Panasonic shows interest in fixed lens compact camera with FT sensor.

Share

Image courtesy: Quesabesde.

Panasonic manager Michiharu Uematsu had a press conference in Barcelona and there is an interesting report at Quesabesde (translation here). The main topic was the present and future of high end compact cameras with fixed lens.

Umeatsu compared the Panasonic LX7 versus the Sony RX100. He claims that the larger size advantage of the RX100 sensor is overridden by the lower brightness of the RX100 zoom. At the wide end the image quality of the LX7 and RX100 are equal while the LX7 tops the RX100 on the tele end. That said Uematsu also talked about a possible future fixed lens camera with larger Four Thirds sensor. He said that it would have to be smaller than the GX1, feature a fixed and bright f/1.7 or f/2.0 lens and price could be around 700 Euro. But Uematsu does n0t know if there would be a high demand for a model like that.

So guess what…let us help Panasonic! Here is the poll:

Would you buy a GF sized camera with GX build quality, FT sensor, f/1.7 fixed lens and 700 procie tag?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Let’s see if you like that camera or not!

LX7 price check at: Amazon, Olympus US store, Adorama, B&H, eBay.
Gariz LX7 case on eBay (Click here).

Share
  • LeGO

    Make fast f/1.8 or f/2.0 compact zoom lenses instead.

    • Anonymous

      I would not ever buy a non interchangeable lens camera with a fixed focal length lens.

      I can live with primes as long as I can swap them out. This is a terrible idea. It will never sell. A super zoom constant F2.8 lens camera is a better idea. Oh wait we already have that in the FZ200.

      • Jus Sayin

        DP1 DP2 RX1

        • narutogrey

          You just listed 3 of the worst selling cameras of all time. Although to be fair, the RX1 only just came out and the high entry price is more of a barrier than the fact that the lens is non-interchangeable.

          • 2chainz

            so dp1 flopped so bad they decided to make a dp1s, dp1x dp2? and since you consider the rx1 among the worst selling cameras, your saying the rx1 is bad?

    • Anonymous

      Since a lot of people seem to have misunderstood this, allow me to clarify:

      FIXED LENS does not = Fixed FOCAL LENGTH lens.

      What is being proposed here is a camera with a non-removable lens, also known as a FIXED lens, so it could easily be a zoom, and indeed all indications from the original post are that a zoom is being discussed, not a fixed focal length lens.

      • spam

        Agree, the “spec” doesn’t say anything axcept (possible) sensor size and that the lens isn’t interchangable. I don’t get how people can vote yes or no without knowing anything about zoom or not, zoom range, size, viewfinder or not, tiltscreen or not.

        Personally I’d consider a 1″ or mFT-sized with a fixed lens as long as it had 3-4x zoom, was reasonably bright (RX100 is bordeline) and had viewfinder and tiltable screen. It would of course also need a size advantage compared to a small mFT model or a Nikon V1/V2.

  • sweln

    I own an Oly OMD EM5 with currently 20mm 1.7 and the lazy 12-50mm zoom.
    I’m about to get rid of the zoom and get 12mm, 45mm, 60mm M,75mm.
    I also own a Fuji X10 wich is a very very nice camera (28-112mm 2.0-2.8).

    What would I like?

    If it wqas a fixed lens camera :
    FT sensor with a 50mm 1.4 lens + wide angle and teleconverter ad-dons to have a 35mm and a 100mm in the bag. That would do it IMO.

  • ilkiem32

    1) micro43 sensor (from Sony), not worse then sensor in Fuji X100
    2) fixed lens equivalent 35mm (e.g. 17mm)
    3) f/1.7 or f/1.4, faster then lens in X100
    4) fast AF, like in GH3 or OMD
    5) small size, like EPM2
    6) in-build EVF or hybrid OVH (like in Fuji)
    7) in-build flash with remote control of external flashes
    8) waterproof or splashproof

    Direct compatition for Fuji X100, Sigma DP1/DP2… If it should be different then EPM2 with 20/1.7, small size and viewer are necessary.

    • Anonymous

      There isn’t exactly a whole lot space to compete with a Fuji x100. Its already a very niche camera.

    • simon

      I agree on most points.

      however:
      -size: smaller like an rx100 (with a retractable lens)
      -no evf, just lcd (because of the size)
      -very good image stabilzer

      a truly pocketable camera with crazy image quality.

  • I’d rather see a new system from Panasonic that has a m4/3 mount and a S35mm (1.6x crop) sensor or a 35mm (FF) sensor. That way I could adapt manual focus lenses to it and live happily ever after.

  • bonzo

    Not a good idea. There are enough small bodies for m4/3 plus small lenses. I dont see much benefit from a fixed sensor/lens 4/3 camera.

  • A GF sized camera with GX build quality, FT sensor, f/1.7 fixed lens and priced at 700 euro/pounds/dollars would need an android operating system and be priced at 500 or available on contract….

    Consumer complaints at that particular target market could esily be rectified by having an audio (voice) warning on camera start up/shut down and at low battery level as most consumers simply forget to charge the battery and also make the chargers work via mini usb then they could be charged of mobile phone chargers (I’ve seen this happen loads of times amongst wedding guests)

    Uematsu is right about the RX100 though :-]

  • Yun

    It should a bit late but it still relevant for such camera but I still prefer interchangeable lens .
    Someone should ask Utmattsu the whereabouts of the very highend camera he promised 1 year ago .
    The L style camera above GX ? This is the most important .

    • peevee

      “Someone should ask Utmattsu the whereabouts of the very highend camera he promised 1 year ago .”

      Well, the price of GH3 is certainly high end. Especially with the 12-35/2.8 – it would be what, $2500? While Sony A77 (with bigger, higher res sensor) with equivalent 16-50/2.8 in kit is only about $1600 now ($1698 on Amazon, which is not the cheapest). And not even much bigger, now that GH3 is so big. And choice of lenses is better, and every one of them is stabilized with Sony IBIS. And of course PDAF which actually can track fast movement.
      You have to be a real fan (i.e. stupid) to go for Panasonic between the two. How this Uematsu is going to explain this failure?

      • How ironic, the advantage of m4/3 is size, and yet Panasonic throws this out in favor of perception.

        • homer

          neither o you obviously have held either a GH3 or a A77. If you did you wouldnt think that

  • > and 700 price tag?

    For that money I would want it to have EVF. Or at least swivel LCD. (Tilt doesn’t cut it.)

    P.S. And there were nothing special about GX1 build quality, beside aesthetics.

  • I dont understand

    What will be the advantage of such fixed lens compact if we compare it to small micro43 body with small prime (like 20/1.7)? Will it be smaller? Will it has EVF or OVF? Will it will we waterproof?

    I understand compact with sensor as much as possible and fast zoom, eg. 1” sensor and zoom f/2-2.8, equivalent 24-57mm or 28-100mm. It will be smaller then smallest mirrorless with zoom lens. But with prime? Where is an advantage?

    • Michael

      The real question: Would the camera have a viewfinder? If yes, then yes. If no, then no.

    • simon

      it would have to be very much smaller, like an rx100 otherwise it doesn’t make sens. you should be able to carry it in your pocket all the time without noticing it. that for me would be the wohle point.

      even a om-d with 20/1.7 fits in my jacket pocket but I notice it also my gf1 with the 20. to make sense this has to be much much smaller. (and it certainly is possible, at least for sony it would be)

  • “He claims that the larger size advantage of the RX100 sensor is overridden by the lower brightness of the RX100 zoom. At the wide end the image quality of the LX7 and RX100 are equal while the LX7 tops the RX100 on the tele end.”

    Not according to the tests I have seen. Anyone seen contradictory results?

    What we want is not a large sensor with fixed lens, but a LX8 with a 1″ sensor – a RX100 competitor with faster lens. That would be the first compact camera I would be interested in.

    • Anonymous

      Yep, this is just wishful thinking from Panasonic. Is the web buzzing about the RX100 or the LX7?

      • Correct. The LX7 price has already collapsed here in the US.

        The MBA approach to this would be something like this: figure out the elasticity of demand on pricing (e.g. given equally compelling products at price X, 2X, and 10X), what’s the curve of sales look like? Now, look at the sales of the LX7, RX100, and RX1, which is hitting below that curve and which above? That tells you something about what’s resonating with the market. Right now, that’s not the LX7 and it is the RX100.

        Now, you could also point to the marketing side of things, as sometimes you can market a product above the curve. Is either Panasonic or Sony optimally marketing their respective products here? Nope (though it appears that Uematsu-san is trying to do that with this presentation). The problem has always been that “lower noise” has been demonstrably harder to market than “more pixels.” Everyone understands the relationships between numbers, but the noise argument is much more nuanced and tougher to make. And, even if you make it, the customer still wants “more pixels” ;~).

        • THOM HOGAN 11th September 2011
          ” If I’m reading Nikon’s forecasts correctly, it appears as if they think they’ll sell as many of their mirrorless cameras as Olympus or Panasonic within the first six months of its appearance.” ………didnt quite work out that way did it?

          • admin

            Hi YouDidntdidyou. it was Nikon’s forecast and not Thom’s forecast. So don’t blame Thom 🙂

          • Not sure why that’s relevant to this conversation.

            But Admin is right. I was simply trying to make sense of Nikon’s forecast. Note that Nikon’s reported and forecast “sales” are to subsidiaries, not to customers. So they appear to have loaded up the subsidiaries with inventory. How’d that work out? Well, they had to do big fire sales of the J1 and V1 in order to launch the J2 and V2. The V1 fire sale is still ongoing, so there must have been quite a lot of inventory sitting around. Indeed, Nikon took the MAP (minimum advertised price) requirement off the V1, letting retailers here basically sell it for whatever they could get for it.

            So, to put this in context of the discussion: The Nikon 1 series sold (to customers) at under the expected elasticity of demand curve, both at the original pricing and it appears even today at the reduced pricing. Much like the LX7, the V2 basically started selling at a discount to list, which is a good indicator that the manufacturer knows they didn’t generate enough “above the curve” demand.

            So I stand by both things I wrote. Care to stand by what you wrote about who would get the investment stake in Olympus? ;~)

            • @Thom Hogan
              everything I said about the Olympus affair was correct,I said Termeno was in the running whereas you said they weren’t nor capable but you were incorrect.

    • Steve

      +1. RX100 has a large advantage at the wide end and is about equal to the LX7 at the long end. In bright light the larger sensor from the RX100 also has a big advantage.

  • AG

    This is something I have been saying was needed over a year ago. The RX100 is excellent, so a MFT fixed lens compact would welcome.

  • BdV

    I can imagine a brand new LX7 follow-up: LX10. Like a combination of GX1 and LX7, with some RX100 or even a bit of RX1 + X100 flavoring. I’d say at least a 1.7 lens, the ultimate challenge between fast and compact, not bigger than the 23mm lens of the X100, but 1.4 would be so nice (don’t forget the built in ND-filter). 17mm is probably just fine. A clear sun flare resistant ovf (I could also live with evf) in the corner would also be highly appreciated, as well as a tiltable screen. Thank you.

    I can’t believe he doesn’t know there would be a high demand…

  • For that target price I’d prefer an interchangeable lens camera. Whatever EPL or EPM with the 20mm Panasonic. I far prefer olympus philosophy and interface, even if I do like better GF2 body…

  • Anonymous

    I would buy a camera with
    LX7 body type
    LX7 lens (F1.4-2.3 24-90mm) or similar but it has to start at least 24mm
    RX100 IQ
    XZ-2 lens dial
    WEATHER PROOF
    GPS
    Touch screen
    EVF

    Nothing revolutionary by todays standard but I still don’t think I’ll see one for a long time 🙁

  • kesztio

    I already have it: G3 + 20/1.7. 😀

  • Anonymous

    If it has a 90mm equiv fixed portrait lens it might be interesting. That would be something new.

    • Anonymous

      90mm equiv. is extremely limited and would appeal to only a very very small number of people. Remember that cameras have large fixed costs irrelevant of how many they sell.

      • peevee

        Absolutely. Who shoots head-and-shoulders portraits on compacts and why? Smartphone cameras are all between 28 and 35 mm for a very good reason.

  • Fepate

    The comment about the LX7 making up for its small sensor with its faster lens compared to the RX100 is interesting considering the recent dpreview high-end compact camera comparison. Dpreview made this graphic:
    http://4.static.img-dpreview.com/files/articles/2367736880/Graph.jpg?v=1877
    And indeed, from about 35mm to 60mm equiv zoom, the RX100 advantage is pretty minimal. Beyond 60mm, the LX7 is clearly ahead. And that assumes equivalent sensor technology. Typically, smaller sensors get new technology first. So what the Panasonic guy says is not totally false. A bit exaggerated is all.

    • Anonymous

      I’m sorry, did you miss the staggering advantage at 28mm?

      At 28mm the RX100 is basically the same as a m4/3 camera like the GF3 or E-PM1 with the 14mm lens. That’s the advantage of the RX100. That’s what everyone is talking about.

      Unless lighting conditions are absolutely perfect, all P&S are completely shitty when zoomed in.

      • ha

        It’s a DOF graphics. For exposure one has to recalibrate by sensor size. What we learn from it: RX100 lens gets really slow fast, at 35mm equiv. already lost more than a stop. So low light means big noses…

        • Steve

          All smaller sensor cameras are crap for DOF at the long end. The difference between the LX7 and RX100 is minimal at the long end. The zoom is just for extra flexibility. For portrait DOF you need a larger sensor with a bright lens. No way around it.

      • Fepate

        >> I’m sorry, did you miss the staggering advantage at 28mm?

        No, I had assumed that that staggering advantage would persist much further up the zoom range than just to 35mm. For everyday use, it really limits the pictures that will see a staggering advantage. Its an interesting situation where Sony has merged engineering with marketing and have really got people over-excited over the RX100. It does have better image quality than the competition, I agree, but not nearly to the extent that of the hype out there.

  • Miroslav

    Fixed lens camera with FT sensor approach is wrong. With m4/3 bodies and lenses being relatively small, there’s nothing to be gained from making such a thing. If you like a particular focal length, just keep the lens on camera all the time. There’s been a lot of examples of “me too” products in the camera world and this analysis by Panasonic is just another example of that kind of thinking. They’ve seen RX100’s success and want to go after the market share in that segment. Why don’t they make a breakthrough product of their own? He rightfully concluded that 7 Mpx sensor is enough for most. So why don’t they make a 7 Mpx high DR / low noise 4/3 sensor and put it in an ILC for example? Or make a large sensor underwater compact with manual controls? No, it’s way easier to imitate Sony, the market research is already done…

  • frankv

    Why would we buy a fixed 1.7 lens cam with m43 sensor when we already have the GF and the 20/1.7 ? Fixes all your problems.

  • How about 25mm f/1, then I’d bite!

    That’s a 50mm f/2 equivalent with f/1 SPEED. OOH BABY.

    With a fixed lens, the AF can be really tuned to the lens/sensor combo.

    I know Olympus are chasing the mass market, but perhaps it’s time to boost the brand’s appeal with a low-volume/high-quality drool camera. It’d prove a small sensor is no holding back.

  • I agree with manager Michiharu Uematsu, it would have to be smaller than the GX1. Why not just keep improving the GX1? I don’t understand the interest in a fixed lens camera when we have so many more lens choices with the current Micro 4/3’s system. I would rather see Panasonic keep it’s eye on the Micro 4/3’s interchangeable lens system.

  • Timccr

    Looking at his screen you need more pixels for an A4 print than for an A3???? Oh, I see it’s for “normal purpose”. Isn’t that what people use their phones for? Or lately even their stupid tablet things, which look most awkward from what I’ve seen. But if it’s for “normal purpose” why call it “premiere”?

    • Zack

      The A3 print is listed as 200dpi vs 300, which is why he’s got a lower megapixel count for it. 😛

      • peevee

        And for a good reason, people will look at it from father away.

      • I am horrified to see “dpi” on that chart when clearly it should say “ppi.” For example, the image is 8×10 inches at 300 ppi. You would want to print this image at higher dpi than ppi, usually twice as high: an 8×10″ 300 ppi image should be printed at least at 600 dpi. Most printers have much higher than 600 dpi capability anyway.

        Amazing to see dpi where it should say ppi in a Panasonic presentation.

    • roger48

      Try reading it properly! He has used a lower DPI for the A3 picture.

      • Timccr

        I did read it properly and he has less pixels for A3 than A4.

        • Zack

          Lower DPI = less pixels.

          • DPI is a printer output setting that has nothing to do with pixels. When you print an image, the printers DPI setting must be higher than the image’s PPI.

      • It should say PPI on the chart. Under “How many pixels we need” [sic], he’s listing DPI, which is nonsense.

        He is referring actually to PPI (scaled image at a particular PPI, suitable for printing).

        PPI refers to the pixels per inch the scaled image has.

        DPI is a printer output setting. There are no pixels involved, but more or less little dots of sprayed ink. In order to render the image resolution (for example, 300 ppi), you need to print at dpi higher than ppi. PPI is image resolution, DPI is print resolution.

        You can take a low-res image, for example a 100 ppi image, and print it smoothly at 600 dpi, but the image will still have low resolution.

  • uiti

    I want a different sensor sizes, don’t mind more bigger or smaller.

  • Anonymous

    Here is the problem, extending and retracting lenses suck in dust and wear out, then you need a new camera and lens. Why not just make a damn rangefinder style body and quit this obnoxious BS, with everything but that. If they want small fast zooms, then shorten the range, to half the current ranges and sell more fast zooms. There, problem solved, what’s next?

  • Matt

    I’d be interested in Panny’s take on the RX100. I say go for a similar size sensor, but with less megapixels than the RX100. 20MP’s is overkill on a P&S camera. I’d also like to see a better aperture throughout the zoom lens if possible compared to the RX100.

    • peevee

      Actually, 20 mpix is not overkill if you consider than with just 2x digital zoom (which on their sensor makes the used area of the sensor about as big as the used area of the sensor in LX7) and decent lens sharpness in the center of the frame, you still have the respectable 5 mpix. In good light you can go even further, to 3x-4x, until you fill your whole HDTV or typical computer screen without any loss of quality. Try that with a smaller sensor, where diffraction alone turns digitally zoomed pictures into mush.

      • Timccr

        But you could get an even bigger screen and look at it from further away and then you don’t need so many pixels. Apparently.

        • peevee

          No, if you look with a whole picture in sharp view from whatever distance needed to observe the whole picture with both eyes, a human can only see 1-2 mpix, after that any increase is imperceptible.

          • That’s all good and fine and true, but if you look closer, you won’t be happy. I always look at details in photos from very close up.

  • Anonymous

    Make a rangfinder type body, upgrade the 20 1.7 and 14 2.5 and make them better with faster AF and try to make some other small primes that are excellent optically, like maybe a 25 2.0, 17 2.5, 10 3.5.

  • Camaman

    fixed fast zoom lens is an OK idea, but fixef 17mm f1.8 is a very poor one.
    f1.8 is not fast at all. Make it 0.95 and iso50 ant then we have something.

  • Anonymous

    Price should be just 500us dollar

  • Bob B.

    I see no real reason to buy a camera with a fixed lens that is also available in approx. the same size, sensor and price with interchangeable lenses?
    Plus I already own 2 MFT cameras and about 9 lenses.. So that is definite no for me.
    The RX100 is a really cool camera because of its size, sensor and build quality….but again…I have a 5D III and about 9 lenses…and although I would LOVE to own one…it,s cost makes it an extreme luxury purchase 4 me…and I would find the camera limiting (sometimes that is a good thing…makes you try harder!), and I would have to deal with yet ANOTHER menus system….so I would not buy that camera either. it is cool though!!!

    • Steve

      Panasonic could make a fast fixed lens 43 camera the same size as the RX100. Take a look at the size of the lens on the X100 vs the RX100. They are about the same diameter, so you just need to eliminate the EVF and reduce the overall size of the body. The lens might stick out a bit but the X100 lens doesn’t stick out that much and this might be less with the smaller 43 sensor.

      http://camerasize.com/compare/#133,332

      • peevee

        Fixed lens with a fixed focal length is a bad idea period. Very niche product. If the lens is fixed, it at least be versatile and good, i.e. zoom, and not 3x starting from f/3.5 either.

        • Bob B.

          Oh..Oh…I got the RX100 confused with the RX1. I was thinking RX1.
          Sorry…I was on a whole other page….I thought that Pany was comparing to the full frame RX1. DUH!

  • The Other Chris

    Would it be like a digital Olympus Stylus Epic? 35mm equivalent and slides easily into a pants pocket? If not, then no.

  • jevfp

    To make a new line of a camera compact lens with four third sensor is really good idea to compete with RX100 is really good but it will be no interest for me,as i already have at least two body and several lens,.also i sense this idea is little bit TOO LATE,.panasonic is really had no idea in term of innovation ,.but i guess not only panasonic,.even Canon and Nikon don’t have a boldness to make a compact camera like the RX1

  • George

    LX7 with RX100 sensor. I would pay RX100 price for it

    • Steve

      It is funny that Panasonic thinks there may not be a market for a $700 fixed lens 43 camera, yet the smaller sensor RX100 is selling like hotcakes for the same price. They still don’t get it!

  • peevee

    Looking at the slide, this guy from Panasonic did not get the point. RX100 is slow zoom? f/1.8 at the most useful focal length is not slow at all. It is not f/3.5-5.6 crap in your typical compact or kit lens (God forbid 3.5-6.3 in Oly 12-50 and many superzooms or 4-5.6 in tele zooms).
    That is why RX100 and LX7, while released at approximately the same time, RX100 has lots of sales and holds its high price of $650, but LX7 went from $500 to $275. The guy is simply stupid, or just tries to cover his incompetent ass.

  • peevee

    ” At the wide end the image quality of the LX7 and RX100 are equal ”

    It is an incredibly wrong statement. The sensor in RX100 wins by 2 full stops (the image circle in LX7 does not use the whole 1/1.7″ sensor), while the lens loses 2/3 of stop. Hence, RX100 wins by 1 1/3 stops (like 4-5 years of sensor development if you look at what is going on), while also being significantly smaller and lighter.

    • Fepate

      >> ”At the wide end the image quality of the LX7 and RX100 are equal ”
      >>
      >> It is an incredibly wrong statement.

      At the widest end, yes, but at 35mm equivalent focal length, which you could still consider to be in the wide end, they are pretty close. So, although his statement is a big exaggeration, there is some merit to his argument.

  • Henry

    Panasonic has a great camera that no other company has in the market currently: FZ200, a megazoom with constant aperture f2.8. Panasonic can out-manuveur Sony by having that MFT sensor in GX1 style body (though I have a weakness for Fuji X-series retro styling) and a bright, constant aperture zoom. You won’t expand your market beyond enthusiast and hipster by having a fixed prime lens. It has to be a zoom, 25-70 f2.8, 24-85 f2.8 etc. My favorite: 24-50mm f2.0 pancake zoom with flash bounce.

    Do it Pana! Do it!

    • PS

      I like this idea. It isn’t clear from the translation whether we are talking about a fixed focal length or a fixed zoom lens (i.e., not interchangeable).

    • peevee

      Well, that “amazing” constant f/2.8 zoom in FZ200 is like f/9 constant zoom for m43, or f/18 constant zoom for FF in terms of total light (i.e. image quality with similar sensor tech, and that Pana sensor is nothing special).
      The formula in Fuji X-S1 is much more useful, at least on the wide end.

  • Optical1

    I wouldn’t buy this cam as listed by Admin. Make the camera a 4/3 sensor, 12-25 zoom, with an EVF in a similar size to the LX5 and you have yourself a winner. Hell, use a 1″ sensor if you have to.

  • JC

    The camera really has to be something that current M43 ILC cannot do. If it can’t change lens, the camera should be like:
    1. rangefinder style with EVF (or maybe OVF since the lens will be fast prime)
    2. fully waterproof for underwater photography (since it can’t change lens, it’s probably easy to make this work)
    3. capacitive touch screen
    4. integrated ND filter

    Panasonic needs to avoid overlapping their GF and GX lines with another M43 P&S camera.

  • GL

    Better would be to sell a camera with a good kit lens, or even many!

    And the natural progression is to update the 20 mm and reissue the GF1 with slight improvements.

    Nobody would bother to look at a NEX or even Oly (nevermind the dinosaurs) with that kind of a deal around.

    This way you can actually attract serious people to your system. Since they have something excellent that keeps its value, they have a reason to stick to it and will keep on buying lenses and new camera bodies.

    I think the 20 mm is the single biggest strength of the whole M43 system. Build on that, extract the maximum leverage.

    • simon

      yeah I hope panasonic will update the 20/1.7.

      what I want:
      -watersealing
      -faster autofocus
      -same imagequality (or better of course)
      -maybe a even number of aperture blades to give nicer stars for nightscenes
      -included hood

      I would buy that in a second, would be the most wanted mft list right away for me, could even be quite a bit more expensive than the original version I would still buy it.

      • peevee

        “what I want:
        -watersealing
        -faster autofocus”

        The lens does not have internal focus, it moves from element when focusing. With that design, it both hard to make fast autofocus, and impossible to make good weather seal (as it sucks air when focusing).

        The design will have to be changed, and then it is Oly 17/1.8 with a rubber ring on the mount.

        • GL

          Thanks PW for a very informative reply!

  • Patboyslim

    I’d consider if it is really pocketable (maximum thickness 1.5″ inch of the whole package), fixed lens, fix focal length 17mm (34mm equivalent) f2 aperture or faster, built in flag with image stabilization.

  • Mick

    Interesting to see that no one talks about the video abilities of the rx100.Thats what attracts people to that cam.I am a big Oly fan,but they just don’t get it.People love having a pocketable camcorder with good lowlight quality + good picture quality in one body.

  • Drazick

    Admin,
    Could you please add a Google+ Page for 43Rumors?
    Thanks.

    • admin

      yep, have to create such a site yet..

  • my name is mar sensor

    As long as it has mar sensor (just like my lx3 and gh2!) I’m in for a real gf1 sized/upgrade, black BTW 🙂
    Must have 17-20mm f/1.4 or f/1.8 and open firmware for VK/ND and rest od the team.

    Ps. Warm greetings for Uematsu San.

  • The succes of the RX100 is a due to the pocketable size, the sensor size, and a fast zoom for everyday situations (thanks to the fixed / in body retractable lens to keep the camera pocketable), the + is also the manual mode in video. I don’t see any advantage of a fixe focal (you can have it with a GF5 and the tiny 14mm or the 20mm).
    So a mini GX1 with a fast zoom and a size like the S100 / RX100 will be great.
    I think the future LX8 must be this kind of compact camera to be competitive with the RX100.

  • Renato S.

    I would like a 4/3 sized sensor with fast zoom, same focal length range of the LX7 (in 35mm equivalent), which would be 12-45, it could be 12-35 if they wanted.

    I know that a fast zoom won’t be so portable, but I would go for a cost-benefit ratio, as with a non interchangeable lens you can also make it smaller, I would like to see what can they get out of it. Can they make the lens f/1.8~2.8 or even f/1.8~3.5?

    I wouldn’t mind to not have all the video feats of the GH3 because they wouldn’t do it, but I hope it could have at least the AVCHD 2.0 that the NEX cameras have. It’s like “build a worth version of the Canon G1X” but you can keep the pixel count down and get a better DR and/or ISO performance.

    And for what it’s worth, make it look good.

  • Pixel Judge

    Many good comments here on this good topic!
    Sensor Size vs Potability vs Affordability vs Lens Speed vs Image Quality.

    Camera companies will tell you the entry level compact cameras don’t make much profit anymore, because more and more people are using their smart phones to take photos instead. That’s including my parents, my sisters, and my wife, as 8mp is plenty enough for them. The G9, G10, S100, LX5 & XZ1 I brought them the past few years are left on the shelves.
    As a new X-E1 owner (former D300 owner), my own compact is Fuji X10. It has bigger sensor, portability, speed & IQ. Even that, the upcoming high-end compact has to be much cheaper to make a sale. Not $600 nor $700. Panasonic knows all this.

    • peevee

      All these cameras are not perceptibly better than modern smartphones in daylight, yet still not useable in low light. RX100 changes that, at least at the very useful 28 mm eq.

  • OM-4

    12-25/1.8 fixed duo setting lens with macro if possible.
    up to 3nd inbuild filter
    50 iso
    OVF with led paralax lines
    4×3 lcd NO 16×9 screen. Flip duo E-ink/S-amoled screen

    • Incessant Troll

      panasonic if you are reading this, you need to go 12-24 f1.8. a nice, fast simple zoom that covers wide 24mm to the end of normal. make it collapsible like oly 14-42.

      • peevee

        Again, most users will not buy it as at least some tele is expected. Doesn’t have to be fast at the tele end as it is not possible within the reasonable size constraints, but it has to be there.

        • Incessant Troll

          thanks for your opinion but someone who would consider paying anything above $400 for a camera is not most users. most users is not the population of this site, which is why olympus can sell lens hoods made out of recycled sardine cans for $100

          • peevee

            Well, sales of compacts are collapsing, while sales of DSLRs are on the rise, with more 11 millions sold every year. Hardly $400 stops them, no new DSLRs are available below that.

  • A fixed lens compact should sport a dual-focal length lens, for example a 12/40 mm f/2.8 – f/f4. I’d buy that. Otherwise I can just stick 12mm on any m4/3 body and also bring the 45 mm along.

  • So want we want is the super zoom of the last 10 years with a 4/3 sensor!!!!
    You know, Canon powershot, Olympus ultra zooms and Nikon cool pix. Don’t we remember them?

  • Anonymous

    If Panasonic want to make a compact camera with 43 sensor, they better be RIGHT, not just put 43sensor with G5/ GF5 quality,.and I suggest make it with rugged body ,I don’t mind with the size of GF1 but have to be like GXI grip , build in EVF, and with an outstanding zoom lens,. 12-70 mm equivalent of 24-140 with F1.4-2.8 at the tele end

  • If it had a 12mm OR 14mm f/1.7….
    that would be my To-Go Street Camera, over my E-M5 with P/14 f/2.5

  • Abraham David

    Well, high-priced compacts are on decline these days considering most people will be happy enough with the quality of their smartphone’s snaps.

    To sell a high-priced fixed (non-removable) lens camera, it has to be much much better quality than a smartphone, but on the other hand also has to be much much versatile than an SLR. Which is really crazy hard to do, but not impossible.

    Panasonic itself has a camera, the FZ200, a superzoom with quite small stature. Better in every way than a smartphone, yet more versatile (and cheaper) than an SLR with equivalent lens.

    What I would like to see Panasonic make is basically a travel / tourist / walking around / everyday camera with 1″ sensor, 20 MP, stabilized 24-120mm equiv. lens with f/2 constant aperture, EVF, fully-articulated touchscreen LCD, high-speed AF, built-in ND filter, and pop-up flash.

    It should be as small and light (even smaller and lighter) as an entry-level SLR (eg. D3200 with 18-55 VR, which are what most people seems to buy everywhere). While being head and shoulders better than any smartphone.

    That, with a pricetag little bit shy of $700, I believe would be a good move for Panasonic.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The 43rumors website, 43rumors.com, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners/
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/analyticsjs/cookie-usage?csw=1#cookiesSet Addthis cookies: http://www.addthis.com/privacy.
Disqus cookies: https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466235-use-of-cookies.
Vimeo cookies: http://vimeo.com/privacy.
Youtube cookies: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en-GB

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.

Close