NEX vs Micro Four-Thirds (m43) Systems

[AkumaX]

Your 30MB/s should not be getting 12.48 MB/s, even if it's been used and even on a USB 2.0 reader (unless the reader is absolutely screwy). Chances are you have a counterfeit. Where exactly did you purchase the card from? I've heard that about 1 out of 3 Sandisks is fake.

I haven't used the RX100 enough to post a review, maybe after I go out with it some, but I was sick last weekend and have been busy during the workweek. I took a few shots of my gf cooking and reading and a few test shots to gauge how much bokeh I can get out of it and if there is too much distortion or decentering. So far I'm impressed enough to know I will keep it. I ordered a Carryspeed MagFilter to go with it so I can use my polarizer and ND filters with it.

According to other benchmarks posted on Amazon, my numbers are exactly on par with USB 2.0 readers. If you move to a USB 3.0 reader, you jump to 46 MB/s which is over double.

The question is, why is 20MB/s not sufficient for the LX7. Why does it write so slow?

Edit: Sorry, not sure why I quoted myself.

Here's the exact card on Amazon. It seems like my results are exactly on par with other customers. I should have heeded the reviews but I didn't pay them any attention since I am a fan of SanDisk. Now, I have to determine who has a faster writing card ...

You fell for it. I'm so sorry I wasn't here for you when you made that purchase. I feel like I should post a PSA, and demand a sticky.

I warn people about it on SD, but most people don't listen, or don't use it at its max anyway.

The SanDisk Ultra 30MB/s is the worst misleading advertised card I've ever seen.

You see SanDisk. Good! You see 30MB/s. Good!
Technically, the Ultra 30MB/s isn't a bad card, but it depends what you use it for.
What happens?

Let me do a comparison to the card that you should get, the SanDisk Extreme 45MB/s.

SanDisk Ultra 30MB/s vs Extreme 45MB/s:

- In a USB 2.0 card reader in USB 2.0 port
------------------- Read | Write
Ultra 30MB/s ---- 20MB/s | 13MB/s
Extreme 45MB/s - 20MB/s | 20MB/s
** note: most USB 2.0 card readers are bottlenecked @ ~20-22MB/s

- In a USB 2.0 card reader in USB 3.0 port
------------------- Read | Write
Ultra 30MB/s ---- 20MB/s | 13MB/s
Extreme 45MB/s - 20MB/s | 20MB/s
** note: here, the USB 3.0 port will work in USB 2.0 backwards compatibility mode, no difference

- In a USB 3.0 card reader in USB 2.0 port
------------------- Read | Write
Ultra 30MB/s ---- 36MB/s | 13MB/s
Extreme 45MB/s - 36MB/s | 30MB/s
** note: USB 3.0 don't have that bottleneck, and will perform much better.
** However, there is still overhead w/ the USB 2.0 bus.

- In a USB 3.0 card reader in USB 3.0 port
------------------- Read | Write
Ultra 30MB/s ---- 44MB/s | 13MB/s
Extreme 45MB/s - 46MB/s | 44MB/s
** note: here's the max that the Extreme 45MB/s can do. I've tested faster SD cards.
** I've also tested a SATA3 SSD, and I was able to pull around 200MB/s write w/ a USB 3.0 SATA adapter.

I'm so sorry you fell for it. I hate SanDisk for that.
However, that doesn't mean the Ultra 30MB/s is a bad card.
Technically @ $18 for 32GB, its reliable, and "fast".
It can (mostly) record 1080p video in a Canon DSLR (which requires ridiculously high bitrates).
Sony makes a C10 card that's barely C10 (barely does 10MB/s write), and can't record 1080p video for Canon
It's just that the Ultra's card is misleading w/ its advertisement of 30MB/s.
They should emphasize:
"Up to 30MB/s*, WRITE SPEED WILL BE MUCH, MUCH LOWER BUT CLASS 10 STILL"

Lastly, I want to talk about where SD cards make a difference -
Your Camera's Max Write Buffer from Camera-to-Card speed.
In a Canon T2i / T3i / T4i / 60D / 6D / 5DM3, the write buffer's max speed is only around 21-23MB/s.
That means even if you had your SanDisk Extreme 45MB/s, the camera is the limiting factor, not the card.
However, the Ultra 30MB/s card will be the limiting factor, since it only has a top write speed of 13MB/s.

The question is, what is your Camera? And what is it's Max Write Buffer speed from Camera-to-Card?

Here's a video of the NEX5N write buffer flushing, with the crappy Sony C10 card, vs. a High Speed MSPD
(roughly the same speeds as an Extreme 45MB/s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkgNgXqYbqk

 

[sygyzy]

Man, I have egg on my face. Thanks AkumaX!

The cameras I will be using the Sandisks on primarily are Panasonic LX7 and Nikon 1 V1. I don't know if they published their camera write speed. It'd be good to know/figure out.

I can't believe I bought another one of the Sandisks (exact same model). I ordered it before I figured all this out. I just though "wow cheap Sandisks, 32 GB, let's go). It's ok, like you said it's not a worthless card. I can still use it in my other cameras or in applications where write speeds don't matter as much.

 

[AkumaX]

Man, I have egg on my face. Thanks AkumaX!

The cameras I will be using the Sandisks on primarily are Panasonic LX7 and Nikon 1 V1. I don't know if they published their camera write speed. It'd be good to know/figure out.

I can't believe I bought another one of the Sandisks (exact same model). I ordered it before I figured all this out. I just though "wow cheap Sandisks, 32 GB, let's go). It's ok, like you said it's not a worthless card. I can still use it in my other cameras or in applications where write speeds don't matter as much.

Believe me, it's not your fault. It's not BlastingCap's fault either. It is no consumer's fault.
It all lies with SanDisk being greedy and fooling people.

I was one of the first ones that jumped with a Ultra 30MB/s when it came out (on sale ). I was going to use it for my Canon DSLR, but once I did all the tests (tried multiple card readers/ports/computers), I couldn't believe the results. But they're real. So I relegated the card to a P&S. Not a big deal, since I needed it anyway. The P&S I'm using only has a max write buffer speed of 6MB/s, so this is more than enough. I even bought the 64GB version, accepting the speeds, because I just needed a card for file storage (and it was only $32!). But there are people buying this card expecting great write speeds. They need to know...

 

[blastingcap]

I wrote a lengthy post that can be summed up as: figure out what you need, then get the smallest camera that fits that need, because small differences in the base kit do not consider the additional weight of larger lenses, tripods, ballheads, etc. (This is not applicable for people who don't carry multiple lenses or tripods or whatever, of course. Or for studio photographers who don't move their gear around much. Obviously. But for most people, portability does matter, and what may seem like a small weight difference at Best Buy can add up to a major one when you are hauling 3 lenses, a camera, various filters, a spare battery, and tripod/ballhead up a mountain.)

If you can have just ONE camera, the V1 isn't a bad compromise at all.. yeah it's not quite pocketable, but it's small, light, fast, has a viewfinder (good for keeping subjects framed right, telephotos zooms as an additional stabilizer (your head braced on the camera), and in bright light which would cause too much glare on the rear LCD), and has near-pro level autofocus speed and coverage, burst mode, and takes good videos, too. It's basically a miniature DSLR.

However, if you want and can afford TWO cameras, then my recommendation is to buy two cameras: a pocketable one that you can take everywhere that is significantly better than your smartphone cam (because if it's barely better than a smartphone cam, what is the point--just use your phone!); and a more serious camera for times when you KNOW you will be using it (e.g., family trip to Disneyland).

For pocket cams, the RX100 and LX7 would be my top picks, and don't automatically get the RX100 because the LX7's hotshoe is very useful for many purposes (flash, cable release adapter add-on, etc.). The RX100's off-center tripod mount, lack of any good cable release option for exposures longer than 30 seconds (I did discover that it does have a BULB mode but there is no hotshoe to mount a cable release adapter, blehhhh), and lack of hotshoe-mountable flash are negatives. The LX7 dealbreaker was the lens cap though, as if the LX7's larger size wasn't a problem, the lens cap makes it even harder to safely pocket. Cheaper options would be a Canon S100 or S110 (or S95 if you don't care about video), or something like that. Whatever you choose, though I think the point is that it has to be pocketable.

For a second camera, you have a lot more options because this is the camera you carry with you when you know you will be shooting. A Nikon V1 in this context is perhaps too small for DoF and MP reasons for some people's purposes, and a M43, NEX, NX, Fuji, or DSLR may make more sense. But it depends on what your needs are. You say you want M43 but not why... I guess because you want slightly higher high-ISO performance and DoF control or a larger lens selection? The E-PL5/E-PM2 are fine cameras to start with, but as a user of M43 I can tell you that you won't be gaining a whole lot more high-ISO and DoF control with the base kit, and you will lose the EVF/speed/PDAF advantages that a V1 would give you. The differencemaker if there is one is the lens selection--with proper lenses a M43 can do things a V1 literally can't do because Nikon 1 lens selection just doesn't have certain things available yet, at least not without resorting to use the FT-1 adapter, and even then, you lose AF-C and have t lug around big DSLR lenses.

Maybe as a compromise you could use the V1 for a year and then sell it off and do a mass-upgrade to M43? Because it doesn't make sense to me to trade your V1 kit for a basic M43 kit... M43 only really separates itself from Nikon 1 with the non-kit lenses, which I'm not sure you need (only you know that).

Hey guys, please don't argue. What I like about the digital camera forum is we have been really civilized. Let's just discuss cameras, cool?

Ok back on topic.

SD Cards - It seems like in terms of popularity and Amazon rankings, the Transcend cards are the way to go. They are cheaper than their equivalent Sandisk counterparts. Their read speeds are identical but they write about 40% faster! Lexars are pretty pricey. I have their products and would support them except I haven't seen any benchmarks posted.

Speaking of, this famous photographer posted this very extensive guide of CompactFlash (CF) card speeds many years ago. Has anyone done something similar, recently, for SD cards?

Olympus M43 Price Drops - I'll probably post a longer version of this question in the Nikon 1 V1 thread. I received mine yesterday and while I like most of it, I started questioning my purchase. I paid $450 for the kit with 10-30 and 30-110mm. I thought the 30-110 zoom was worth the extra price since that lens goes for more sold separately. Going into this, I was viewing it as the V1 is a helluva camera for the ("cheap") price it currently is at. The problem is it fills my "not compact, not pocket-able, MILC" spot which I really want for M43. I plan on getting a OM-D and if I did, I now have two lens systems. Yes, I knew this going in. With the current price drops, would it make sense to return the V1 and get a E-PL5 or E-PM2 as my starter, or backup, M43 then later get the OM-D E-5 or its successor? I am already at $450 with the V1 and the PM2 I think is $500 (albeit with one lens instead of two).

I am quite happy with the V1 and it clearly can produce excellent shots as evidenced on the internet. I already have the 18.5mm on my wishlist but I have to stop myself because I do I really want to invest in the 1 system?

 

[blastingcap]

Good info, does someone keep a database of the max buffer write speeds anywhere or where are you getting the Canon stats from? I would be VERY curious to see what the max for the RX100 is.

Also for the record I didn't recommend that card, I thought when he said 30 MB/s Sandisk that he was referring to the Extreme series, which I have always used. I did not know that the Ultra series had made it all the way to 30 MB/s yet, even for read speed.

But anyway I think we can all agree that write speed is as important as read speed, for applications like photography, maybe even more important.

Edit: imaging resource said it took 2 secs to clear 13 RAW shots so that implies something north of 60MB/s. I do not see a need to get 95 MB/s or even 60 MB/s cards unless one really needs it, though.

information

Believe me, it's not your fault. It's not BlastingCap's fault either. It is no consumer's fault.
It all lies with SanDisk being greedy and fooling people.

I was one of the first ones that jumped with a Ultra 30MB/s when it came out (on sale ). I was going to use it for my Canon DSLR, but once I did all the tests (tried multiple card readers/ports/computers), I couldn't believe the results. But they're real. So I relegated the card to a P&S. Not a big deal, since I needed it anyway. The P&S I'm using only has a max write buffer speed of 6MB/s, so this is more than enough. I even bought the 64GB version, accepting the speeds, because I just needed a card for file storage (and it was only $32!). But there are people buying this card expecting great write speeds. They need to know...

 

[sygyzy]

I wrote a lengthy post that can be summed up as: figure out what you need, then get the smallest camera that fits that need, because small differences in the base kit do not consider the additional weight of larger lenses, tripods, ballheads, etc. (This is not applicable for people who don't carry multiple lenses or tripods or whatever, of course. Or for studio photographers who don't move their gear around much. Obviously. But for most people, portability does matter, and what may seem like a small weight difference at Best Buy can add up to a major one when you are hauling 3 lenses, a camera, various filters, a spare battery, and tripod/ballhead up a mountain.)

If you can have just ONE camera, the V1 isn't a bad compromise at all.. yeah it's not quite pocketable, but it's small, light, fast, has a viewfinder (good for keeping subjects framed right, telephotos zooms as an additional stabilizer (your head braced on the camera), and in bright light which would cause too much glare on the rear LCD), and has near-pro level autofocus speed and coverage, burst mode, and takes good videos, too. It's basically a miniature DSLR.

However, if you want and can afford TWO cameras, then my recommendation is to buy two cameras: a pocketable one that you can take everywhere that is significantly better than your smartphone cam (because if it's barely better than a smartphone cam, what is the point--just use your phone!); and a more serious camera for times when you KNOW you will be using it (e.g., family trip to Disneyland).

For pocket cams, the RX100 and LX7 would be my top picks, and don't automatically get the RX100 because the LX7's hotshoe is very useful for many purposes (flash, cable release adapter add-on, etc.). The RX100's off-center tripod mount, lack of any good cable release option for exposures longer than 30 seconds (I did discover that it does have a BULB mode but there is no hotshoe to mount a cable release adapter, blehhhh), and lack of hotshoe-mountable flash are negatives. The LX7 dealbreaker was the lens cap though, as if the LX7's larger size wasn't a problem, the lens cap makes it even harder to safely pocket. Cheaper options would be a Canon S100 or S110 (or S95 if you don't care about video), or something like that. Whatever you choose, though I think the point is that it has to be pocketable.

For a second camera, you have a lot more options because this is the camera you carry with you when you know you will be shooting. A Nikon V1 in this context is perhaps too small for DoF and MP reasons for some people's purposes, and a M43, NEX, NX, Fuji, or DSLR may make more sense. But it depends on what your needs are. You say you want M43 but not why... I guess because you want slightly higher high-ISO performance and DoF control or a larger lens selection? The E-PL5/E-PM2 are fine cameras to start with, but as a user of M43 I can tell you that you won't be gaining a whole lot more high-ISO and DoF control with the base kit, and you will lose the EVF/speed/PDAF advantages that a V1 would give you. The differencemaker if there is one is the lens selection--with proper lenses a M43 can do things a V1 literally can't do because Nikon 1 lens selection just doesn't have certain things available yet, at least not without resorting to use the FT-1 adapter, and even then, you lose AF-C and have t lug around big DSLR lenses.

Maybe as a compromise you could use the V1 for a year and then sell it off and do a mass-upgrade to M43? Because it doesn't make sense to me to trade your V1 kit for a basic M43 kit... M43 only really separates itself from Nikon 1 with the non-kit lenses, which I'm not sure you need (only you know that).

Hi BC,

Thanks for your wonderfully detailed reply, once more. It's funny you mention the LX7 because I received it on the same day as the Nikon 1 V1. Yeah, first world problems. I do not plan on trading out or returning the LX7 since it is replacing my LX3 which I absolutely love. I use my LX3 pretty much anytime I don't need a pocketable camera. I have been using the LX7 for just a few days and I really have no faults with it.

You're right, it doesn't really make much sense to replace the V1 with a basic M43 kit. I assume you consider the LX7 in the same class as the V1 and basic M43 in terms of ~500, not pocketable but still big sensor but not SLR big? Since the LX7 isn't an ILC, I kind of put it in it's own category but that might be a mistake on my part. If I got a M43, it seems like I'd have three cameras in the same "category" and that seems redundant.

In fact, the Nikon 1 and the LX7 are sort of in the same space too except obviously the Nikon has a larger sensor (I think) and interchangeable lenses.

So what you are suggesting is keep the V1 and if I ever decide to upgrade, go big like X-E1, OM-D E-5, or the likes?

By the way - I am not suggesting that the M43 would be a vertical upgrade to the V1. I know the difference would be negligible if you don't count lens selection. What I meant is it'd be a horizontal side-grade. Meaning, if I am probably going to end up on M43 anyway (for reasons you stated - mostly lens selection and more of an established history for the format), why would I keep the Nikon 1? If I keep the V1 and my needs grow, I will most certainly start buying more things for it (lenses, cases, etc). That's fine and all except if I ever get a OM-D, none of my stuff will be compatible and I have to amass "duplicate" lenses again but from different formats. I know it seems like I am trying to get rid of the V1. I'm not. I am just thinking out loud and bouncing ideas off you.

By the way - what M43 do you use?

 

[Uppsala9496]

Would this card be any good with the NEX 5N:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820178537

Write speed up to 35MB/s.
64GB for $34 seems like a pretty good deal.

 

[blastingcap]

Would this card be any good with the NEX 5N:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820178537

Write speed up to 35MB/s.
64GB for $34 seems like a pretty good deal.

Do you know who makes the underlying flash and the flash controller chip for that card? Yeah, neither do I. Pass. I'd stick to Sandisk. Some things just aren't worth cheaping out on because reliability is that important. You do not get to re-do your vacation if you come home and the vacation photos are corrupted or damaged. I'd say stick to Sandisk/Lexar for camera cards.

Hi BC,

Thanks for your wonderfully detailed reply, once more. It's funny you mention the LX7 because I received it on the same day as the Nikon 1 V1. Yeah, first world problems. I do not plan on trading out or returning the LX7 since it is replacing my LX3 which I absolutely love. I use my LX3 pretty much anytime I don't need a pocketable camera. I have been using the LX7 for just a few days and I really have no faults with it.

You're right, it doesn't really make much sense to replace the V1 with a basic M43 kit. I assume you consider the LX7 in the same class as the V1 and basic M43 in terms of ~500, not pocketable but still big sensor but not SLR big? Since the LX7 isn't an ILC, I kind of put it in it's own category but that might be a mistake on my part. If I got a M43, it seems like I'd have three cameras in the same "category" and that seems redundant.

In fact, the Nikon 1 and the LX7 are sort of in the same space too except obviously the Nikon has a larger sensor (I think) and interchangeable lenses.

So what you are suggesting is keep the V1 and if I ever decide to upgrade, go big like X-E1, OM-D E-5, or the likes?

By the way - I am not suggesting that the M43 would be a vertical upgrade to the V1. I know the difference would be negligible if you don't count lens selection. What I meant is it'd be a horizontal side-grade. Meaning, if I am probably going to end up on M43 anyway (for reasons you stated - mostly lens selection and more of an established history for the format), why would I keep the Nikon 1? If I keep the V1 and my needs grow, I will most certainly start buying more things for it (lenses, cases, etc). That's fine and all except if I ever get a OM-D, none of my stuff will be compatible and I have to amass "duplicate" lenses again but from different formats. I know it seems like I am trying to get rid of the V1. I'm not. I am just thinking out loud and bouncing ideas off you.

By the way - what M43 do you use?

I think the LX series is awkwardly sized; too big for many people's pockets, and the lens cap was a dealbreaker for me. It is arguably pocketable for some people, with purses or jackets, but for me, personally, and I speak ONLY for myself (yes I am purposefully being redundant), the largest I want to go is the RX100. That's my line in the sand as far as what is pocketable.

So for me personally, since I do not have a purse and don't want to rely on a jacket pocket (e.g., during summertime), the LX7's competitors are not the Canon S-series and RX100 so much as the Nikon 1, M43, Sony NEX, Samsung NX, and CaNikon DSLRs.

That said, the LX7 has a great lens and good sensor, allowing it to mostly match the RX100. Against Nikon 1 and M43 kits, the LX7 isn't that much worse except in DoF control and overall system handling (the ILCs tend to boot up faster and have faster autofocus, customizable buttons, etc.; also, the LX7 lacks EVF and PDAF if compared to Nikon 1.) But it will lose to kit NEX/DSLR because at that point the sensor size gap is so huge that it more than makes up for the slower kit lenses on NEX/DSLR.

If you compare LX7 vs non-kits then obviously the non-kits win on image quality in almost all cases, as non-kit lenses tend to be higher-quality, and you can get fast glass for Nikon 1, M43, NEX, and DSLRs that wipes out the LX7's fast-lens advantage.

But like I said, my recommendation if you can fund two systems, is to get a good pocket cam and then get the smallest system that still meets your needs, as your second cam. I have no idea what your needs are so I can't make a recommendation. I know that if you just want to share webstuff or print no larger than 8x10, then even the LX7 might suffice. If you want to print 24x36" you are going to need something more like a full-frame camera.

The M43 cameras I used included the Pany G3, GH1, GF2, GF3, and Oly E-PL1. I used various lenses including the 25/1.4 PanaLeica, 100-300, 40-150, 55-200, 45/1.8, 9-18/4-5.6, and 14/2.5 lenses, plus pretty much every kit lens except the 14-45. I also tried adapting Nikon F-mount glass but that didn't work out as well--too many functions were missing such as VR. Nice system, though. If they firmly stated that they'd have hybrid AF support and that existing lenses could use it, or that CDAF got some breakthrough where it was comparable to PDAF even in AF-C mode, then I would have stayed with M43 as a great compromise between DoF control and size/weight. As it stands, I have no idea what's going to happen so I'm going to sit out of ILCs for a while and rely solely on my RX100 for the next 12 months. That's the plan anyway--the V1 keeps dropping in price (now $399 for the V1 + two kit lens bundle at B&H!), and with each price drop it gets more and more tempting for me to get one and use it for a year and then sell it off if necessary. Must.... resist..... Ugh..........

 

[AkumaX]

Would this card be any good with the NEX 5N:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820178537

Write speed up to 35MB/s.
64GB for $34 seems like a pretty good deal.

Seems like a pretty good deal. The new UHS-I cards (that have U1, Speed Class 1) tend to be fast. I would have no doubht that this card could really do 50MB/s read and 35MB/s write.

The NEX-5N can utilize UHS-I U1. It's been tested with a Sony UHS-I 94MB/s (does 94MB/s read, 45MB/s write) and Extreme 45MB/s. Blastingcap does bring up a good point, however - even if the speeds are there, what about reliability?

If I sell some stuff, I might get this card Maybe even use it for my 5N

 

[blastingcap]

Seems like a pretty good deal. The new UHS-I cards (that have U1, Speed Class 1) tend to be fast. I would have no doubht that this card could really do 50MB/s read and 35MB/s write.

The NEX-5N can utilize UHS-I U1. It's been tested with a Sony UHS-I 94MB/s (does 94MB/s read, 45MB/s write) and Extreme 45MB/s. Blastingcap does bring up a good point, however - even if the speeds are there, what about reliability?

If I sell some stuff, I might get this card Maybe even use it for my 5N

Brands like Vivitar and Polaroid trigger alarm bells in my head, and when a company like PNY (doesn't make its own flash or controllers AFAIK) uses those brands, it triggers even more alarm bells.

For those who don't know, many "name brand" photographic companies went out of business a long time ago, but Chinese companies bought the naming rights in bankruptcy court and then issued a bunch of crap under the old name. That is why you can still find Vivitar and Polaroid branded photo gear.

(Fun fact: Sakar bought Vivitar's naming rights, and the top google result for them begins with: "Sakar International Recalls Battery Chargers Due to Electrocution, Electric Shock Hazard. 4/19/2012" Yeah very confidence inspiring, guys....)

Bottom line, Sandisk makes their own NAND and uses their own controllers with wear-leveling algorithms, etc. There are a few other legit companies as well, such as Panasonic: http://panasonic.net/avc/sdcard/industrial_sd/function.html

Other companies, I don't know, and don't care to know. It's not worth saving $10-20 to find out. Just eat ramen for a week and buy known-to-be-good stuff. To analogize, why NOT buy a Samsung 830 if it's not that much more expensive than buying an OCZ drive with iffy controller and firmware?

 

[sygyzy]

I think the LX series is awkwardly sized; too big for many people's pockets, and the lens cap was a dealbreaker for me. So for me personally, since I do not have a purse and don't want to rely on a jacket pocket (e.g., during summertime), the LX7's competitors are not the Canon S-series and RX100 so much as the Nikon 1, M43, Sony NEX, Samsung NX, and CaNikon DSLRs.

-the V1 keeps dropping in price (now $399 for the V1 + two kit lens bundle at B&H!), and with each price drop it gets more and more tempting for me to get one and use it for a year and then sell it off if necessary. Must.... resist..... Ugh..........

The LX series lens cap thing is a non issue for me since I have always installed an automatic retractable lens cap. I am not sure why you are opposed to this. I agree with you that size-wise the LX7 is in the same class as Nikon 1, small M43, etc. That's why I was asking if it's redundant to have the LX7 + Nikon 1 / small m43. Would it be better to have a ~$500 M43 plus a OM-D later down the line (the OM-D being a larger and heavier camera). Or would there not be enough distinction there?

It seems to me like your plan is to have a small camera like the RX100 then have a "high-end" ILC camera at some point (Sony NEX, M43, Fuji). Is that accurate?

Thanks for the heads up on the price change. I emailed B&H. Do you think they'll price adjust? Now at $400 for the two lens kit, do you think it's a keeper?

David

 

[blastingcap]

I didn't know they even made such things for the LX series, hmm.. if I did, I would have given the LX7 stronger consideration.

I do think that it's overkill to have LX7 + N1 + M43. There's just too much overlap there, though the N1 has EVF/PDAF that the others don't have, if that matters to you. If you are happy with the LX3 you are probably also happy with the LX7, so in that case the LX gets to stay, and either the N1 or M43 should probably go. As we've previously discussed, M43's advantage over N1 isn't much unless you also have M43 glass to back it up, so if you are going to go M43 you should go whole-hog rather than try to buy a body now and lenses later.

$399 for that bundle is getting a little crazy for what I'd like in a camera, but I already have the RX100 and am doing everything I can NOT to buy another camera for a while, so please don't make me talk myself into getting a V1 + 2 lens bundle.

Ultimately you need to ask yourself what you need and go from there, because some things that matter to others might not matter to you, and vice versa, such as EVF or PDAF or size/weight or whatever.

Example: I want long exposure capabilities. The RX100 has BULB mode but that involves some ugly cable release jury rigging; else you get 30 seconds tops. The V1 has the same limitation except it is compatible with an existing Nikon remote that I already have. This makes the V1 a little more attractive in my eyes, as a second cam for long-exposure shots.

But do most photographers care about such things? I bet the answer is no, they don't care because only a tiny sliver of photographers ever go into ultra-long exposure modes anyway. So what I need, is different than what others need. Similarly, what you need, may be different than what others need.

As for B&H, it's between you and them; I hope they'd accept it but maybe not.

The LX series lens cap thing is a non issue for me since I have always installed an automatic retractable lens cap. I am not sure why you are opposed to this. I agree with you that size-wise the LX7 is in the same class as Nikon 1, small M43, etc. That's why I was asking if it's redundant to have the LX7 + Nikon 1 / small m43. Would it be better to have a ~$500 M43 plus a OM-D later down the line (the OM-D being a larger and heavier camera). Or would there not be enough distinction there?

It seems to me like your plan is to have a small camera like the RX100 then have a "high-end" ILC camera at some point (Sony NEX, M43, Fuji). Is that accurate?

Thanks for the heads up on the price change. I emailed B&H. Do you think they'll price adjust? Now at $400 for the two lens kit, do you think it's a keeper?

David

 

[sygyzy]

Hey blastingcap - Buy the Nikon 1 V1

 

[AkumaX]

I got a 5D2 + 5N, hope that satiates any 'desires', lol

I could see myself getting an RX100 though

 

[sygyzy]

Important news everyone! I just checked my Amazon order and it turns out the second Sandisk SD card I ordered was a Extreme series one. For some reason I thought I had ordered another Ultra. Whew! No more Ultras for me.

 

[ivan2]

I am on the same boat. I was shooting a 40D and now all I carry is a GF2 with 14mm pancake. Touchscreen convenience, prime lens speed, 2/3 of the price I paid for the 40D body I get both the body and the lens. Can't be happier.

 

[ChrisJowett]

I recently had the same issues, but went in a different direction.
I have 6 Pentax cameras and 13 lenses dating back to 1974.
I had/have no desire to purchase a Q or anything similar (Nikon 1) as I really don't like the tiny sensors and the resultant shallow DOF, even if the IQ is "acceptable". I ended up buying a K-01 after the price dropped as it really was a no-brainer in my situation. I now have a MILC smaller than any DSLR that is fully compatible with all my AF and MF lenses and Focus Peaking that makes MF a breeze.
I nevertheless am again considering another smaller system for street use.
I was originally swayed by a twin lens kit OM-D, as the NEX lenses were not that smaller than DSLR lenses, but the MFT lenses were a lot smaller.
The NEX-6 has changed that because it has the same size sensor and IQ as the K-01 and is 200g lighter than the OM-D despite having a better EVF and a built-in flash. There is also the new retractable 16-50 kit lens that is MFT size. The end result is a twin lens kit no bigger than the MFT equivalent but no trade-off on DSLR quality. I can even use my K-mount lenses in stopped-down mode with a simple and cheap mechanical adapter.
I now can't see any reason to go MFT unless they release something a lot smaller and lighter with an EVF and built-in flash.