Panasonic Rumor - Panasonic LX8

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can't wait to see this camera!!

It's weird, I love my GX1 but my GX7 leaves me cold?!?!?! I hope this LX100 gets my blood warm again. This could mean ditching all my M4/3 gear and just have the LX100 then I can concentrate on lenses for my A7 (Which is the best this since sliced bread!! :D )
 
National Camera Exchange is already showing the new GM5 and LX100 pricing info. Both camera will cost $899 each. The Panasonic 35-100mm lens will cost $399.

35-100 is also pricy for 35-100 f3.5-5.6 zoom... LX100 will kill GM line unless GM5 comes with a 12-35mm f2.8 lens or we'll see quick price reductions on GM that Panasonic does... I am now waiting for Canon g7x price...

Looks like the LX100 will sell for $899 in the U.S. And be more desireable than the GM5 at the same price...

(FT5) New GM5 and LX100 to cost $899! 35-100mm for $399 - 43 Rumors
 
Well, that's not such good news. Compared to the RX100m3 (102 x 58 x 41mm) it's 50% thicker.

I think it's really good news! For those who want a pocketable camera, this one was never gonna be in the running. The rumored Canon G7X maybe competes with the RX100m3 for the pocketable crown. The LX100, like the LX3, 5, 7 before it should just be a great small, all in one camera with great controls and a surprisingly good sensor. Ever since the RX100 came out a couple of years ago, I've been interested to see who's gonna take a similar sized sensor and build a slightly larger camera around it with a better lens, controls that I'll personally like a lot more, etc. That Panasonic did it with a 4/3 sensor is just a nice IQ bonus. But I was always more comfortable with the size of hte LX7 and RX1 and Olympus XZ2, etc than with the RX100 or Canon S90 (which I had a few years ago). Those are incredibly capable cameras and a lot of people love them. But a lot of people don't also, and I don't think Panasonic was ever going after that "ultra-small" market with this camera. Anymore than Fuji was with the X-10 / 20 / 30, which is another interesting line, but I think they all but killed it off by keeping the 2/3" sensor in the X30. I think Sony set the new standard for this category of camera with the 1" sensor in the RX100 and now that they're selling it to other manufacturers, I can't see why anyone would release a new camera with a lesser sensor that's intended to compete in this category, whether pockeable or not.

-Ray
 
It seems that the regular, full-retail, going price for the original RX100 is now $499. I suppose if the G7X is priced like the LX100 or the RX100 III, the original RX100 is still a decent option for something you can slip into your pants or shirt pocket. But, really, I can't complain about my Fuji XF1.
 
I think it's really good news! For those who want a pocketable camera, this one was never gonna be in the running. The rumored Canon G7X maybe competes with the RX100m3 for the pocketable crown. The LX100, like the LX3, 5, 7 before it should just be a great small, all in one camera with great controls and a surprisingly good sensor.

It's much closer to the Canon G1X II in size than the LX7. For a fixed lens camera these days, 'small' isn't really the adjective that comes to my mind.
 
For the LX100 I'd rather Panasonic get the sensor size, lens specification, handling and control balance right than produce the smallest possible camera.


Absolutely. It makes perfect sense to me to have this category of cameras split between "pocketable" and "not".
 
There's room for both types of camera of course, but a pocketable camera has to be built to a size and compromises are made to achieve that. Remove the size restriction and the compromises reduce as the size and weight increases. For me the point of the G1X and LX100 cameras are that I could easily use them as a direct replacement for a mirrorless camera with a fast zoom lens, whereas smaller cameras like the RX100 and rumoured G7X I would not.
 
There's room for both types of camera of course, but a pocketable camera has to be built to a size and compromises are made to achieve that. Remove the size restriction and the compromises reduce as the size and weight increases. For me the point of the G1X and LX100 cameras are that I could easily use them as a direct replacement for a mirrorless camera with a fast zoom lens, whereas smaller cameras like the RX100 and rumoured G7X I would not.

What Nic said! I've had an S90 and an RX100 and never really liked either of them, as capable as they both were/are for their time. The handling and control compromises associated with getting that much camera into such a small package just made them both totally un-engaging to shoot with, at least for me. Never enjoyed using either of them - hence, rarely did. The S90 was sold long ago and the RX100 is my wife's now and it's perfect for her, but she just sets it to auto and uses nothing other than the zoom rocker and the shutter button.

Slightly larger camera like the LX5 / LX7 and fixed focal length miniatures like the Ricoh GR and Nikon Coolpix A, OTOH, are just large enough to put a real emphasis on controls and interface and handling and I LOVE all of those cameras. I'd still say they're small, just not pocketable small, and actually the GR and Coolpix A are pocketable if the pocket's not too small - I've done it with both. And I think the LX100 is likely to join their ranks, although it will be a bit larger still. But I consider my RX1 small and the LX100 won't be bigger than that...

-Ray
 
For the LX100 I'd rather Panasonic get the sensor size, lens specification, handling and control balance right than produce the smallest possible camera.

Amen. I had a play with the RX100 not too long ago after buying it as a gift for my little brother who went backpacking around South America for a few months recently.....the RX100 packs a nice IQ punch for its size and kudos to Sony for pushing the envelope with the concept, but man, the user experienced just plain sucked (for me)....it felt about as engaging an experience as shooting with my iPhone, which in saying that is a perfectly fine experience for when shooting WITH my iPhone....but for a camera it was not an engaging experience and I got bored with it super quick. That being said, it did a great job and my brother was thrilled with the results.

I'm almost having to pinch myself to believe that these specs are real and to believe that this camera may come with all the goodies, all the bells and whistles of a modern m43 camera and with THAT lens in something the size of an RX1. Wow.

I'm just hoping Panasonic don't cripple it by getting the ergos/usability wrong...if they get all the technical stuff right, then the camera can be something else entirely, it becomes 'fun' to use.
 
What really interests me about this rumoured camera is the possibility of 24mm 16:9 ratio using a m43 sensor. If it holds true to Panasonic's LX series, 24mm at 16:9 will be more like 21.5mm, and with a decent m43 sensor, will have great image quality.

Depth of field will be a bit longer than if the lens covered the whole 4:3 imaging circle, but the IQ benefits will remain. If the specs are true, and the multi aspect is what I hope it is, the camera at its widest will be like a 21.5mm f1.7 with GH4 image quality, in a fixed lens camera the size of the Sony RX1. Now that's very intriguing to me.

Only another day to see what this camera will be like.
 
My old GH1 has a multi-aspect sensor, with the possible resolutions being:

Total sensor - 14mp
4:3 - 12mp
3:2 - 11.4mp
16:9 - 10.6mp

Extrapolating to the 16mp available on a current Panasonic m4/3 sensor gives:

Total sensor - 16mp
4:3 - 13.7mp
3:2 - 13mp
16:9 - 12.1mp
 
I guess all will be answered shortly, but I do wonder what they mean by..."multi-aspect sensor - no resolution loss"...which has has been written is the spec leaks, could this possibly mean an oversized sensor that will at any given aspect ratio deliver the full 16mp (or close enough to) ??
 
Funny enough it may be similar to my Nokia

at 16:9 it's wider but shorter than 4:3 so I think it's 7mp, yet at 4:3 it's taller and not as wide but covers a larger part of the sensor so you get more MP so it does have a multi-aspect ratio sensor.

I think it's the case for all Nokias, that you get more resolution shooting at 4:3 aspect ratio.
 
That is correct for a true multi-aspect sensor. A square shape covers a larger area within a circle than a rectangular shape, so a 4:3 aspect ratio will deliver a higher resolution for a given image circle than a 16:9 will.
 
Yeah, there will be minor changes in resolution, but you'll need a microscope (or at least strong magnifying glass) to see them. But the beauty of it is that 3:2 and 16:9 won't just be 4:3 images with the tops and bottoms lopped off - the actual sensor is WIDER for those aspect ratios so it's like shooting with a real 3:2 camera, which I personally prefer for most types of landscape orientation shooting. And, yeah, at 24mm and 16:9, the LX5 and LX7 were very very close to a 21mm width. I loved shooting with those cameras and the multi-aspect sensor was a big part of why. 3:2 as a default setting, 4:3 for street (where I'm often cropping down to a square anyway) and most portrait orientation shots, 16:9 for the rare occasion I want super wide. I'm not even remotely in the market for a camera like this, but I've liked the LX series sooooo much I'm actually tempted by it anyway, at least based on the rumors. Thiis will be the best low light zoom compact yet if it really has a GH4 sensor. And at f1.7 it'll be better even than the GR or Nikon A at f2.8. And will be about as good as anything else in good light (although it won't have the detail of that 1" Sony sensor).

Potentially a VERY VERY attractive package. IF (and this is a huge if and I don't expect it to happen), Panasonic suddenly wakes up the potential of auto-ISO and allows for a useful minimum shutter speed setting with auto-ISO, I'll eventually buy this because it would be as good a street camera as my Nikon A as well as being versatile as hell. But so far, only Samsung, Nikon, and Fuji (in only a few of their models) have figured out how to do auto-ISO right, and with todays' amazing sensor, to NOT offer those tools is almost a sin. I don't expect that at all in this camera, though - Pany hasn't done it in any of their higher end cameras - and then I'd have VERY limited use for this camera because I'd almost always have to carry another camera with me too. But if it has the auto-ISO functionality to allow me to carry JUST this for a lot of shooting, I'll find a way...

-Ray
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top