Archiver
Top Veteran
- Location
- Melbourne, Australia
Personally, as much as I loved the LX5/7 and the GRD3 for as long as I did, I don't see any reason to shoot with that sensor any more when there are cameras roughly as small and handy coming along with vastly superior sensors. Once I shot with a Ricoh GR and Nikon A I knew one of those was gonna be my "pocket" camera and the LX7 headed out the door soon after. I'm happy enough without a zoom, but for those that like 'em, things are really heating up now...
Oddly, the LX7 has shown me that as much as I love good image quality, I really give favour to a very wide angle lens. As you mentioned in response to my previous questions, the LX7 at 16:9 is much wider than 24mm, more like 21 or 22. From my estimates, it is just shy of 21mm on a full frame camera, making it around 21.5mm or thereabouts. The ability to shoot with a modern small sensor at that field of view is thrilling for me. It beats the GRD III with the 21mm adapter for a few reasons, one being the much smaller size, another being the image quality and colour control. Yes, the LX7 actually has better image quality than the GRD III, something I resisted for a while as the Ricoh was my favourite pocket camera, hands down.
Putting a 21mm adapter on a GR/D is fine, but it feels clunky and a bit fragile. The LX7 can go straight into a jacket pocket and emerge with wide angle lens blazing.
As far as the G1X II goes, the combination of 24/2 wide angle lens with that fat, luscious sensor ought to be great. A fair equivalent would be the Olympus 12/2 prime on an E-PL5, assuming that Canon has brought its sensor up to scratch. It could be a very competent and smaller alternative to a m43 camera with a number of lenses, ideal for traveling and general photography. Let's hope that Canon don't botch this with lesser image quality.