chud, but the new one really won't even work for those types anymore. Look, I'm sorry that your favorite company sucks but you don't need to make liking X or Y company your whole personality.

>>4510075
for who is an old mft camera but bigger and more expensive than a better fuji? panasonic sales associates? its so fucking fat and $1500 the sony a7c is a better choice until panasonic realizes no one wants it and it goes on sale for $999 like all their other cameras do. their own release announcement doesnt even sell it as a material improvement and focuses on celebrating lumix’s 25th anniversary. its an oversized firmware update for the lx100ii in a bigger, more expensive box.

buy a real camera or wait for it to go on sale and then sell for even less on ebay when the retard who bought it for $1k realizes it fucking sucks, dude. fuji is bean soup. its not for everyone but its good for a lot of people. panasonic is turd curry. inexcusable garbage for those whose budget is not measured in rupees.

>>4510077
meant for >>4510056

File: consoomer.jpg (26 KB, 680x432)

26 KB JPG

>>4510077
>the left really cant meme
topkek

>>4510077
>The L10 is a regression from the previous gen quite a bit.
In what ways outside of size?
Is there nothing about it that is an improvement over previous gen?

>>4509981
I think x100 body is the size of diminishing returns there’s really not much value in making it smaller without making it too small to fit useful tech or to hold. Biggest pocketability limitation at this point is the lens, and L10 has a big advantage of having 24-70 equivalent instead of just 35mm like x100

>>4510130
The x100 is massive for an APS-C body. Insane after 7 or so generations they've never been able to shrink it down once.

File: IMG_5510.jpg (54 KB, 863x706)

54 KB JPG

>>4510131
I mean they can go close to Ricoh size but lens is still a limiting factor.
So most people would rather have a marginally larger camera but with EVF, IBIS and better specs.
Unless they come up with a folding lens design - there’s no value in making the body smaller since it’s not a pocket camera either way.

>>4510127
I check in after months away from this shithole and that Clive autist is still here? No wonder this place is fucking dead.

>>4509981
Not only that, a 40MP Foolji file can be cropped to 20MP for a crop factor similar to m43. APS-C won.

>>4510130
>4509981
>I think x100 body is the size of diminishing returns
Facts, when people want to keep going smaller, I have to imagine they have very small hands
I also doubt they minmax for small size in every other area of their life, like tiny phone, tiny monitor, etc

File: small.jpg (76 KB, 612x421)

76 KB JPG

>>4510130
>>4510166
Just need to add an R to the beginning of the model name. It's small enough that it's easily pocketable even in trousers. Obviously it has a smaller sensor but it's still very capable, it has a decently fast lens and IS which most of the X100 models don't. And of course it has a zoom so it's more flexible, something you want for a pocket camera. Depending on the particular models you're comparing there can be other advantages too like better AF or the tilting screen.

>>4510299
I have an RX100II I got for free and never use it, anything that small I'd rather just use my phone, and even with X100, I'd be adding a grip
The only pocket cameras I've ever felt worth it has been a Mju II
I'm just so used to using normal sized cameras as edc picks that I just have a need to go much smaller

File: _DSC9972.jpg (126 KB, 1619x1080)

126 KB JPG

>>4510304
Well it's better than any phone, significantly so unless you have one of those new monstrosities that cost over a grand. Even just having an EVF is a big deal, as is not running down the phone battery (even more so if you crank the display brightness to see when it's sunny out). They do an add on grip for the RX100 that makes it better to hold while not affecting the pocketability, it's so light it doesn't take much.

File: ISOLCJRXK.jpg (15 KB, 450x450)

15 KB JPG

>>4510307
>Well it's better than any phone
True, but you know what's better than it? A real camera, so I just bring that if I care about taking photos.
>Even just having an EVF is a big deal
Yes, which is why I appreciate even better ones on cameras.
>as is not running down the phone battery
100% a non-issue lol
>They do an add on grip for the RX100
Yes, I have sold many of them. My RX100 has picrel too, still never use it.

>>4510320
If you can just take your "real" camera everywhere then cool, but not everyone can in every situation (conveniently). I ride a motorcycle so if I'm going to a show or exploring then I can stuff the RX100 easily in my jacket pocket and not even notice it's there, meanwhile my A7 is swinging around on a strap. I go some places not even knowing if I'll want to take any photos, but it's so little hassle to take it with me I'll do it just in case and I end up with better photos than I'd get with my phone.

I'm not trying to say you should only have a pocket camera over a "real" one, just that for some people both have their place. An X100 however isn't going to go into as many pockets so many people are just going to be putting them on a strap, and in that case it's not much more hassle to just take the "real" camera.

>>4510323
You go girl

No video stabilisation, no dice from me. My iPhone mini 13 has this, why not a flash camera, it's absurd, the only reason I'd get a camera like this is good video

>>4510325
>GO
>GO
>GO
>GIMME A G!
>GIMME AN I!
>GIMME AN R!
>GIMME AN L!
>YOUUUUUU GO GIRL!

>>4510166
I recently held an a6700 in person and I was so surprised how small it was, too small in fact. I held a Z5ii and it was much more ergonomic. The a6700 must have been made for w*men and very delicate, childlike men.

>>4510389
I have large hands and I found that the a6700 grip could be deeper and the front dial positioning is bad, otherwise fine ergonomically.If it came with Lumix firmware I'd have bought it.

File: size.jpg (188 KB, 930x1156)

188 KB JPG

>>4510135
Just because its not as small as a GR or isnt pocketable doesnt mean they cant make it smaller. The RX1 size is a good size.

>>4510143
Who is Clive?

>>4510512
You’re literally proving that RX1 is less portable than x100 with that picture and that was my point.

>>4510512
Saw a couple of RX1R III's for sale in the local classifieds and currently there is one at a 40% discount from launch price and still no takers. Retail pricing has in one year gone down 25%. You probably have to eat a 50% loss if you want it gone at this point. Crazy.

>>4510512
>The RX1 size is a good size
It literally isn't. It's the same slop that Panasoynic released when both companies realized enthusiast """compacts""" were getting popular, so they took a design that was in the trash can for a decade, quickly dusted it off and made a few things modern, then released a piece of shit. Both the RX1RIII and the L10 desperately needed lens redesigns and neither received them which shows just how much thought the companies put into those flaming shitheaps.

>>4510537
The x100 does not have a FF lens, retard.

File: 1765042605464244.jpg (64 KB, 800x450)

64 KB JPG

>>4510820
Yet why would you get one over an even cheaper RX1RII besides slightly better battery life and quicker to use EVF? The lens was already underspecced for the 42MP sensor, so no reason to even bother with 61MP. At least the II had something neat with the variable optical low pass filter which was gone on the III, and it still had a tilt screen.

>>4510828
Mark II Sony bodies were an unusable janky mess
>>4510820
I would gladly get a firesale RX1rIII for $2k

Fix the dust issue, put in a newer sensor, and boom: lx100iii.

File: P1130098-2048x1365.jpg (203 KB, 2048x1365)

203 KB JPG

>>4508975
I like it except the motorized zoom. Slow and long-term the mechanisms are a lot less reliable.