New C-Lux 20MP 1" sensor 24-360mm equivalent lens

[jonoslack]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Indeed any superzoom lens is going to be compromised. A cheap superzoom is even more so.

 

It's a snapshot camera, nothing more, fighting for customers who are mostly happy with their smartphone images. Obviously the zoom lets them get closer photos at shows/gigs and animals at the zoo. For some people that will be enough to justify the outlay.

 

It's not a camera for Leica photographers. Not to say it can't produce some decent results, but why would any of 'us' want to compromise this much?

 

 

I can't tell you how radically I disagree with this.

Of course it isn't an M10 or an SL or even a CL, but in good light this camera takes cracking pictures which you can certainly print up to A2 sized. 

The zoom allows you to get shots that you certainly could not with any other camera (without having to change lenses, by which time the moment has gone). 

 

I'm a Leica photographer through and through, and I'm proud of some of the shots in that article, and only too aware that I simply would not have got some of them . . even with my complete SL kit. 

 

I wouldn't dream of shooting with it at a wedding - but it's a cracking companion to an M10 (or SL) when you have unpredictable opportunities . .

 

Of course it isn't good for everything . . but nor is the SL.

 

I had a lot of fun with it, and I have some images which I really like (and I don't think I missed anything with it). 

 

Ah - it seems that I CAN tell you how radically I disagree

Edited June 17, 2018 by jonoslack

[wlaidlaw]

I can't tell you how radically I disagree with this.

Of course it isn't an M10 or an SL or even a CL, but in good light this camera takes cracking pictures which you can certainly print up to A2 sized. 

The zoom allows you to get shots that you certainly could not with any other camera (without having to change lenses, by which time the moment has gone). 

 

I'm a Leica photographer through and through, and I'm proud of some of the shots in that article, and only too aware that I simply would not have got some of them . . even with my complete SL kit. 

 

I wouldn't dream of shooting with it at a wedding - but it's a cracking companion to an M10 (or SL) when you have unpredictable opportunities . .

 

Of course it isn't good for everything . . but nor is the SL.

 

I had a lot of fun with it, and I have some images which I really like (and I don't think I missed anything with it). 

 

Ah - it seems that I CAN tell you how radically I disagree

 

Hi Jono, 

 

How sure are you that the production version will have DNG RAW? I really dislike the RWL format, which my C112 outputs. We were told the same thing, that the C112 was going to be updated with firmware to DNG from RWL but it never has. I would not have bought it if I had known that in advance. C1 converts RWL files badly and they look worse than the out of camera JPEG's, which are not at all bad. 

 

Wilson

[jonoslack]

Hi Jono, 

 

How sure are you that the production version will have DNG RAW? I really dislike the RWL format, which my C112 outputs. We were told the same thing, that the C112 was going to be updated with firmware to DNG from RWL but it never has. I would not have bought it if I had known that in advance. C1 converts RWL files badly and they look worse than the out of camera JPEG's, which are not at all bad. 

 

Wilson

 

Hi Wilson

I'm absolutely certain that I've been TOLD that it will have . . 

[jmschuh]

I can't tell you how radically I disagree with this.

Of course it isn't an M10 or an SL or even a CL, but in good light this camera takes cracking pictures which you can certainly print up to A2 sized. 

The zoom allows you to get shots that you certainly could not with any other camera (without having to change lenses, by which time the moment has gone). 

 

I'm a Leica photographer through and through, and I'm proud of some of the shots in that article, and only too aware that I simply would not have got some of them . . even with my complete SL kit. 

 

I wouldn't dream of shooting with it at a wedding - but it's a cracking companion to an M10 (or SL) when you have unpredictable opportunities . .

 

Of course it isn't good for everything . . but nor is the SL.

 

I had a lot of fun with it, and I have some images which I really like (and I don't think I missed anything with it). 

 

Ah - it seems that I CAN tell you how radically I disagree

Your experiences stand in total contrast to all testers who have tested the Panasonic original. The testers criticize the soft image results, the disappointing detail resolution and the considerable series variation of different cameras with different optical errors.

[wlaidlaw]

If the C-Lux uses the same sensor as the TZ200, (I hope not), according to various reviews, this is the same sensor as the Sony RX100 Mk.2 of 2013. Sony is now on the RX100 Mk.6 or 4 generations later sensor. I hope that Leica have managed to get Panasonic to source a later generation of sensor for their new camera, if not the latest, which I would imagine Sony restrict to their own branded cameras.

 

Wilson 

[monsieur nobs]

Your experiences stand in total contrast to all testers who have tested the Panasonic original. The testers criticize the soft image results, the disappointing detail resolution and the considerable series variation of different cameras with different optical errors.

Not all "testers". My TZ202 works very good and the pictures are not soft or otherwise disappointing!

[mmradman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If the C-Lux uses the same sensor as the TZ200, (I hope not), according to various reviews, this is the same sensor as the Sony RX100 Mk.2 of 2013. Sony is now on the RX100 Mk.6 or 4 generations later sensor. I hope that Leica have managed to get Panasonic to source a later generation of sensor for their new camera, if not the latest, which I would imagine Sony restrict to their own branded cameras.

 

Wilson 

 

Did camera rebadging ever involved different sensor?

[mmradman]

Hi Wilson

I'm absolutely certain that I've been TOLD that it will have . . 

There was that pop song advising audiance how to make world peace.

[jmschuh]

Not all "testers". My TZ202 works very good and the pictures are not soft or otherwise disappointing!

 

 

You're not a tester.

[jonoslack]

Your experiences stand in total contrast to all testers who have tested the Panasonic original. The testers criticize the soft image results, the disappointing detail resolution and the considerable series variation of different cameras with different optical errors.

 

 

Hi There

Hmm - I read some very good reviews of the TZ200 - but I do realise there was a lot of sample variation with the lens on the original TZ200 - I understand that Leica have checked this very carefully, but certainly I had no complaints with the camera I was using and I wonder whether the TZ200 problems didn't hinge around a batch of pre-production cameras which were not all they should have been? You would think they would have checked them carefully before sending to the press, but perhaps not everything!

 

Of course, I can't be categorical because I only used one camera, but apart from an expected (slight) fall-off at the long end it  performed very well. 

 

Best

[jonoslack]

If the C-Lux uses the same sensor as the TZ200, (I hope not), according to various reviews, this is the same sensor as the Sony RX100 Mk.2 of 2013. Sony is now on the RX100 Mk.6 or 4 generations later sensor. I hope that Leica have managed to get Panasonic to source a later generation of sensor for their new camera, if not the latest, which I would imagine Sony restrict to their own branded cameras.

 

Wilson 

I'm sure it does have the same sensor as the Panasonic Wilson - but I thought it was the same as that in the mk v Sony (could be wrong though). 

[wlaidlaw]

I'm sure it does have the same sensor as the Panasonic Wilson - but I thought it was the same as that in the mk v Sony (could be wrong though). 

 

Jono, 

 

You would have expected that Panasonic would have moved on to stay just one generation behind Sony. It would not make commercial sense for Sony to give their latest generation (VI) to their competitors. I would have thought the Gen.V would be good enough and certainly a country mile ahead of Mrs.L's current V-Lux 20, which must be close to 8 years old now or a lifetime for digital camera evolution. In any case it is the Panasonic TZ220 we should be comparing the C-Lux not the TZ200, as that has been superceded. 

 

Wilson

 

PS The TZ220 outputs RW2 files in RAW not the older RWL. This would account for them not being supported by LR unless fully updated, which others have reported but is supposed to have been sorted with Camera RAW 10.3 in April. I would suspect that the C-Lux may also be outputting RW2 or RWL2 files.  I deleted and reloaded my copy of LR Classic CC V.7.3.1 and it does now support the RWL files from my C112, so my copy must have been corrupt. W.

Edited June 18, 2018 by wlaidlaw

[dugby]

I did wonder if I might be better getting my wife a Sony RX100 mk.6 but then what might raise its ugly head would be........"I see - you get Leica cameras but I get Sony"     My wife has always had Pana-Leicas. Also the Sony is more expensive than the Leica (not often I say that) €1300 against €970. 

 

I also almost bought my wife a Sony RX100, and expected the same "trap" that you mention above,

as the D-Lux isn't as handbag friendly as a RX100.  So I bought her the Hasselblad Stellar     

Edited June 19, 2018 by dugby

[jonoslack]

Jono, 

 

You would have expected that Panasonic would have moved on to stay just one generation behind Sony. It would not make commercial sense for Sony to give their latest generation (VI) to their competitors. I would have thought the Gen.V would be good enough and certainly a country mile ahead of Mrs.L's current V-Lux 20, which must be close to 8 years old now or a lifetime for digital camera evolution. In any case it is the Panasonic TZ220 we should be comparing the C-Lux not the TZ200, as that has been superceded. 

 

Wilson

 

PS The TZ220 outputs RW2 files in RAW not the older RWL. This would account for them not being supported by LR unless fully updated, which others have reported but is supposed to have been sorted with Camera RAW 10.3 in April. I would suspect that the C-Lux may also be outputting RW2 or RWL2 files.  I deleted and reloaded my copy of LR Classic CC V.7.3.1 and it does now support the RWL files from my C112, so my copy must have been corrupt. W.

Hi Wilson

First of all, the TZ220 is not a newer version (AFAIW), because it’s not for sale in the UK - just the TZ200 (I think it’s nomenclature). The C-Lux currently (with pre-production firmware) produces RWL files (not RW2) I have been told by Leica that the production firmware will produce DNG files, and I’m trying to get final confirmation on this.

 

As for which version of the sensor it is, I imagine that they’re all slightly different, so that what you should be looking at is the quality of the output rather than anything else - and I think it’s pretty good.

[wlaidlaw]

Jono, 

 

The TZ220 is just becoming available this week in the UK. The review copies have been out for a couple of weeks with UK reviewers and the first ones are now for sale https://www.eglobalcentraluk.com/panasonic-lumix-dmc-tz220-digitale-cameras-zilver-alleen-in-engels.html# It went on sale in the USA and Far East in April, which is when ACR was updated to handle RW2 files. 

 

Wilson

[jonoslack]

Jono, 

 

The TZ220 is just becoming available this week in the UK. The review copies have been out for a couple of weeks with UK reviewers and the first ones are now for sale https://www.eglobalcentraluk.com/panasonic-lumix-dmc-tz220-digitale-cameras-zilver-alleen-in-engels.html# It went on sale in the USA and Far East in April, which is when ACR was updated to handle RW2 files. 

 

Wilson

 

Hi Wilson

It's not listed in the shops here - what's the difference between it and the TZ200?

 

for instance this guy says they're the same:

 

http://www.photobyrichard.com/reviewbyrichard/panasonic-lumix-dc-tz220-tz200-zs200-tx2-review/

 

I think the TZ220 name is for Australia TS200 for the states and TZ200 for Europe

 

https://www.panasonic.com/nz/consumer/cameras-camcorders/lumix-digital-cameras/compact-zoom/dc-tz220.html

 

https://www.panasonic.com/uk/consumer/cameras-camcorders/lumix-digital-cameras/superzoom-cameras.html

 

For example

Edited June 19, 2018 by jonoslack

[wlaidlaw]

Jono,

 

I understand it is a later sensor. The TZ200 was believed to use the sensor from the 2014 Sony RX100-III, although that seems quite old for a camera first announced in 2017. It is believed the TZ220 uses the sensor from the 2016/7 RX100-V. It was released by Panasonic in April 2018, whereas the TZ200 was released in November last year. I have to agree it seems an extraordinarily short life for a camera but it may just be that Sony no longer fabs the older sensor and was forced to update Panasonic's supplies, so Panasonic rolled the digits of the camera name forward by 20. Only reason I can think of. 

 

Wilson

[ianman]

I'm a bit late to the party but Iridient Developper can open D-Lux4 RWL files... maybe it's an older version but you test using a free demo of the software.

[jonoslack]

Jono,

 

I understand it is a later sensor. The TZ200 was believed to use the sensor from the 2014 Sony RX100-III, although that seems quite old for a camera first announced in 2017. It is believed the TZ220 uses the sensor from the 2016/7 RX100-V. It was released by Panasonic in April 2018, whereas the TZ200 was released in November last year. I have to agree it seems an extraordinarily short life for a camera but it may just be that Sony no longer fabs the older sensor and was forced to update Panasonic's supplies, so Panasonic rolled the digits of the camera name forward by 20. Only reason I can think of.

 

Wilson

Hi Wilson

I’m really confused by this - if you look at dpreview (https://www.dpreview.com/products/panasonic/compacts/panasonic_dczs200) they say the TZ200 was announced in February this year - neither they, nor WEX photographic even mention the TZ220 as far as I can see. Searching the Dpreview site finds no mention of it at all.

 

Where did you get the information from?

 

PS I now discover from Leica that they’ve changed their story, and that the C-Lux uses RWL files and NOT DNG files as I was first informed.

Edited June 20, 2018 by jonoslack

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Lux

[jaapv]

http://www.photoreview.com.au/reviews/advanced-compact-cameras/fixed-lens/panasonic-lumix-dc-tz220

 

 

DPReview is not always up to date