Which compact?

[tagor]

Have you compared the kit zoom with the 20mm?

The 20mm Pancake is a bit sharper in the center (the difference is much smaller than for example the dpreview tests suggest), has much better corners and significantly better micro contrast (compared on a E-P1). From 20mm to 33mm, the Oly 14-42mm is surprisingly good. (The Pancake does best at f2.8 - f4.)

A Zeiss 28mm f2.8 Distagon is FAR better than the 14-42mm, the difference in fine detail / micro contrast is quite big (much bigger than the difference between the Pancake and the Zoom).

-- Tilo

[cjmonty]

Tough call- so many first-generation mini cameras out there... you never know if just around the bend someone is going to come out with a "category killer" system with no compromises.  

That said, I think the best option is the Sony NEX-3 with 16mm 2.8 pancake.  If you need a viewfinder, then this isn't your camera, but I've always thought viewfinders a hindrance in landscape & architecture work (thats an opinion, not a declaration!).  The Sony swivel screen is impressive and very high quality for a camera LCD (if not so great in direct sunlight).  

There's no in-body stabilization, but apparently the lSO sensitivity beats the competitors by a stop or two, so its a toss-up.

On the negative side, the camera interface is... worse then bad.  But once you figure out how to quickly adjust the manual settings, its less of a problem.

If you are willing to pay $100 for a better grip and metal construction, then buy the NEX-5.

[Dave Gurtcheff]

Tough call- so many first-generation mini cameras out there... you never know if just around the bend someone is going to come out with a "category killer" system with no compromises.  

That said, I think the best option is the Sony NEX-3 with 16mm 2.8 pancake.  If you need a viewfinder, then this isn't your camera, but I've always thought viewfinders a hindrance in landscape & architecture work (thats an opinion, not a declaration!).  The Sony swivel screen is impressive and very high quality for a camera LCD (if not so great in direct sunlight).  

There's no in-body stabilization, but apparently the lSO sensitivity beats the competitors by a stop or two, so its a toss-up.

On the negative side, the camera interface is... worse then bad.  But once you figure out how to quickly adjust the manual settings, its less of a problem.

If you are willing to pay $100 for a better grip and metal construction, then buy the NEX-5.

I just put my M8 up on ebay, but I have mint Zeiss ZM 21mm f2.8 and 35mm f2 lenses. I was thinking of holding on to these with the idea of using an adapter and eventually getting a small mirrorless camera and using them. Anyone have any similar experience? What camera did you adapt to? Somewhat off topic...I appologize.
Thanks in advance
Dave

[thierrylegros396]

I'm looking for a second smaller camera to replace my dSLR on motorcycle trips; something not necessarily pocketable but significantly smaller than a prosumer dSLR. I would prefer a system, so I can invest in good lenses and upgrade the body when new generations come.

I would be using the camera with fixed lenses for landscapes and cityscapes, and some portraits. Shooting at base ISO, with substantial amount of low-light photography on tripod, so proper bulb mode and remote control a must. MFT cameras seem like a perfect compromise between IQ, features and size/weight.

On Olympus side the price difference between E-P2 and E-PL1 is quite large, and the differences in features is small, at least where it matters to me. The only one is the claimed superior image stabilization, 3 stops for the E-PL1 vs. 4 stops for E-P2 as per Olympus specs - but it's certainly not worth several hundred euro.

I have dismissed the Panasonics due to their lack of in-body image stabilization. But the lens selection isn't exactly large for unstabilized MFT lenses so this is not such a limitation as it first appears. The Oly would benefit from IS with off-brand lenses. The G2 will probably be around the price of E-P2 as well, so expensive compared to the E-PL1.

Samsung NX or whatever Sony has in store would be an option but they're not available yet. Lumix LX3 would be a contender if it was available anywhere, and the IQ is poor from the samples I've seen. There are some Ricohs with impressive IQ, but they are limited by either a fixed lens or poor range of their zooms. I'll consider a Leica if I win the lottery.


The Olympus E-PL1 seems like the obvious choice - it's an affordable entry to MFT to see if it's a viable choice for me in the long term, and offers most of the benefits of the format and features of its bigger brother. I'm also considering a 6x9 film folder, but that's a whole different beast.

Anything I've missed?

Panasonic LX-5 ?!

[cjmonty]

I just put up some pictures and a brief first-impressions of the NEX-5 on the TactlessTech blog.

http://tactlesstech.wordpress.com/2010/07/...the-sony-nex-5/

I came away impressed with the camera style.  The tilting hi-res LCD made waist-level and overhead shooting much easier.  My main issue is with the apparent IQ from the 16mm lens.  

Since it is a interchangeable lens system however,  there might be hope.  Even from MemoryStickMiniDiskBetaMax Sony.

UPDATE:  This sounds like a great idea (Leica lens on Sony NEX), but again, the Manual Focus on all of these LCD viewfinder cameras is a bit of a bear.
http://www.cosina.co.jp/seihin/voigt/acce/adapter/e-vm.html

[attachment=23266:DSC00028.jpg]
[attachment=23267:redchairs.jpg]
[attachment=23268:PepsiJunction.jpg]

[kevin weil]

I've had the Lumix LX3 for nearly a year now and am quite impressed with the image quality and the overall camera capability and performance.   I considered the 4/3 stuff, but for me, i'd not invest a constant stream of money in a system of camera and who knows how many accessories (lenses and whatever else appears) on a technology that while it will grow, will always stay a step behind DSLR systems.   Sure, it's about the upgrade process, but my feeling is i dont want to upgrade down that path.  

part of that is budget related.  im not in a position to invest money in two different, but very close in terms of image quality, technology paths at the same time.  part of that is also self-justification post-purchase of the panasonic camera.  

i think the review on this site nails it pretty well.  i actually had not read it before purchasing and using the camera for a few months.   a big selling point was how fast the lens is.   so i decided to use this camera while budgeting for going straight to digital medium format.  i really dont feel like i need anything in between the two.  as background, i have never owned a DSLR.

and the proof's in the pudding.  the attached is a completely unedited, but cropped for composition, jpeg done in the camera, taken in fully automatic mode.  i can easily take the companion raw file, fiddle and enlarge to 17x24ish.   i've been printing mostly at 13x19.  there's a little bit of fixing required in the blue sky here, but nothing a little luminance smoothing wont fix in Camera Raw.  at 8x10 or smaller, or sharing via the web, this is not necessary.

[Goodlistener]

Hi! Your analysis is all the way correct, and very cogent. The only serious options you have not mentioned are:  

1.     The Olympus DSLR line is extremely compact and the price is very reasonable. You get an articulated viewing screen and a 18-55 equivalent lens for about $475. and;

2.     The Panasonic or Canon pocket cameras that shoot RAW and have high quality lenses built in. The current Panasonic model is LX-3. It has been replaced by the LX- which is announced but not yet shipped. LX-3s are for sale in my local retail store for $350. Amazon lists the LX-5 for pre-order at $500. The Canon S-90 is seriously competitive but I personally prefer the LX-3.  The LX-5 is all about incremental product improvements, mostly in the sensor for ISO performance and dynamic range. The number of megapixels and the physical dimensions of the new LX-5 sensor are the same.

I personally own the LX-3 ad am very pleased with it for small portable carry when a DSLR is "too much".  I posted a few example shots when the LX-3 was still new to me here if you want to see:  http://www.pbase.com/goodlistener/panasoniccameraexamples