All Activity

Size is a funny thing as there are two different comparisons to be made - one is with it switched off (and lens retracted) and the other with it on and lens extended. I've noticed that people often only care about one of these and don't give a hoot about the other. The EDC crowd only care if it's pocketable (while off and lens retracted) so they can take it everywhere and others (like me) only really care about it when it's being used. From the perspective of what it's like when it's on and extended, especially if you use the sci-fi looking triangle door lens cap thing which will attract all kinds of "WTF is that thing?" attention: It never ceases to amaze me how different we all are from each other, even when literally talking about the same piece of equipment!

Forget it. We humans now have two eyes after all: one on the forehead and one on the chin...

Oops

The dual crop from open gate is a legit use of it of course but unless you're shooting the portrait shot for a massive portrait orientated ad screen, you'd be better of shooting the camera in landscape orientation so that the cropped image is portrait, and the highest quality non-cropped image is landscape. Phones the by far the dominant destination for portrait formats. I really think it's massive overkill, and the file sizes in RAW are nuts. If you are making disposable slop and are happy deleting the original files, then I suppose it doesn't matter - but imagine archiving so much data just for social media content. It makes my head hurt just thinking about it

I’ve also had an email this week trying to get me to rush down to London for the MPTS broadcast show lest I miss their headline speaker…..erm…. Michael Gove The irony/shamefulness of having him as an expert speaker when his most famous contribution to political discourse in the UK was this.

It’s the Frank Sinatra of camera review retirements then.

This looks like a really cool set-up. One thing I would definitely be worried about is the lens though design. Optically, from everything I've seen it looks great, but it has been well-known to have issues with dust getting trapped inside and that was the reason I never really went after the LX100(I or II). However, it's the same problem with almost all POS cameras. Did Lumix say anything about this?

Presumably, the h.265 quality is better on the Canon. The vertical mounting hole is so you can use as much as possible of the sensor (for the lowest noise and shallowest DOF, if desired) when 100% committed to vertical video. The extra resolution is for when you want to shoot both horizontal and vertical content and crop the latter from the content. Presumably billboard screens can display higher resolution video content if they are really 4K TVs mounted vertically. Of course the extra resolution is not really necessary and the vertical orientation in 16:9 aspect ratio is quite badly suited for video but for narcissistic content showing only the creator rather a person in an environment, it is what seems to be used. In my opinion, a less narrow vertical aspect ratio would work much better but the pocketability, hand-holdability, and availability of devices seems to dictate the aspect ratio. Above all, the manufacturers need increased specs to sell more cameras than are truly needed for any practical purpose, and they don't care about the e-waste, because they are not forced to care.

As of now, RF mount is the only one they're promising, but who knows after that? I'll just need to grab one quick before Canon's lawyers get to them. 😅

As an LX100 successor, I think Panasonic have got it about right and it'll sell well. It's larger and about 100g heavier than the LX100, as it's using the basic S9 bodyshell - the width and height are basically identical, as are the positions of many of the controls and the battery is the same. Probably a fair exchange for a better sensor, a considerable upgrade to the video specs and better battery life (the LX100 battery life when recording video was poor - I used to own one). But at the moment, the S9 + 18-40 kit lens is cheaper, has IBIS and is not that much larger and heavier - is that a better deal for a primarily video user? As it doesn't have IBIS, I don't think I'll be buying an L10, but a (GX10?) M43 version of it with IBIS, paired with the 14-140 zoom would make a superb travel cam (and a nice compact wildlife camera paired with the 100-300). So an S9 mk2 (S10?) with EVF or a GX10 next from Panasonic? (I think an S9 mk2 is more likely - a GX10 would undermine sales of the L10 too much, I think).

Amazing spec really. Looks like it could be my forever camera….

Praise be to the gods... Megadap don't make stuff for L-mount (so far) but maybe they'll surprise all 3 users at once.

If Megadap's website/YouTube is to be believed, sometime this month or next, their M mount autofocus adapter (M2RF) will be released this month sometime. 🤞

Indeed, hard to see what it offers over the Nikon Zr other than a different badge.

With the lens not covering the full sensor and battery is the absolute unit from the GH7, I think Panasonic are missing a trick here https://www.dpreview.com/news/8679910436/panasonic-lumix-dc-l10-four-thirds-enthusiast-compact They should make a version with a prime lens, a slim pancake on the front and reduce the body size a bit towards the Ricoh Gr series, then it would open up a world of sales Panasonic's marketing team never knew existed. Have they ever heard of the Fuji X100 VI!? They have all the capabilities to make a killer competitor to that too.

For manual focus vintage lens users like me, I just can't get away from that damned Techart adapter which autofocuses your Noctilux. Really miss it when picking up my Sigma Fp-L. It's a real shotgetter. Not Panasonic or Leica's fault of course, lots of nice native Sigma lenses for the system and they can't influence third party adapters much.

They should have called it the L1. Now THAT was a nice camera, iI still have it with the 14-50 mm lens. It still works, all 7 megapixels, and the batteries too ! At least it was fourthirds, so using the same name for a microfourthirds cam would be less confusing ? I must admit, this new L10 looks like a really nice camera. It is too expensive though.

Perhaps the biggest mistake was inviting a bunch of influencers with tiny hands to come to Japan and make it look enormous by comparison. They could have just had someone the size of Shaq in the lobby holding one and posing and every video would have started with a very different tone! Sounds pretty normal to me, but my household has a rather eclectic purchase history, so I might be an outlier!

I envy Sony’s lens line up which being honest, blows away what is available from L Mount. But that is it. And I try not to think about it too often.

I suspect there is at least one person out there who is currently debating which one of yesterday’s 3 cameras to get or a fancy tropical fish tank.

Same intern that is currently doing their marketing is also in charge of product naming.

I now think that calling it the L10 was also a mistake. I watched the Micro Four Nerds video about it earlier anud the camera looked very big in the presenter's hands. I looked it up the Panasonic L10 on cameradecision and compared it to some other cameras and was outraged by how much bigger it was than the LX100. Then I noticed something about 10 megapixels and realized that the Panasonic L10 was a 10 megapixel Micro 4/3 camera from 2007. The Panasonic Lumix L10, on the other hand, is quite small. Was L10 such a great name that they couldn't change it after somebody pointed out that they already had a camera called the L10 and there would be some confusion from people who looked it up?

There are a bunch of weird 🔨 limitations on the R6 V. Nowadays, I'd expect a $2,500 video-centric camera to have shutter angle, at least. I'm not sure if a dedicated timecode port is a reasonable expectation, but in my mind, it should have one. Those would go al long way to making it a proper B cam to one of the cinema line cameras.

The battle of Resolution vs Common Sense was over long ago and us consumers were the losers.