That’s useful to know. I guess it would still be quite slow to zoom to whatever focal length you set on the lens. Maybe they’ll use a similar body for the S9ii or even a GX10? I guess this is the first use of the updated sensor with PDAF on a compact, though no IBIS, so it seems possible.
It’s hard to get over that overly protruding lens. Doesn’t go well with the body style IMO. But cool to see a modern compact camera that doesn’t seem to be just a lazy re-release with the EVF ripped out.
I want that lens on a m43 mount.
That’d be cool, but doesn’t seem like it could happen. It’s likely that small because it can go into the camera body and sit close to the sensor.
1 Like
Yes, I am wondering why these 3x zoom f/1.7–2.8-ish lens designs (also on the LX100, and something similar on the Canon GX7) are not adapted to interchangeable lenses. Even with extra bulk they would make sense.
Same here, I almost bought one back in the day, but I tried it out in person and hell no, I don’t want to be back in the 1990s when some digital cameras were being powered on like a bear waking from hibernation in the spring.
I think that they imagine that the lens OIS will be sufficient for most people. In a compact, it does not really matter whether it is OIS or IBIS, just the resulting stabilization. EDIT curiously, I cannot find the CIPA stabilization rating in the specs anywhere.
Yeah, this is probably the dealbreaker given its core use for travel and urban environments
1 Like
Yes, I agree. My comment was more about the size of the camera considering it doesn’t have an IBIS unit to accommodate. From videos, it seems to be a fair bit larger than something like a GM5, RX100 and GRIV. Probably similar to the X100VI but that one has IBIS.
1 Like
I hope l that it has better dust sealing than the lx100, I wouldn’t want to pay that amount for something that is producing mucky images in a few months’ time.
1 Like
Don’t forget that part of the lens is also inside the camera, much like it is with the X100V and this might make the camera a little fatter too.
I have tried my friend’s X-E5 and it surprised me in a few ways:
- chunkier and deeper than my X100V and X-T3, it is not as light, I guess due to the IBIS mechanism.
- it felt as premium as my two cameras, maybe even a bit more.
- shutter sound is strange but I like it, louder than my X-T3.
I would consider it when my X-T3 dies, even though I like fast drives, I think it is quite good. I prefer the offset EVF as I have a big nose which ends up dirtying the screen on my X-T3 all the time. The EVF is smaller than my X-T3, which sucks a bit but I guess they are limited by the positioning of it.
1 Like
The Panasonic L10 looks amazing. Its lens would be enough for me if I didn’t do macro photography (using the m.Zuiko 60mm f2.8 macro).
A fast 24-75mm lens in this size is very nice for an all-around setup.
What I’m really hoping for is a successor to replace my GX9: the exact same L10 body, sensor and processor, but with IBIS and a Micro Four Thirds mount. I actually think there’s a solid chance Panasonic might do this.
I don’t understand the Panasonic compact attempts. I’m pretty sure what made the Fuji’s and Ricoh’s (leica Q’s?) popular was the fixed lens and aspects of handling.
Panasonic seems to do things that bring their compacts more toward the bad compacts of old.
This time they might be ahead of the curve IF the digicam retro trend gets misunderstood by “normies” that don’t like shopping for used junk. OR the digicam trend somehow desensitizes people to the horrors of power zoom photography.
Doesn’t look like the L10 has improved things. Chris Nichols mentions it here:
1 Like
Me, neither. The L10 IMO takes a bad concept (the LX100), and moves it into a worse direction.
However, I’ve recently had a discussion about it on another forum, where the poster said he considers his LX100 pocketable, and usually shoots static subjects, so speed doesn’t matter. I suppose to such a person, the L10 might be a refinement of the concept.
I sure hope so, because I want Panasonic to succeed with the L10, and explore other compact designs. How about an M43 prime compact? How about a freaking GM5 II?
1 Like
Emily makes a very sensible point about new sensor capabilities and camera body sizes, in connection to the L10, but also in general:
This, practically, means that new bodies with all bells & whistles will be non-pocketable (regardless of sensor size), or they have to make compromises (with AF, burtst rates, IBIS, etc) and thus will be treated as niche products (like the Ricoh GR line).
Personally, I made my peace with camera bodies the size of OM-3 and similar. But then I am wondering whether crop sensors still make much sense I am shooting below, say, 100m ff equivalent. Especially if third party (mainly Chinese) lens makers continue to come up with more compact and affortable FF lenses.
2 Likes
For me the size of the L10 is perfect. It’s about the same size as my GX9.
The biggest downside of the L10 seems to be the slow power zoom.
Hopefully, Panasonic will release the exact same body (evf, processor, sensor) as the L10 but with an M43 mount and IBIS. That would be the perfect upgrade for the GX9.
1 Like
I thought about this recently. Then I looked at the price of bodies and equivalent zooms and quickly changed my mind back to staying with Fuji 
A quick example:
Fuji XH2 or XT5: 1.75-2k + 16-55 f/2.8 mk2 1.3k
Z6 III: 2.5-3.1k + 24-70mm f/4 S 1k
Both bodies are on discount at the moment. Nikon at 1k off and Fuji at around 250.
It’s not a huge difference, but when you start looking into longer focal lengths, even taking crop into consideration, it changes quite a bit and sometimes equivalent lenses don’t exist. One of my most used lenses, the Fuji 70-300, would be hard to replace if I wanted the same FF equivalent focal length. On Nikon the only equivalent options are a huge lens, or a higher megapixel body(3000-3800€) and cropping.
1 Like
fair point, w x h only grew by 3mm each, which is OK.
That would be an exciting development. I still use a GX9, and would eventually upgrade it gave me better AF capabilities.
Recently I read a comment about the limitations of micro 4/3 (as a mount standard) for high-speed AF, but could not find any details/specs to substantiate that. I am wondering whether mount communication speed ever a practical bottleneck for AF?
Looking forward to watching that over my lunch, because as usual, I have opinions I want to share on this topic 
2 Likes
Ok, I watched the video, and she basically confirms what many of us have discussed earlier in this thread and on similar topics: that the need to satisfy consumer expectations, (in terms of sensor quality, battery life, IBIS, thermal protection, etc.) is preventing smaller camera bodies in the majority of cases.
So, two things would need to happen:
- power efficiency needs to increase (to allow for smaller batteries)
- consumer expectations needs to change (not expecting the latest tech and all the tech crammed into the body)
Given that 2) above is probably never going to happen, we need to wait for a technology leap that enables reduced power demands while achieving the same or better performance.
But even then, can a smaller body be made that satisfies consumer expectations? All the compact cameras that people know and love, like the GM5, GR series, PEN cameras, have big compromises, such as a lack of IBIS, no viewfinder, inferior video, crummy grip, etc.
To me, the bigger question is this:
I think Emily rightly called out the haters that think M43 and any crop sensor cameras are “toy” cameras, but I also think there’s a valid argument hiding among the hater comments: if cameras and lenses across sensor formats are going to be essentially the same size, why not just choose FF?
Crop sensor cameras are clearly not toy cameras, but if the size advantage decreases to become almost irrelevant, and FF prices continue to decrease with more 3rd parties getting involved, then where is the value proposition of crop sensors?
Obviously there is still a significant size difference with telephoto lenses, but purely in terms of image quality, FF does have a slight advantage. It’s not huge, but it does exist. And more than just the nebulous “image quality” argument, I think the more important advantage of FF is the versatility. It gives you more options in terms of depth of field, and when conditions get more extreme, such as low light. While crop sensors can almost match FF with certain lenses, it usually comes at the expense of size and cost of those lenses. And so you’re back to same problem of losing the crop size and price advantage.
Ultimately, I think the argument is increasingly coming down to specific features, ergonomics and joy of shooting. Every manufacturer has a slightly different take on how a camera should handle, and that can have a big impact on how much you actually enjoy taking the camera out with you.
1 Like
The Ricoh GR IV exists. It has a modern sensor and IBIS and still runs on a tiny battery.
There are many reasons why Emily’s video could be wrong. We don’t know how much technical knowledge Emily has. Maybe her information was based on marketing BS by Panasonic. Maybe it was based on conjecture. Maybe she did talk to an engineer, but misunderstood. Maybe everything she said is correct, but only applies for video (which the GR does not take).
Either way, the fact that the GR IV exists, I think proves that a modern GM5 is technically feasible.
3 Likes