Yes, I’ve sometimes wondered about getting an optical viewfinder for the GR but then it wouldn’t fit in its case or be in any way as pocketable
1 Like
I sometimes wonder, conveniently, whether crop sensors would get some of these innovations before full frame because of the processing demands but I guess it’s as much to do with owning the software as anything and by then who knows what kind of multi-lens devices will be on the market.
I’ve just checked: the G1X Mk iii is 115 (W) x 51 (D) x 78 (H) mm; the LX7 is 111 mm wide, but with the EVF, it becomes 65 mm deep and 95 mm tall. It’s not a brick, of course, but the fact that the EVF really sticks out, prone to be caught in everything inside my day-to-day city backpack, may actually make it worse (I do store it in a thin textile bag placed in a padded laptop sleeve inside the backpack).
1 Like
As a fellow Pixel owner, this piqued my interest, but I’m not fully sure what you’re saying. Are you saying how much detail the Pixel captured of the moon? If so, what settings were you using when you took the shot? I’ve taken some nice shots with my Pixel 6, and it’s got some neat tricks, but I can’t say I’ve ever been bowled over by the quality. And as I don’t have the Pro version, I’m limited to wide-angle shots with it. So I’m interested to hear more about (or even see) what you experienced with your moon shot.
Sure are and thus probably a better fit for the job here.
You are totally right, and your answer really is relevant to the original post I guess, I guess I was just really digressing 
As a supplemental note and because the screen and viewfinders have been mentioned, fully articulated screen is really nice but the viewfinder really is a must for me
I found your reply really helpful. I’m going to download some Olympus RAW files and have a play post-processing them.
1 Like
FWIW, this video came out after a long absence from this nice channel. His opinions are a bit quirky and geared to fairly cheap and secondhand.
4 Likes
I think that as a very experienced photographer, he is just unusually (and delightfully) hype-resistant. He cares a lot about controls and ergonomics, understands the limiting factors in image quality very well and focuses on features that matter.
3 Likes
I enjoy his videos and recommendations, too. But know that his recommendations are as quirky as his opinions, so judge with caution whether they apply to you.
I’m saying this because I once fell for one of his more quirky recommendations, a Pentax MX1, which I did not enjoy at all, and lost a (little) bit of money on. As the Grail Knight says: “choose wisely”.
(On the other hand, I had tons of fun with two other recommendations, the Pentax Q7, and the Ricoh GR. I just wish he would stop talking about that little Leica, every time I see one, my GAS flares brightly.)
5 Likes
I ended up binge-watching a lot of Mattias Burling’s reviews yesterday, and while I still think that his POV is highly relevant to the original question, focusing on solely on camera bodies is a mistake.
IMO lenses are at least — and probably more — important, and buying into a particular mount should be done after looking at the available lenses and whether they fit one’s purpose.
Naturally this is very difficult for someone who never used an interchangeable lens camera, because most mounts have a bewildering variety of lenses. So the ideal solution may be to pick up a cheap second hand camera body and experiment a bit.
2 Likes
Yeah, I admit get a slight shudder when he starts saying “and, oooh, the colours…”
That goes for the entire YouTube camera community, however… The “Leica Colors”, the “Canon Tones”, the Fuji Film Simulations". I guess they never had the time to learn post processing…
6 Likes
At least Matias, dunno for others, has clarified and showed examples of how raws from different cameras differ out of the box(with the same WB and lens) and that can change the way you process, or interpret the image in the end.
2 Likes
Yes… and…
Also yes! That’s a point that has confounded me on occasion… even after making custom input profiles, there’s still differences… unsurprising really, as a basic ICC profile is just a set of multipliers, but still…
But the more I learn of processing, the easier I find it to get a look I like. I think…
2 Likes
Same here, play raws also helped a lot with that in a way since it gives us experience developing raws from different cameras.
I guess in his case since he doesn’t like editing too much, having the camera develop a good image out of the box is a bonus, definitely up to personal taste I believe
2 Likes
Absolutely. 
On both points!
1 Like
He specifically has one video I remember that shows his “very light” LR processing
2 Likes
I recently purchased a Lumix GX80 (GX85 in some countries for some reason) with a 20mm 1.7 pancake prime and I’m absolutely in love with it.
Next I will buy a 14-140mm zoom for it for more flexibility and I think that’s all I need as a simple grab & go gear.
There’s even a nice hack with the hotshoe cover to point the integrated flash upwards to bounce it against the ceiling. Perfect for some party and family gathering shots and stuff like that.
3 Likes
From experience I agree Gx80/85 are good, work well with analogue lenses
RX100 similarly good, secondhand ? or cheaper mk3
I agree stick with the old camera until it stops working
I think the lower quality compared to full frame is more than compensated in reportage/social photos: less imposing so more relaxed subject, less cluttered ease of movement
There are lumix equivalents to RX100, reviews say jpg colours not as good, should that worry someone on here ?
1 Like
Not really IMO. The Sony RX100 has really excellent optics in a very small package. So small, that actually I find it too tiny to hold comfortably. And the latest iterations have excellent PDAF autofocus and object tracking, trickling down from the R&D of Sony’s best in class (for AF) MILC models. All of this comes at a hefty price of course, but as a compact it is hard to beat. The RX10’s are also excellent among bridge cameras.
The downsides for the purposes of @LateJunction would be the price, and the lack of manual controls.
That said, I would still go with a MILC, working back from the lenses I want, and just getting a second-hand body released 5–8 years ago. This will always give you more bang for the buck than the latest & greatest compacts. Eg if micro 4/3 (which is what I would buy) is not one’s cup of tea, then a Sony A6xxx, A5xxx, or even a NEX-7 are great cameras and bodies are available for less than 4-500 EUR.