Jump to content

A GH4 in your pocket - Panasonic LX100 with 4K and Micro Four Thirds sensor

Andrew Reid

Recommended Posts

Yep Andrew, you better not cancel your iPhone 6 if you want the iWatch, as it needs an iPhone to work. 


And don't forget to mention that this LX100 is actually not really 4/3. The sensor is 4/3, but the lens covers it with a 1.5 crop, so it is between a 1" and a 4/3 in term of DoF and so on. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 146
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Can't say I am noticing any moire so far with mine.   Review soon.

Anyone that wants it is going to have pro level imaging soon soon soon.

Shot 4K with the LX100 yesterday, going to upload and write my review as soon as I have access to a 1st world internet connection ;)

Andrew, i don't understand what you find liberating about the solle watch -
I think its the opposite - also without the iPhone it's useless.
I really do like this new lx100 - the bigest downside on this, which makes it practically
Useless for filmmakers - it has no Nd built in - at least it doesent say so. I dont think
Its a good sollution to use magnetic clip on NDs. I guess thats also the reason were not seeing any
shallow dof footage from the Demo clips.
And its also a shame that it doesent have a intervallometer.
Other than that - for me it would have been Perfect.
Really looking forward to your hands on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And don't forget to mention that this LX100 is actually not really 4/3. The sensor is 4/3, but the lens covers it with a 1.5 crop, so it is between a 1" and a 4/3 in term of DoF and so on. 

No. Its almost the same as GH4. (And in UHD it is exactly the same).


http://***URL removed***/products/compare/side-by-side?products=panasonic_dmclx100&products=panasonic_dmcgh4&sortDir=ascending


Depends on image ratio. In 16:9 format it is 4480 x 2520 crop from maximum (like GH4) 4608 x 2592.

Simple math (crop from m43 area):

Horizontally: 4608/4480 = 1.03 crop

Diagonally: ... = 1.03 crop

Surface area: 11943936(4608 x 2592) / 11289600(4480 x 2520) = 1.06 ratio (square of crop)


And what is most important for us on this forum (I suppose) is 4K video crop. In UHD both GH4 and LX100 are the same 3840 x 2160 crop:

horizontally: 1.2 crop

diagonally: 1.2 crop

Surface area: 1.44 ratio (square of crop)



From wikipedia (not sure if true):

The most commonly used definition of crop factor is the ratio of a 35 mm frame's diagonal...

...the ratio of sensor areas is the square of the crop factor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The beauty of multi-aspect sensor usage is that they could make smaller lens sacrificing 4:3 image format (1.12 crop) but maitaining almost whole 16:9 image (1.03 crop).


But who cares anyway (probably my wife which will use it as stills camera)? The UHD is the same crop as GH4, so for me they could make the lens even smaller, just to cover UHD video :) .

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi

The thing about multi-aspect as I understand is, they designed a lens that doesn't cover the entire sensor, okay, now it's covering around 1.2x 4:3 area. If we give people just that, when they want 16:9, they will need to crop even further, so lets use a little bit of the sensor width for 16:9 to accomodate that loss.

In short, they are making the best out of a bad situation (which is that the lens does not cover the sensor).

I wonder if they chose putting a larger sensor and leave it unused is due to this being lower cost as these sensors are already in mass production for the Gh4, gx7, em1, etc... I believe it would be costly to develop a new 2.3x sensor for that specific camera.

I would love this lens to come off to use on the Blackmagic 2.5k (similar 2.3x crop), Gh4 in 4K (similar 2.3x crop) and of course super 16. It's would be a smashing wide angle -normal lens for these camera considering the cost compared to the Panasonic 12-35mm 2.8

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi

Yes these leica rebadges seem like a better choice if the prices are correct. They're making both the LX 100 and the FZ1000 superzoom in a little sleeker design + leica dot + free lightroom.

Link to post
Share on other sites

let me get this straight.


this camera costs $900 and has a 11-34mm f1.7-2.8 lens on it and a m43 sensor. so why the f is the 12-35mm f2.8 so expensive?!


The LX100 seems to have a better lens and yet its less expensive than the 12-35mm alone?!?


i always called this lens completely overpriced, but now Panasonic is just making fun of themselves! rediculous.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How is this new D-LUX a better choice than the LX100? Sleeker design? What sleeker design? They removed the grip and changed the labelling a little bit. I actually prefer the grip of the LX100, it's rather practical. Besides, you're not all of a sudden going to make the camera more compact by losing the grip, the lens is still the main thing sticking out. And you can put on a red dot that says 'Leica', well whoopty-effin-doo, congratulations. Maybe you should add a red dot to your nose too, because if that's the reason you get a certain camera, doesn't that kind of makes you a clown? Free lightroom..? Ok, so you pay more to get less, some sprinkles of Leica make-up and then you're praising them for including a software that you, if you're serious about photography, probably already have. I'm sorry, I do not follow this kind of reasoning. Then they can include Lightroom with the LX100, up the price by the costs, and sell it as a premium package with 'free' Lightroom as well. You're still paying for it (although perhaps at a reduced fee, because of the partnership). And I'm not sure about the firmware... but I think Panasonic will care quite a lot about firmware support and fixes and upgraded features, especially concerning video, I'm not sure if Leica would follow with the same upgrades right after... so you might be missing out here...


But whatever makes you feel better. I mean, I always say: a certain camera wouldn't exist, if there wasn't a single soul found to buy it. If you feel like you can cheat your way into having a Leica by buying a relabelled LX100, then by all means be my guest. But if you want this for the sole reason it has 'Leica' written on it, I'm not really sure if that's the right reason to spend some extra dough on it. But again... you're in charge of your own wallet, whatever rocks your boat. I'm laying off the Leica and Hasselblad rebrands myself. It's like an Apple. People are willing to pay for the 'name', 'image' and 'philosophy' more so than specs and performance. In fact, it's much like a religion. But I'm open to any brand. If they have incredible performance for a justified price, I'm going with them and Panasonic is doing a damn good job at providing the best bang for buck lately.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My first time commenting, but have been a long time follower since I got my first camera, a Canon 7D.


To begin with I'd like to thank you, Richard, for all that you do to improve our photographic and filming skills and choices.


I was prompted to post today because having seen 4K possibilities in small cameras like the new Panasonic and potential beta firmware for 4K recording in the OMD-EM1, perhaps we can press Sony to offer an updated firmware for 4K in their new A7S?


If 'heat issues' apparently make this difficult for a camera like the A7S, then it begs the question why it's possible in these smaller cameras and phones. If the heat builds up over time, then perhaps Sony could offer a limited 4K internal recording capability as even shorter sequences would be better than nothing. Keep up the great work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 43mm filter thread is for the LX100?? I couldn't find it...




I do get some of the reasons of why Panasonic chose not to, but I'm disappointed in not having built-in ND filter like the LX7 had and like the LX100's competitors have. The camera has a 43mm filter thread though, I did a quick research and it doesn't appear to exist a lot of good quality ND for that filter thread, so it would need an adapter. This makes me wonder if even at 43mm, can you use that auto-cap accessory with the camera?



Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...