MX-1...rather impressed so far

Have had a lot of fun using the MX-1 on today's dog-walks. I love the build, and I find it just the right size for me (I don't love tiny cameras). I've not yet had to delve into the manual as it's pretty easy to find your way around (especially if you have Pentax dSLRs) and the rear info screen means you shouldn't need to dig into the menus terribly often in any case. The live highlight warning is brilliant and the whole camera is very quiet and discrete (shared with most other compacts, to be honest). The tilty rear LCD is very helpful - I actually prefer these to the fully articulated variety.

Image quality is impressive too - and so far I've only been using it for JPEGs: tomorrow I'll try out the DNGs. Pictures taken in poor indoor light last night at ISO800 (I wouldn't expect to get much at higher ISOs but I suspect 1600 would be usable for smaller prints) were far better than I had anticipated - easily usable for something like a 10 x 8, possibly more. And pictures taken outdoors today have been great. Struggling to find any CAs in the JPEGs, even at high contrast edges, colours are quite natural and realistic, and the files require very little processing. Control over depth of field is much better than I'd expected it would be.

I haven't taken any great shots yet, but that is nothing to do with the camera. Some early examples though:













I bought the camera to keep with me most of the time during the week, and I suspect it is going to get quite a lot of use - and be rather fun in the process.

Cheers,

Jon

I'm impressed too Jon. The results don't look 'compact camera-like' at all. This MX1 is high on my wishlist... in fact I think I'd prefer it to the GR, just from a usability point of view.

The last image is a stand out frame. DOF is well illustrated and the detail is very good.

Best regards

Hi guys, I have an MX-1 and I love it.
The pictiure quality is fantastic and build is amazing.
I have also ordered a GR, different but I'm sure it to will be great.
The MX-1 deserves to do well, I never leave home without mine.

I'm trying to decide between a MX-1, lumix LX7 and a micro 4/3....am leaning towards a micro 4/3 but the image quality here is making it tougher to decide. I am a little troubled by its lack of a hot shoe for a flash.

Really I feel that micro 4/3 and a compact like the MX-1 are very different. I am much more likely to have a genuine compact with me as it can be carried in a small pouch on a belt. Even the smallest micro 4/3 cameras have relatively bulky lenses and need larger/thicker bodies to house their larger and (of course) superior, sensors.

Part of the decision has to involve the convenience of a compact versus the better image quality of a micro 4/3 camera.

Another way of looking at it is if you always have a small sensor camera with you, even when you're not expecting to take pictures, you'll get a shot of some sort. If your bulkier micro 4/3 camera is at home, then you won't.

To the OP, the image quality is impressive, but do you feel the zoom range is adequate?

To the broader audience, has anyone given thought to the Lumix DMC-LX7 vs the MX-1?

I'm really impressed with my MX-1, mostly the handling (which is very similar to my K-5) but it has turned out great photos, which I wouldn't have got with a larger camera I didn't have with me. I was looking for a micro 4/3rds when I bought my K-5, but the size difference felt minimal (especially if considering one with a viewfinder). The lack of a viewfinder did put me off at first, but having used it, it's not an issue. Being able to tilt the screen up/down is a definite benefit.

I was going to wait for the GR (I also have a GR1s film camera), but by the time I'd have added the finder, 21mm adapter and hoods etc. it would have been too expensive to justify buying a fixed lens wide-angle camera.

The best advice is to go to a shop and try them all out. I can't think of any reason why a hotshoe would be useful to me on a compact - OK you could fit an EVF but I wouldn't pay £200 for one! My Minox 35mm compact doesn't have a built-in flash but I've never used its hotshoe or carried a flash gun around with it.

For me the zoom range is roughly equivalent to my DA 17-70 on APS-C. I shoot in RAW+ mode, if you then set the JPEG size to less than 12MP this allows you use the 'Intelligent Zoom' which effectively crops the JPEG in camera. You get a 'full frame' RAW capture and 'cropped' JPEG - really useful when you need quick output.

John.

Don't mean to be a pain by asking too many questions, but with the k01 it can be difficult to see the image in the LCD when the sun is reflecting strongly off of one's face (I use an LCD shade to help). It seems more like a mirror than a device for framing a shot when that happens. Do you have a similar problem with the MX-1? And, how useful is the tilting LCD in these cases?


One more thing. I posed the question above about the MX-1 vs the Lumix LX-7. I found this review that shows side-by-side comparisons, and if it was well conducted, the MX-1 is less noisy and holds detail better as you move up the iso ladder.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentax-mx-1/9

Thanks

I can't comment on the K01 as I haven't used one. I was concerned about bright sunlight but in the brightest I've tried (full UK sun in June) with the sun on the screen (not my reflection) and with the default camera settings, it was adequate. I don't remember reflections being a problem, the biggest issue has been lack of contrast when fingermarks are on the screen.

The screen tilts up to 90 degrees 'up' and 45 degrees 'down' and I think it would help whenever glare is likely to be a problem - I don't remember having to use the tilt to avoid glare though.

Well, partly based on the IQ I saw here, I went ahead last night and placed an order for an MX-1. Looking forward to getting it!

Steve

Tiz very good.

Jim

Well, I got mine...and one thing I noticed that struck me as strange.

I have my camera set to shoot RAW only, but when I change the image (megapixel) size, the number of shots left changes on the camera. In my experience, you only have one size for RAW and any changes you make to the image size only impact the JPEGs. I would understand this happening if I had it set to RAW+ or JPEG. But, I would have thought it would have no impact when I only select RAW.

There is one way to check if this is really what is happening of course. Change the size and see if it impacts the DNG file sizes that come out.

Has anyone experimented with it yet?