John Matthews

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.

For photos, I prefer most landscape shots in black and white. City and people shots are mostly in color. I've also been impressed with the black and white profiles in video. I also need to shoot more video in them.

It'll basically perform the same as the GX80, but without IBIS and you're forced to lock down most shots. If there's IS in the lens, it works. Rolling shutter is bad just like on the G100 in 4k. I turned down all the sharpness and NR, the other settings are specific to EOSHD Pro Color in Standard profile.

Massive amounts! I've never seen so much and the ground has been saturated for weeks.

I've seen great footage from the LX15, this included. Today, I went on a walk to get some berries and took a few shots with the GX800 and the kit lens:

The original RX100 was the second camera I ever purchased as an adult. Back in the day (2012), it made decent 1080p and I loved the 28mm (equiv.) side of the lens. Fast-forward to today and it looks almost identical, but has improved so much in the video department. As a photo camera, I think it's roughly the same as the first one. My main problem with these is the lens because you'll be limited in terms of looks. Build-wise, they feel good but when the lens is extended, it's fragile and the littlest bump is going to screw the whole thing up. Also, there's the dust issue. The other cool thing is the leaf shutter as it has a 1/2000 max sync speed- amazing. Also, the slow-motion is pretty good too. Compared to the LX10, the Sony is clearly better, but it's Sony (if you've had Sony's before, you know what that means). IMO, both the LX15 and RX100 beat the GX800 with the kit lens; it's only when you put other lenses on the GX800 that it begins to rise above. Personally, I'd love to have more recent options, but apparently no manufacturer is on-board. With the release of the G100D, it's that or nothing from Panasonic. Sony hasn't updated the RX100 in a long time either. Grab what you can or be happy with a G100D (which isn't bad) or E-M10 or E-P7, or OM5, but they're all way bigger.

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.