Jacek

It is funny how different needs do people have. LX100 is currently the best camera on the market for my needs (ordering this weekend). It will be my only camera (for both video and photo) for next few years. You should say: "For my needs LX100 is overrated and overestimated.". When you say "The camera is bad.. It is my opinion." it sounds like you think that it's bad for everyone (or almost everyone). If you think like that - you are wrong. If not - you should correct your statement to cool emotions.

It has more useful and intuitive fully manual aperture and shutter speed controls. Better than one PASM ring.

But are you talking about RX100, RX100 II or RX100 III ? Because they are totally diffferent segments! ;) LX100 is 14% wider and taller and 34% thicker than RX100 III but RX100 III is 14% thicker than RX100 ! So just be clear which segment you are talking about: kid's trousers back pocket segment, kid's trousers front pocket, kid's jacket pocket, adult's trousers back pocket, adult's trousers front pocket, adults jacket pocket, snowboarder trousers back pocket... I, for example, am interested only in adult's winter jacket internal pocket segment.

Question to people who bought LX100 in Germany/Austria: Is it multi-language? Can you change the language to Polish? I'm considering to buy in abroad, couse here it appeard with 900euro price.

Panasonic LX100.

Still not available in Poland :( ..

Nice low light ISO tests from Gordon Laing (CameraLabs) LINK

I like to use autofocus just before recording video (quick start). Hope It will work well in this way.

Some video samples (AF hunting all the time? ): http://www.photographyblog.com/previews/panasonic_lumix_dmc_lx100_photos

I did some math, and it looks like in 4K: LX100: ~2.4x crop vs full-frame = ~6x smaller sensor area vs full-frame FZ1000 : ~4x crop vs full-frame = ~16x smaller sensor area vs full-frame So in 4x FZ1000 uses ~2.6x smaller sensor area than LX100. It will undoubtedly affect ISO perfomance (at least 1 stop, and probably more). Maximum aperture: 1.7 vs 2.8 = 1.5 stop difference. Maximum low-light performance difference will be at least 2.5 stops. It is big, especially when you will se that even LX100 will not go far into dim corridor..

A problem when you need wide angle most of the time (like me). Another significant difference is low-light perfomance: LX100 has bigger sensor, smaller crop in 4K, faster lens.. Dim (not too dark) indoor scene and FZ1000 fails.

You lucky bastard! :angry: Give us some 4K flat sample straight from the camera... please? ;) And some RAW pictures?..

But using one fixed, non-rotating polarizer is ok i think?

LX100 has stabilization too. 1. LX100 has bigger sensor (and makes smaller crop for 4K than FZ1000) and faster lens (max f1.7 vs f2.8) which means: - significantly better low light performance (we are talking about ability to shoot in dim scene, not dark) - ability to get some shallow DoF in wide shots 2. LX100 can go significantly wider in 4K: about 26mm vs 37mm of FZ1000 (http://www.eoshd.com/2014/06/4k-899-panasonic-fz1000-beware-quirks). 3. LX100 is much smaller, 2x lighter (http://***URL removed***/products/compare/side-by-side?products=panasonic_dmclx100&products=panasonic_dmcfz1000)

In my country street price is similar to A7s. It was expensive after release only.

There is 55" OLED TV on the market already costing little more than A7S camera: LG 55EA980V

It is completely fake. They are posting such videos every time new camera is released. (They say they use Panasonic 12-35/2.8 lens on both cameras :D )

This one looks much better than Samsung.. Little pricier, but it covers 100% Adobe RGB according to one of the reviews: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/dell-up2414q-monitor-review,3781-7.html Much more colors than sRGB..

I have to disappoint you, but Rec.2020 is just a recommendation for UHD and has nothing to do with actual monitor colour gamut. That Samsung is not bad (especially considering it's TN panel) and almost covers sRGB (similar to rec.709), but it is far far from rec.2020 colour gamut recommendation. Don't know its colour accuracy (which is as important as color space coverage), but overall it is just avarage monitor (good for TN) in terms of colors.

It's not the only one 4K 28" Monitor on the market at that price... AOC u2868Pqu ViewSonic VX2880ml IIYAMA B2888UHSU-B1 Dell P2815Q Philips 288P6LJEB Asus PB287Q

It's not that simple. They did it in GH4 - 200Mbit 2K. While the image is great, downsampled 100Mbit 4k is still better. There is one more thing - these all are hybrid stills/video cameras. That means they just can't go lower than 8 megapixels in 16:9. For 2k video the best sensor would have 2 megapixels - 1:1 full sensor readout with best DR you can get. But nobody would buy still camera with 2-3 megapixels :).. So 4K video looks like natural resolution for hybrid stills/video cameras. Sony did a 12 megapixels A7S and it is the lowest limit for photographers I suppose. And GH4 example shows that it's better to output that native 4K image than try to downsample internally.

I see your point - they could do better if there were no 4k on the horizont. But there is hope :). There is one company which turned into the right direction.... OLYMPUS !.. Seriously! Their Open Platform Community is very promising. Now there is no political obstracles to develop perfect software for their sensors: RAW video support, all kind of video profiles, HDR tricks ... Open Software = no restrictions. The only limitation will be the electronics. Hope the project will succeed. http://opc.olympus-imaging.com/en/index.html

But as I said, they do. Sony released A7s 2k camera. GH4 has 200Mbit 2k (but apparently lower quality downscaled 4k produces better 2k image from the same camera). Both with great DR, true 2k resolution and less other artifacts... Bmpcc is an example that focusing on DR and color is not the best way. Consumer cameras have to first overcome bigger problems - Panasonic/Sony/Samsung are making great progress. It is huge imrovement over previous cameras, but don't expect Alexa quality (wait some more time - they are budget cameras).

The video is more about delivery format. And it's about professional cameras. The guys say that: - to get proper 4k you will need 6k camera - to get proper 2k they often use more than 2k camera. They are using right now true 2k (or more than 2k) professional cameras with perfect image quality: professional codec or RAW, no banding, moire, blockiness, digital noise and sharpening etc.. So they can produce stunning 2k image right now and the only thing they would like is more DR and more color depth. I agree with them - 2k output is sufficient (for me). But we are talking about professional quality true 2k. Consumer cameras is different story - until now they were not even true 2k and suffered from much bigger problems than DR and color depth. We had to deal with softness, banding, moire, rolling shutter, digital noise, low bitrate, false colors and different other artifacts. If you just add 10bit and 15 stop DR to this crap it would be just a little better crap. 4k recording format is one of the solutions for many consumer camera artifacts - not only resolution. Panasonic and Sony are making huge improvements in consumer level cameras from the other side. Full pixels readout, better codec (higher bit-rate) etc.: Sony A7S: great resolution -could say true 2k (it is not 4k camera [without other gear]), great DR, codec, low-light, picture profiles like SLOG... Panasonic: 4k cameras with high bit-rate, great DR and full pixel readout - it is huge step up for 2k delivery format - 4k downscaling means true 2k resolution, less banding, blocking, digital niose... For 2k delivery format Panasonic Sony and Samsung made HUGE leap forward in consumer (budget) level cameras, while Canon and Nikon did nothing. PS.: You want just 10bit and 13 stop DR 2k? Just get BMPCC, it has all of that and more (RAW). But if you want other improvements, here comes Panasonic/Sony/Samsung with true 2k delivery resolution, no moire, less digital noise, more professional settings etc..

But they are talking about delivery format. To get 2k image they say, they are using often higher resolution cameras (and for 4k delivery they say you will need 6k camera). About consumer cameras: - Sony does not have actually 4k camera. A7S is 2k (you need other expensive professional gear to get 4k) and the image quality is superb - huge improvement. - Panasonic/Samsung are promoting their 4k TVs, but actualy their 4k cameras is very good direction to get much better 2k output.