Thanks for commenting and the link. Good point about the sensor
design. We'll see if it can really trump the LX5, G12, S95, XZ-1 IQ
with a
normal range zoom. My point about the size is that if it is not
pocketable due to the depth and already smallish, it matters much less
if it is smaller still. It is already in a different category if must
be on the belt or carried in a case so might as well have a larger
sensor in my book.
That be said , it would be interesting to mount my Celestron 750 / f6
on tthe Pentax Q. Might be able to see Moose wave on a clear day.
:-)
Mike
As for the sensor: it will probably beat the pants off the LX3. The
sensor is
smaller, but the photo sites won't be a lot smaller because the
electronics are
on the back. Also, the sensor is a newer generation. Sure, it won't be
on the
level of my E-P1. It's not intended to be. It is a compact, but with
that one
thing that lifts it up a level: interchangeable lenses. It's why I got
into the
OM-1 in the first place: you can connect telescopes, microscopes, play
around
with lenses, make a pinhole body cap, put a lens at the end of a
cardboard tube
and do macro, ... I love my LX3, it's versatile, but it's just a
camera, not a
tool.
I'm not saying I will buy one, but I do like the concept.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|