John Matthews

So many people loved the RX1 series of cameras. Leica is Leica with the price. Granted, the Minolta TC-1 was made of rather exotic materials to get to that weight. Heck, I'd be happy with a hard plastic version with "only" APS-C sensor and f/2.8 lens. Really, the Rocoh GR (a rather popular camera) would be perfect if it had some reasonable video features. My point is here we are, 28 years after the TC-1, and we cannot do better with a digital point and shoot. I'm hoping for OMDS to make something.

The Minolta TC-1, 200g (with battery), f3.5, FF, 28mm lens (5 glass elements in 5 groups). This camera, made in 1996, is the target for small, compact digital point and shoot.

In recent years, there have been a few, but mainly at the long end where size REALLY matters. I think Canon made a 600mm F/11 (fixed aperture). IMO, in terms of size, it still doesn't compete well with the Panasonic 100-300mm. Fast and wide lenses on FF will probably be impossible to beat for M43. Even a 24mm f/1.8 on FF won't be beaten by a auto-focus version of the equivalent on M43. However, there are other lenses in the middle that make more sense. A very small and light-weight FF body with a tiny F/4 lens could kill M43 unless more effort is made to make a smaller M43 body. There is still a market for M43. I've seen prices on the used market go up and up. It's not as if people are really dumping M43 without more new shooters buying in. There is still demand and its high. If Panasonic developed a GM1-sized camera more pancake updates, wouldn't people buy it? Or, would people say "my FF camera is small enough; I'll just use a phone on the go".

At some point M43 was about small bodies and small lenses. Now, it's about is about bodies with more features due to the smaller sensor and "smaller than FF" lenses. This must change because FF sensor will inevitably catch up to the features and cost less than the M43 sensor. The M43 lenses will probably be smaller, but it won't take other manufacturers long to make smallish, f8 versions that compete with the M43 lenses.

I have an M1 iMac; so, I don't have the latest and greatest, but does really well with FCPX. The problem is, after several hours of processing, I can't really tell much of a difference except for compression artifact in 4k. At least the M1 is super efficient. It does decently with aliasing (electrical wires in 1080p), but moiré is another beast apparently. In fact, I don't know any consumer software that fixes it. The biggest fix for moiré is more resolution out of camera (and even then, without a low pass filter you'll have some frequency with it).

I have version 3.1.11. I have had excellent results deinterlacing and slightly upresing 540i 60fps footage to 1080p 60fps. However, when I take 4k or even 1080p footage and try to improve, it's almost never worth the energy (time and electricity). This software is still in its infancy- it doesn't even correct moiré- a major point.

The A6700 is bigger and heavier than the Sigma FP.

*for L-mount

Very good point. I'd say the nail in the coffin is the G100D, not the G9ii. I don't think the G9ii is selling as well as they'd thought, but have no information. I only know that there's been great enthusiasm on YouTube; yet, they're certainly not sold out. The G100D is a lazy upgrade and if it doesn't sell well, they might come out with something else. I know that Sean from Lumix livestreams is always saying: "M43 isn't about size, but features". While this isn't entirely false, it isn't entirely true either. I've even asked why don't they make a F2.8 pancake and his response was "there are too many IQ compromises"; so, I guess Sony can do it, but not Panasonic. It's time for Panasonic to either focus M43 on small or get rid of it because I don't think this strategy is going to work for long. They've confused all of their M43 users. Now, there are so many other options out there that they need to stop the bleeding. That's not me. GX85 is a "one and done" camera in my book. Also, if I were going Sony for video, why would I go for M mount if that negates the one feature (AF in video) that Sony does best? Does the Techart do proper continuous AF in video? I'm a tiny camera and "big" camera combo seeker. I want a modern version of the GX850 at 270g, not the "heavy" 429g of a GX85. As mentioned before, I'd rather get the E-P7 at 337g with better IBIS, AF, and full-sensor readout.

Yes, maybe I should have prefaced my statement with "log files meant for 10bit". Yes, they will not look great in 8bit. I don't really like shooting log anymore, only sometimes. I think most cameras do quite well in the normal profiles. I remember the XC10. Do you still have it and shoot with it? That was when Canon was 100% into making great concepts suck so you buy something pricier.

My first real camera was a Pentax K1000. My first digital camera was the Olympus E-420 DSLR (at the time, it was the world's smallest DSLR). I especially like DSLR's for the ability to compose without turning on the camera. With mirrorless, I always seem to have a battery counter in the back of my mind. Sure, I could bring more batteries, but I still cannot get rid of the counter. That is the whole point for why I started this thread- a small phone and a small camera is better than a big phone that is also a camera.

That's a nice selection. I've thought about getting the K10D before. My question was more about what camera you have with you at all times, not for everyday shooting. The reason I ask is that I personally find smart phones way too big for one-handed operation now and I'd rather have a small, cheap smart phone with a camera in the pocket than just a large smart phone.

I have yet to see any examples of banding of a 4k 4:2:0 100mbps file when put on a 1080p timeline. I can't remember banding on a 4k timeline either. Mathematically, you are correct that 1080p 4:2:2 10bit has more information than 4k 4:2:0 8bit, but I haven't found any examples that prove it objectively- most of the 4k 8bit files that I see end up looking slightly more detailed; punch in and the difference is even bigger. There is definitely something to be said for down-sampled footage though.

It's close, but the Sigma with one of the smallest lenses is 637g! Yes, you get FF, but the GX850 with the 20mm is only 356g and much smaller. Also, the Sigma can't even do flash photography. I can sell all my M43 gear and have sold most of it. I'm only left with the small (and less expensive) stuff. The fact is that I enjoy shooting my GX850 and I want a more modern replacement. Concerning Canon, I just don't trust them (R5) and I'd certainly never buy anything RF- too expensive, too closed. It's a company that will only change if there's a scandal by pushing the cripple hammer too far (R5). I wouldn't not buy the G100D. I had the G100 and shot a ton with it for a year. If the G100D actually has a significantly better EVF, I might buy it. Unfortunately, I think that was a seriously lazy update to a camera that has really sold well. What camera do you take with you everywhere?

Just put a 20MP sensor in the GX850, give it slightly better thermals (15 minute 4k record time), PDAF, decent microphones or mic jack, electronic stabalization, and I'll buy it. I won't be the only one buying that camera for $900-$1000.

I'm not a business person, but something tells me there's more potential than 10,000 units per year with a population of 7.5b on the planet and 1% able to afford the device and .01% who want one and 1% of those who will. That's bigger than your number (7.5M).

The reason I'm talking about Panasonic is simply because they're the only ones with livestreams as far as I know. Also, they listen (or maybe look). The cameras you mention have fixed lenses and/or no lens options to get under 350g or even 500g. Few of the Panasonic cameras that I've had actually have waveforms... just histogram and zebras (I prefer the Olympus histogram by far as it shows where the focus point falls in the histogram). The R50 and R100 look cool, but they're still bigger than the G100 without the lens options. Also, I refuse to reward Canon for 2 reasons: 1) the R5 overheating silliness; 2) it's a VERY closed mount. The sigma is super-cool, but still big and no small lens options (again). The same could be said about the Nikon Z30. I talk about Panasonic because they seem to be the only ones who could make a DSLR small enough with modern features and still have lenses that would work- no one else does! I disagree. I think they got spooked by smart phones.

Those cameras certainly have their place, but I'm not giving up. I'm going to go to every single Lumix live stream to ask more questions about small DSLM cameras. Fortunately, I'm not the only one either. I won't let it go. All those other cameras you mention don't have proper ergonomics. That style of camera has been around forever and they still don't have nice-looking images IMO. The industry also knows this because when they often hire out someone to make promotional videos that look like their shot on a phone, the final video is shot on a GH6 or something. The only reason for me to use one is to hide the fact I'm shooting video. I realize they're making some progress on the computational side of video, but there must be a market. Look at all the X100V's that have been sold. It would seem most of the manufacturers are spooked by the market. Did they lose massive money on the GX, GM and LX series? There must be a middle ground between releasing a GM5, LX10, LX100, GX850, GX85 and all the ZS/TZ series of cameras and releasing ONLY a G100 at 355g in the past few years? I only ask for ONE decently-sized and modern DSLM. Is that too much to ask? Everyone that wants to go to a phone has done it already- there's a market for the ones that are left. Something's up.

When weighing 10bit versus 8bit, the debate was particularly pronounced in the era of 1080p. While 1080p 10bit, depending on the camera, has issues like moiré and aliasing, these concerns are often gone with 4k 8bit. The redeeming quality of 10bit is in H.265, where file sizes remain more manageable, only marginally larger than 4k 8bit H.264. IMO: 4k 8bit 4:2:0 > 1080p 10bit 4:2:2 due to: Absence of banding Diminished moiré Reduced aliasing Enhanced detail and cropping capabilities While 4k 10bit holds an objective and mathematical superiority over 4k 8bit, its perceptible advantages are often overlooked by many.

I know the IBIS thing. Nothing worse than super shaky footage. It goes way back to my Pentax K5 (the first large sensor with IBIS if I'm not mistaken). Almost every camera I've owned had it. Of course, you can turn it off and everything, but I like the limitation of not having it now... nothing handheld or if handheld, use the steadycam (which means I almost never use it).

Those are good points. I would argue 10bit to 8bit comparisons almost never look like the 10bit file is 4x better. When shot properly, the 8bit file often indistinguishable to the 10bit file. The real question is: “Exactly how much can you screw 8bit up and still fix it?”

I downloaded all of them. My conclusion (as I thought): stay away from overexposure. Underexposure is scary, but noise can be dealt with. Overexposure results in lost colors and a strange halo softening that you don't have with underexposure.

I've come to the same conclusions. IBIS and rolling shutter at the clear problems with the GX850, but any sort of tripod fixes that. I have a steadycam or kit lens for the rest, but really prefer the locked down shots right now. I've grown a little tired of the IBIS look but fully admit its practicality.

Great work, @kye! I'd be interested at looking at the full resolution images if possible. After doing the WB tests, do you think there's more latitude in slightly blue, magenta, or green version. I remember that Gerald Undone did a test some time ago and found more latitude in a warmer WB than a bluer WB.

I'd just like to clarify my goal: I want the smallest, lightest kit possible to produce either a good enough 1080p (free of fatal flaws like moiré or aliasing) or 4k image. I'm looking for an equivalent of a super 35 f/2.8 image at around 28mm S35 field of view (around 42mm FF equivalent). I'd like to fit it with a variable ND and CPL filters.