[cali92rs]

For me at least, I would prefer a fixed lens camera. Curbs LBA, is simpler and smaller. I would like a micro 4/3 camera as a travel camera but I can totally see myself buying a ton of lenses for it, in which case I might as well bring my k-5.

[pinholecam]

To add to the confusion of choices, there is also the GXR with 28mm and 50mm modules which are APS-C

[Wired]

To add to the confusion of choices, there is also the GXR with 28mm and 50mm modules which are APS-C

yes... something I've been trying to convince myself I do not need to buy.

[Docrwm]

Panasonic G5, 45-150mm, and LX7 to be announced on July 18th (July 17th in the US)

According to 43rumors.com, the Panasonic G5, 45-150mm lens, and the compact LX7 will be announced by Panasonic on the July 18th. The Panasonic G5 is expected to be a minor upgrade to the existing G3 based on the same sensor, while there isn’t all that much information available for the all new 45-150mm lens. LX7 will be interesting given what Sony did with their RX100 and Samsung with EX2F and its f1.4 lens.

Source: (FT5) G5, 45-150mm, LX7 and compact cameras announcement on July 18th! | 43 Rumors

[Dr Orloff]

For me the Q is sufficiently different to the K5 to perfectly complement it. There are other compact system options but often with one of those beer cans attached, so not really compact at all. A K5 with a compact lens is pretty compact anyway. I just like the feel and ease of use of the camera and it is a lot of fun. I can shoot RAW in Av mode with shake reduction, preview the shot as I choose, dial in exposure compensation very quickly. And I only wanted to use prime lenses. That's pretty much all I'm interested in.

There are plenty of excellent other options, I really like the FujiX100 for example but for me it would just compete with the K5.

The Q might lose out to larger sensors on IQ, but it is still capable of surprisingly good IQ. I initially thought that the large depth of field would be a handicap, but actually it can be used very advantageously as it is easy to get the subject in focus at wide apertures. You just have to bear the dof in mind with shot selection. I think the Q's metering is excellent and I am also impressed with the dynamic range.

At the price I bought it for, £250 (US$390) with 01 prime and toy wide lens then the only serious rival was a compact, also is the only option that is more pocketable. My next choice was the Ricoh GRIV (fixed lens compact), but that was a lot more expensive. I do need Pentax to bring out a compact preferably pancake) wide angle for the Q. I reckon that would make it a formidable little street shooter.

Finally the Q and K lens combination offers some interesting high magnification potential, which is a bonus.

[Dr Orloff]

I didn't even mention the build quality. I had a look at a few other cameras whilst shopping yesterday, compared to the Q almost all are just cheap feeling lumps of plastic.

[fikkser]

Did not read everything, but I've had the LX3, don't know how much they've changed in LX5 (same sensor atleast), anyway the LX3 has really poor IQ compared to Q IMO.

[Unsinkable II]

Here's a good comparison photo between a GF3 (m4/3s), Nikon J1 (1 inch sensor), RX100 (1 inch sensor) and S100. The S100 is very easily jeans pockable, the RX100 looks possibly jeans pocketable, the other 2 are not.

That image perfectly illustrates why I've said the Nikon 1 system is dead in the water.

[JHD]

That image perfectly illustrates why I've said the Nikon 1 system is dead in the water.

Because it's not pocketable?

Between the NEX and Nikon 1 system I no longer bother packing a DSLR around. Mirrorless systems may not be small enough to put into in a pocket, but they are much lighter and easier carry than a DSLR. And FYI, there isn't a Pentax camera that can focus as fast and accurate, muchless track motion like the N1 - no - not even close!

[Unsinkable II]

Because it's not pocketable?

Between the NEX and Nikon 1 system I no longer bother packing a DSLR around. Mirrorless systems may not be small enough to put into in a pocket, but they are much lighter and easier carry than a DSLR. And FYI, there isn't a Pentax camera that can focus as fast and accurate, muchless track motion like the N1 - no - not even close!

No not at all. Rather because it is the same size as a m4/3, and a m4/3 has a sensor nearly twice the size of a Nikon 1.

Any 60fps or AF advantages the Nikon 1 may hold currently are temporary (I say "may" as the RX100 has blindingly fast AF, and I hear that m4/3 AF has become extremely quick also). You can be sure that Sony will be cramming them into the RX200 or RX300 when their time comes, just as Panny and Oly will be having those advantages coupled with their larger sensor advantages.

The Nikon 1 is a neither here nor there system. I'm not saying that it doesn't have its uses; it must be great for a pap or birder with long Nikon glass, it's just not a great solution for its core casual/general shooter demographic.

With all these mounts currently existing, there are going to be some that don't make it. I don't think the Nikon 1 mount will make it (unless the imaging circle can take a bigger sensor). Ditto the Q. That's just my opinion. You may well have a different opinion.

[JHD]

No not at all. Rather because it is the same size as a m4/3, and a m4/3 has a sensor nearly twice the size of a Nikon 1.

I'm not too hung up on sensor size. I'm more interested in the sensors performance and the end result. There are quite a few N1 owners who also have the D3, 4, 700, 800 etc. Those that are skilled at PP are able to get great results on par with m4/3, which comes as no surprise as the sensor in the N1 measures better than the sensor used in many of the m4/3 cameras.

The N1 may or may not survive. It matters not to me. Everything is ultimately doomed to whatever comes next. I choose my tools according to my perceived needs and if they get the job done, nothing else matters.

[Unsinkable II]

I'm not too hung up on sensor size. I'm more interested in the sensors performance and the end result. There are quite a few N1 owners who also have the D3, 4, 700, 800 etc.

I'd be surprised if D3, 4, 700, 800 etc owners did not also own a N1. To them it is a low cost teleconverter.

As for sensor size, all being equal technologically (which, as Sony sensors spread through Oly, will not be the case against the N1's Aptina sensor), a stop is a stop is a stop.

Those that are skilled at PP are able to get great results on par with m4/3

Nikon have themselves stated that the core Nikon 1 target demographic are general/casual shooters upgrading from a point and shoot. These are people who have no interest in becoming skilled at PP.

Everything is ultimately doomed to whatever comes next.

Sure, we're all going to die. Would you rather live to 16 or 60?

[JHD]

But things are not equal among sensors of any given size... and sometimes a small sensor out performs a bigger sensor. I know what kind of output the N1 is capable of and that is far more meaningful than any spec or 3rd party opinion. If the tool is a pleasure to use and it gets the job done, then nothing else matters.

Regardless of Nikon's "intended" target, the camera found its own destiny. And from what I've seen on the N1 forums, most users shoot raw and do various degrees of PP to one extent or another. The effort always pays off in spades.

Anyhow, this is Q country and I didn't mean to derail this thread.

[Unsinkable II]

Anyhow, this is Q country and I didn't mean to derail this thread.

Agreed and ditto!

[Docrwm]

There's a rumor today that Panasonic has set the release of the LX7:

"As for the other cameras in Panasonic’s new range, the paper also outs the DMC-LX7 and DMC-FZ200. The LX7 is a new flagship compact, with an f1.4 Leica lens in front of a 10.1-megapixel sensor. On the back is a 3-inch display, and it can shoot Full HD video and up to 12,800 ISO stills, with availability in September."

Other sources say that the Leica lens will be f1.4-f2.3.

Panasonic LUMIX G5, LX7 and FZ200 leak - SlashGear