Leaderboard

A couple of things the LX10 has in its favour are the integral automatic slide away lens cap and the lens resume option. With the latter enabled, when you power on the camera it will automatically return to the last used focal length so its like having a prime attached in that respect. The caveat I suppose is that if you have it set to a longer focal length for your last shot then that might not what you want to happen on power up but its a selectable option anyway. The speed of operation of the camera lens wise is also helped by the dedicated aperture ring and the control ring which defaults to being the zoom barrel but auto switches to be a focus ring when you have it in manual focus. It can also take my Cinelike D/V hack as well which is a bonus if you want to match it to other Lumix cameras. Beware of the crop when in 4K though (36mm vs 25mm equivalent) and also that the full 5 axis stabilisation only works in HD mode so in 4K you are "limited" to OIS. As per previous discussions about the LX10, it accommodates ND filters and WA/TC adapters easily via an affixable filter thread adapter. If you are looking to trade reach and some functionality for a slower lens then the 10x Zoom version of the same camera is called the TZ100. Doesn't get much discussion but its an option for travel when the standard zoom range of the LX10 might be a bit too limiting. It takes the Cinelike D/V hack too.

Is there an option for resuming or fixing focal distance as well? One thing I love on my LX10 is the character of the lens. Using it at F2.8 in its 2/3" 4K mode gives me a DOF equivalent of F8 in S35. I am very fine with that. I actually adore the fact that it crops into 2/3" sensor format, showing me how little sensor estate I need and how little of technical prowess is needed to produce an image of cinematic beauty. The little LX10 provides. Give me that in S16 4K 10bit 150mbit HLG and a MF mode with hard stops. Price it 649 EUR. The HD 24p AVCHD mode seems to be of similar quality like the G6 in it´s best mode. 50p is very brittle though. 25p might be the same. TZ100 is for sure an interesting camera to buy in 2024 unless one has committed to the non purchase rule for the upcoming year. 🙂

It does both zoom and focus position.

I think if you were to say "only the 15mm body cap lens", I'd choose the iPhone. If ergos are the priority, I'd go with the LX10 if you can do with the crop. If diversity of looks is the main priority, I'd go with a GX850 and two lenses: 12-32 and 42.5 IS lenses. Is that small enough, not sure. Personally, I cannot give up ergonomics and I find the LX10's 4k crop and lack of IBIS too limiting. I went the route of the GX850 for two main reasons: 1) the simplicity of the screen/lack of EVF; 2) Panasonic familiarity. I love the fact I can put a tiny tripod on it and not care about ibis and be in the shots I make while seeing the framing. As everything I do is related to family, I figure my children want to see me in the shots sometimes, especially since my wife doesn't want to take any shots of me.

No specific experience with it, but it's Panasonic; so, single point AF will be stellar. DSLM cameras have these considerations when quickly shooting: Pocketable or not? Acceptable audio or not? How good are the auto modes? Is Aperture priority acceptable? Do you have a lens cap on it and how fast can it come off? Zoom or prime? Zooms take longer in general. If zoom, power zoom or not? With power zoom, you can get automatic lens cap. Is an ND filter part of the setup? Maybe there are more questions?

To change the subject slightly (and with apologies to @John Matthews) after shooting with my GF3 and 15mm F8 pancake lens I've been thinking about tiny cameras further, and am wondering what the best option would be for the smallest and fastest 4K camera setup without a super-wide lens. To be specific, I want it to turn it on, aim it, and hit record and be capturing 4K / 100Mbps video in the lowest possible number of seconds. To this end, auto-everything is preferable, except auto-focus, which has to either be fixed focus or fast enough so I never have to wait for it. Essentially, I want an action camera, but I don't want the super-wide FOV. I've re-read the thread, and here are the options I think are on the table: Zcam E1 with 15mm F8 body cap lens GX850 with 15mm F8 body cap lens Sony RX0 (mk1 or 2) iPhone Things that don't make the cut: Cameras that are too big: GX85, Olympus E-P7, Osmo Pocket series Too wide FOV: action cameras Modifying an action camera with third-party lens Things I'm not sure about: LX10 (is the AF instant and reliable?) Are there other options I missed? Other thoughts?

I noticed that smartphones have huge differences in terms of sensor sensitivity - for example, the scene is set to 1/24 and ISO 3200 on Motorola Fusion+, to have exactly this exposure on Motorola One Zoom I have to set ISO 640 at 1/24 🙂 I don't know what there is a difference, but clearly the One Zoom sensor is much more sensitive (about three times).

What a book! 😂

I saw it almost twice because I have a friend who works at a theater where they were showing it and I went to catch it. The script is nothing much and it gets lost in the end. Just another movie. Let's face it: it was discussed so much for a very simple reason: all independent filmmakers and the kids (including white-haired ones like me) je***ng off with their little cameras in the backyard thought: if he made a blockbuster with my own little camera, so can I. But picking up on the thread title "Will The Creator change how blockbusters get filmed?" I venture to say that This was a whim of a very particular director (his resume proves it) but the film industry doesn't give a shit about the camera used for the film and nothing will change. As I said 8 pages ago, if there is one reason the film will be remembered and may change the way these blockbusters are shot, it is the visuals. The film is a visual treat. But not because of the camera or the lenses used but because unlike 99% of other similar films they chose not to create everything by computer but to use real locations as much as possible to which, in post production, the necessary modifications were applied (mainly for budget reasons i suppose). There are scenes shot in real Buddhist temples in Nepal, ruins in Cambodia, hotel, train station, and Bangkok airport, to which they added futuristic details. The futuristic lab you see in the trailers is a real nuclear accelerator in Thailand. the result is mind-blowing. The locations are real and fuck if you can see it. The visuals have a great scope that the Star Wars productions look like South American soap operas in comparison. In short seeing the total CGI reconstructions of entire landscapes in other much more expensive and famous films you get the impression that perfection has been achieved. Then you see this film and knowing the technique used (I would almost call it augmented reality) you realize that there is still a long way to go. Here, in my opinion, this will be something that will change the approach of other productions.