Click to ENLARGE.
I could be wrong but I don’t see the justification for the added $601.
But, darn it — it is a Four-Thirds sensor. Panasonic appears to be playing the same game recently played by Olympus with the much anticipated OM-D E-M1 Mk II. That too was priced, body-only, at $1,999.
I think the Four-Thirds vendors are HOPING that a $1,999 might make their cameras look better. Not sure that that is going to work.
Yes, the Panasonic GH5, at the end of April, with a new version of firmware, is supposed to get some groundbreaking video features. That has zero value to me.
I just can’t see paying $2,000 for a 20MP Four-Thirds body. Period!
It would be competitive if it was $1,400 U.S.
“DPReview” side-by-side comparison.
Click images to ENLARGE and study here.
There is also this YouTube video
that rates the NX500 over the LX100.
So give it some serious thought.
++++ Check Categories ‘Camera News’ for other related posts >>>>
>>>> Search on ‘Panasonic’ for MANY other posts too >>>>
Click these images to ENLARGE and study here.
I could be wrong BUT the only ‘biggie’ I see in this purported specification is the “touch panel”, i.e., touch screen. I guess that will support touch screen AF. So that would be good.
But that would appear to be it.
The increase in zoom from 400 to 480 is decent, i.e., a 20% increase, but it is a long ways short of the 600mm (at f/4) offered by Sony.
Yes, most likely the FZ2000 will have better video quality.
And it probably will be cheaper than the (overpriced) Sony RX10 III.
But in my experience, when it comes to bridge cameras, the MAIN thing you are looking for is the reach. IF I was into a 1″ Bridge I would not get the FZ2000. I would go with the Sony, despite the price. 120mm of zoom, at one stop larger aperature, at the high end, cannot be sneezed at.
++++ Check Category ‘Camera News’ for other related posts >>>>
>>>> Search on ‘FZ1000’, ‘Panasonic’ & ‘Sony’ for other posts >>>>
I would NOT be able to resist this — and I know myself better than anybody else. That reach?
I have realized that I love my 15-day old Nikon P900. Today is day 15 and that is crucial in that I bought it from BestBuy rather than Amazon, BuyDig or Cameta. They have a 30-day return policy; BestBuy but 15. [Actually I took the precaution (always the belt-and-braces person I am) of buying it with my Discover card. They do offer a 90-day $500 guarantee.] I have NOT returned the P900. I am keeping it. One the easiest cameras to use that I have encountered in the last 2 years. Easier than your average compact, point-and-shoot. Yes, I will write a detailed review soon. I have taken 2,812 ‘keepable’ pictures in those 15 days; at an average of 187/day.
A P900 with a 1″ would be WONDERFUL and it would be in the same class as my old Panasonic Lumix FZ1000 and the Sony RX10s that I evaluated ad nauseum and never bought. The redoubtable FZ1000 has a 16x zoom. This Nikon puppy would have 4.6 times MORE. 75x. Not as much as the 83x on the P900, but 75x with a 1″ sensor would be formidable.
Yes, I would get this Nikon the day it is available irrespective of what other cameras I currently have. Most likely by then I would have, at a minimum, the P900 and a Canon 80D or M5. I would get this and give away the P900. Smile.
“DPReview.com” side-by-side camera comparison of the
Panasonic Lumix FZ1000 vs Nikon DL24-500mm.
Click on images to ENLARGE and view here.
Use link above to access full, original.
There was at least one error/omission in the “DPReview” comparison that kind of incorrectly tilted the comparison — and that had to do with “image stabilization”. The Nikon DL24-500, per the Nikon specs, is said to have:
The “IS” issue, notwithstanding, the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000, which I owned for 7-months (till April 2016 and took over 7,000 pictures), is indeed quite the camera.
It is impressive that the FZ1000, 2 years older than the Nikon, offers twice the max. ISO and can hold its own when it comes to sensor size and resolution. Plus, right now it has the HUGE advantage that it is available while the latest rumors are that the Nikon DL24-500 will NOT be available till October 2016 (if that). Plus the FZ1000 is (at least) $200 cheaper.
That $200 could make a big difference.
And this is BUT the paper comparison.
In reality, unless Nikon screws up badly, the DL24-500 should be a much superior camera with newer and superior technology when it comes to the sensor, autofocus, vibration reduction and color rendering.
PLUS, the Nikon offers a dedicated exposure compensation dial on the top plate. Not having a dedicated dial for exposure compensation was my biggest peeve against the Panasonic. Plus there is a touch-screen not to mention the added 100mm of reach.
IF the $200 is not a factor, come October the Nikon DL24-500 should be the better choice. But we will have to wait and see. In the meantime the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000 is a tried-and-tested entity that delivers very good results.
++++ Check Categories ‘Camera Notes’ >>>>
++++ Search on ‘Nikon’ >>>>
It is crazy that there is still confusion as to the sensor size and format. Of course it will be a Micro Four-Thirds. That is what the sensor format is on the Panasonic Lumix LX100 and Panasonic will not mess with that.
The big issue is whether the LX200, in contrast to the LX100, will ever use the full-size of the sensor.
Interesting that they have brought forward the announcement date. They probably don’t want the Pentax K-70 full disclosure on July 15, 2016 to steal too much thunder given that both cameras will be in the same price range.
++++ Check Category ‘camera news’ >>>>
++++ Search ‘LX200’ for related posts >>>>