So, several years ago, I purchased a little pocket camera. Although it claimed to have some controllability, that proved to be limited and in reality it was a "Point & Shoot". It was very nicely made, with a robust and very compact metal body but there it stopped. Images always had blown out areas; the colour balance was poor particularly for skin tones; the usable ISO range was limited; and the lens was softer than I'd have preferred. You can guess the result: it usually stayed at home!
Over the past year or so, in idle moments I have found myself looking at camera review pages and magazines, progressively more impressed by many new offerings and wondering if any might be suitable for my needs. So I made up a general list of what I wanted (not all in priority order):
1: pocketability (a must)
2: a viewfinder
3: good ISO capabilities
4: a good lens
5: control over settings
6: image quality
7: water resistance (least important)
With much of the 'non enthusiast' camera market now taken by smartphones (just hold it at arm's length and point it in the general direction, the little gnomes called apps will do all the messy photographic stuff) the camera makers have been working furiously to meet photographers' needs. Strangely though, including viewfinders seems to have been a low priority: maybe because it seems the 'home' Japanese market are happy to take 'arm's length' photos. If, like me, you're "chronologically gifted" and need to wear bifocals, this arm's length approach is unworkable. Yes, I hear you cry, some makers do include viewfinders - but I'm talking about pocketable cameras, not the "electronic viewfinder with interchangeable lenses" (EVIL) cameras; all very nice but approximately as large as the DSLRs against which they compete.
The EVF has a diopter adjustment, for those of us needing optical assistance, and I am fully able to use it wearing my spectacles. Despite some negative comments about the eye level viewfinder in one review, I find it excellent and it has twice as many pixels, at approx 200,000 as did my old 2005 vintage Lumix FZ20, which did (still does) a great job for me: the important thing is that I can see it!
Most of all though, the LF1 does indeed fit in my jeans pocket and it does take excellent quality images up to 800 ISO. And that will do me nicely! It won't be replacing my DSLR, but I'm sure it will complement it well, and already is making it easy to have a camera handy when otherwise I'd have been saying "I wish I had my camera here!" You can expect to see images from it in my stream, the first is already up (and in Explore).
UPDATE: In Use
With a little experience using the LF1, I feel I now can give some positives and negatives. I'm not about to do a full review, but there are links to those below.
If you've only time to read a few words, the quick answer is yes, I'm happy with it. The more detailed answer is that it's not perfect (is there such a thing?) but it meets my needs and expectations very nicely in most circumstances. The further details are below as positives and negatives.
Positives
It is good and, importantly, pleasant to use. It fully meets my requirement for 'pocketability'. The ergonomics are generally good and the systems are reasonably straightforward with just a little experience.
The controls and screen displays are very useful, as shown by these two shots of the rear display (the viewfinder shows the same and is easily activated with a button). They indicate:
1/ the range of settings for a correct exposure in manual, with the (optional) composition grid and green line camera level indicator.
The image quality is generally very good, as I think some of my recent postings have illustrated. The focus is fast and accurate, the AWB also is reliable except in extreme conditions, such as some artificial lighting.
Negatives
I don't wish to overplay these points, but they should be made:
2. The battery life could be better, so it would be useful to have a spare battery handy if going for a full day's shooting.
3. The position and style of the on/off switch can result in the camera being accidentally turned on (I'm learning to be more careful). As the lens extends, in a pair of jeans this can be a problem. Who knows, it could lead to the following variation on the Mae West line "Is that a Lumix in your pocket or are you glad to see me?" :)
Taken overall though, it meets my needs well and I am indeed very pleased with it. I'd be happy to recommend it for anyone with similar requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In case anyone wishes to read full reviews on the LF1, you might care to look at these links.
"Inspired Eye review" tinyurl.com/m548yqq (detailed and highly recommended) "Sydney Morning Herald" tinyurl.com/kmdc7ku (clear, concise and positive)
"Camera Labs" tinyurl.com/m5nypzu (detailed, mostly positive, rates at 86%).
12 comments
Pam J said:
One more thing for the wish list !
Thankyou George !
tiabunna replied to Pam J:
beverley said:
but I am reliably told that these little point and shoots as with all digital point and shoots
do not have too long a shelf life ... they are superceded and for anyone like me who is a clutsy
to say the least ... its a nightmare ... ;-) I am just saying my prayers every night that it behaves
and does not go defunct ... the thing is they supercede quick and will not always repair ...
its change ... upgrade ... as so it goes ... ;-) best of luck with yours George ... I am sure
you will be thrilled with the brand ;-) and the lens ... brilliant ;-) oOo
tiabunna replied to beverley:
David Lloyd said:
Size is important, I rarely use my K10 now, just my Sony NEX. And that's getting big because I use old manual focus lenses on it. I need something like your LF1, I'm looking forward to seeing the results from yours.
tiabunna replied to David Lloyd:
just"jj" said:
:)
Thank you for this; it is an issue for me too.
tiabunna replied to just"jj":
GrahamH said:
The first bought camera was a Canon PS A550 (had a REAL viewfinder). Another major advantage was its using 2x AA batteries. This took good photos over a wider range of subjects and the pocket size was a great advantage. After a few years it acquired some problems so I its younger brother the PS1200. This was 1/3 the price of the previous one but doesn't handle skin and the red soil colours very well. I noticed a better response by humans when pointing these small cameras compared with the 35mm SLRs.
Last year I was given an Olympus E410 by a relative who didn't need it anymore. It's definitely a step up but it needs a bag rather than a pocket. Still learning how to get the best out of it.
On trainscapes and landscapes the Canon is the backup but for 'techy' shots I still prefer the Canon.
tiabunna replied to GrahamH:
Janet Brien said:
Thanks for taking the time to write this in-depth article and for including pictures and your overall positives and negatives. Great to read, and may I add, you're a super writer!
tiabunna replied to Janet Brien: