Panasonic TZ100 w/ 1" sensor+25-250 zoom

[Serhan]

New Panasonic TZ100 with 1" sensor+25-250mm Leica zoom
New Panasonic TZ100 compact camera with 1" sensor coming soon | Photo Rumors

During the 2016 CES show, Panasonic will announce a new Lumix DMC-TZ100 compact camera with 1" sensor. Here are the basic specifications:

• 20.1MP 1" sensor
• 9.1-91mm f/2.8-5.9 lens (25-250mm equivalent)
• The official announcement in Europe is on January 5th, 2016

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[jyc860923]

It seems camera manufactures are re-doing with 1" sensor what they have done in the last decade with 1/2.3", with additional RAW and EVF and WiFi and all that, probably still not is there a touchscreen.

 

[scott rawson]

I want one!....as a travel cam and going out with the missus for a drink cam it looks good...had a sony rx100 iii and daytime shots were great...night time with flash good...only thing that let it down was the tiny zoom coverage.Nice to have pocketable options near m4/3 territory.

 

[TNcasual]

We have a couple of older model Panasonic travel P&S. They perform pretty good.

If I was in the market for something like this, I would definitely check it out.

 

[Turbofrog]

Assuming it's similar in size to the RX100 / G7X, this looks like a fantastic camera. Good form factor and infinitely more versatile than the RX100.

It looks like it might be bigger though, in which case it would no longer be pocketable. Needs some dimensions attached to it, really.

In general, I think it's very interesting. Kind of puts a nail in the ILC + kit lens coffin.

 

[tkbslc]

I'm extremely excited about this! I have looked at an RX10 or FZ1000 multiple times, but those are pretty big cameras. This looks quite svelte.

Jugding from the size of the LCD and buttons, I'm thinking it can't be too much larger than a GM5. It's probably slimmer than any m4/3 body with a pancake on it, too. It looks like the EVF is probably really tiny, though.

 

[tkbslc]

A guy on another forum did a side by side comparison matching up LCD sizes and it seems to be roughly the same size as their current ZS50/TZ70 camera with a very similar EVF size. Based on that, I think it will end up being about the same size as an Olympus E-PL7 body with no lens.



Getting excited for this one...

 

[drd1135]

For this kind of pocketable camera, the Evf is essentially an alternative to the lcd in bright light. As long as I can frame with it, I'm good.

 

[scott rawson]

I used the Panasonic lf1 and yes the viewfinder is tiny and like version one of the clip on evf the gf1/2 used (resolution wise)...but still better than glancing at lcd in bright sunlight ...a very good compromise in my opinion.

 

[PeeBee]

I owned an LF-1 for all of 2 days and was really disappointed with the EV-F. I then tried the TZ60 in store, which seemed much better. I think the optics are more important than the size.

 

[mattia]

Interesting good light travel camera. It's a very different beast to an rx100 in quite a few ways (smaller EVF and slower lens), so different niche. The thing that makes the Rx100 so useful to me is the wide aperture at the wide end (mostly use it underwater), and the mark 3 and 4 have very fast but short zooms. Still, this would make an interesting travel cam!

 

[oldracer]

This class of camera is the largest that my wife is willing to carry. She had a ZS10 which I upgraded (Christmas 2014) to a ZS50 primarily because the new one will do RAW and has an EVF. Both models produce excellent pictures. I'm skeptical that the larger TX/ZS100 sensor will produce dramatically better results worth the inevitable (IMO) negative of a larger body size. The wide end of the lens going from 24 to 25mm is unfortunate, too, IMO. So ... not at all sure that this one will be an upgrade for her. We'll see.

 

[tkbslc]

This class of camera is the largest that my wife is willing to carry. She had a ZS10 which I upgraded (Christmas 2014) to a ZS50 primarily because the new one will do RAW and has an EVF. Both models produce excellent pictures. I'm skeptical that the larger TX/ZS100 sensor will produce dramatically better results worth the inevitable (IMO) negative of a larger body size. The wide end of the lens going from 24 to 25mm is unfortunate, too, IMO. So ... not at all sure that this one will be an upgrade for her. We'll see.

I don't know why you would be skeptical. There are a lot of examples from these 1" sensor cameras and the difference in detail and noise is pretty dramatic, even in good light. a 1" sensor is 2.3x larger diagonally and over 5x larger by area than the 1/2.3" sensor used in the ZS50 and similar. m4/3 is only 1.8x larger than 1" by area, which is the same as the difference between m4/3 and aps-c.

Just compare shots from the FZ1000, which uses (presumably) the same sensor.
Search: fz1000 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

[Turbofrog]

I don't know why you would be skeptical. There are a lot of examples from these 1" sensor cameras and the difference in detail and noise is pretty dramatic, even in good light. a 1" sensor is 2.3x larger diagonally and over 5x larger by area than the 1/2.3" sensor used in the ZS50 and similar. m4/3 is only 1.8x larger than 1" by area, which is the same as the difference between m4/3 and aps-c.

Just compare shots from the FZ1000, which uses (presumably) the same sensor.
Search: fz1000 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

1" is definitely a big step up from smaller sensors, but it's actually 1.94x smaller than M43 by area, which in turn is 1.64x smaller than Nikon APS-C (only 1.47x smaller than Canon).

The more advanced sensor tech makes up for it a bit, but there's a fair bit bigger jump in size from 1" to m43 than m43 to APS-C.

 

[oldracer]

I don't know why you would be skeptical. ...

Well, the main reason is the experience of a few thousand photos from the ZS10 and ZS50, none of which have had objectionable noise or other sensor quality problems versus the thousands of G1 and GX7 photos I have taken. We don't shoot a lot in the dark, though, and we don't crop much.

To be clearer, I am skeptical that the improvement due to the sensor would, for us, be worth significantly increased size in the camera. So I'm waiting to see how big the camera is. Life is a tradeoff.

 

[tkbslc]

1" is definitely a big step up from smaller sensors, but it's actually 1.94x smaller than M43 by area, which in turn is 1.64x smaller than Nikon APS-C (only 1.47x smaller than Canon).

The more advanced sensor tech makes up for it a bit, but there's a fair bit bigger jump in size from 1" to m43 than m43 to APS-C.

Based purely on diagonal, it is 1.33x vs 1.35x crop difference. That is the same for all practical purposes. I assumed same aspect ratio for my numbers because comparison is tough when we don't hold everything constant. Since we have different aspect ratios, I suppose you are correct. But then what print size and aspect ratio would you use to compare final output?

You need a 1.4x difference in crop factor or 2x area difference for a theoretical 1 stop advantage.

 

[Turbofrog]

Based purely on diagonal, it is 1.33x vs 1.35x crop difference. That is the same for all practical purposes. I assumed same aspect ratio for my numbers because comparison is tough when we don't hold everything constant. Since we have different aspect ratios, I suppose you are correct. But then what print size and aspect ratio would you use to compare final output?

You need a 1.4x difference in crop factor or 2x area difference for a theoretical 1 stop advantage.

I don't particularly like diagonal based comparisons, partly because I think it's innacurate, but also because the 4:3 aspect ratio is part of the secret sauce of M4/3, since it's a more efficient utilization of the lens image circle, which is part of while the lenses in the system are so tiny. If you had a square sensor, that would be even more efficient (albeit not especially more useful in the real world), but would sound even more comparatively bad in crop factor discussions because of that exact space efficiency.

If you're talking about light gathering, sensor size, and how that affects image quality, you simply need to do it based on area, since that's what physically causes the noise issues on the sensor (i.e. shot noise). You can print two images with roughly the same area with different aspect ratios (11x14 vs. 10x15, for instance) if you want to compare. But ultimately it depends on the kind of photos you take, and what aspect ratio works best for that, I guess. If you're always cropping to 3:2 or wider, M4/3 is probably not the best choice for pure image quality. If you prefer squarer compositions, 1" or APS-C is a similarly poor choice.

 

[Turbofrog]

Well, the main reason is the experience of a few thousand photos from the ZS10 and ZS50, none of which have had objectionable noise or other sensor quality problems versus the thousands of G1 and GX7 photos I have taken. We don't shoot a lot in the dark, though, and we don't crop much.

To be clearer, I am skeptical that the improvement due to the sensor would, for us, be worth significantly increased size in the camera. So I'm waiting to see how big the camera is. Life is a tradeoff.

This was just posted in the Panasonic 100-400mm thread. The TZ100 is 111 x 65 x 44 mm, and the ZS50 111 x 65 x 34 mm. So the only physical difference is 10mm thickness! Panasonic's miniaturization prowess appears again...

Unfortunately, 44mm thickness puts it in the same "barely pocketable" category as the RX100 III and IV (102 x 58 x 41 mm). But if you have a jacket pocket or a little belt pouch, it could definitely be a constant companion.

Other nuggets of usefulness that I can see skimming the text and knowing zero German is that it shoots 4K and has a very, very small 0.46x viewfinder. Same as the LF1/GM5. So not very pleasant to use, I imagine, but I'm totally ambidextrous when it comes to rear LCD / EVF usage, so the only time I have a really strong preference for the EVF is in bright light or with extremely long focal lengths or heavy lenses.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Serhan]

I just saw that post too. GM5 evf is higher spec'd then TZ100:
Viewfinder magnification 0.92×
Viewfinder resolution 1,166,000

 

[Turbofrog]

I just saw that post too. GM5 evf is higher spec'd then TZ100:
Viewfinder magnification 0.92×
Viewfinder resolution 1,166,000

Nah, it's just different units. 0.92x is the "true" magnification relative to the sensor size, so it incorporates the crop factor.

Most times magnification is referred to relative to FF. So the GM5 is the same as this cam. 0.92x would be much bigger than any flagship camera, including a medium format Pentax 645Z...