Sony RX10 is interesting for m4/3 users Locked

Started Oct 17, 2013 | Discussions
This thread is locked.
dougjgreen1
Senior MemberPosts: 2,200Gear list
And it will face the same Questions......
In reply to Sean Nelson, Oct 19, 2013

Sean Nelson wrote:

marike6 wrote:

I have no problem with the Sony RX10 (other than the price which seems high for a bridge camera). The point is was trying to make is: why should an almost 2 lb camera (heavier than virtually every APS-C / m43 mirrorless, and most mid-range DSLRs) be of interest to m43 users?

It's because this camera has just opened up a new point on the sensor size / capability spectrum, and that point is directly adjacent to M43. Before the 1" sensor cameras were introduced, there was a huge gap between M43 and "compact" cameras. Now the 1" sensors provide a new choice for those who don't quite need the capabilities of the M43 system but who aren't satisfied with small-sensor compacts.

Just as M43 users have decided they don't need FF or APS-C capabilities, some of the people who choose the RX10 will do so because they decide they don't need M43 capabilities. And of all the 1" sensor cameras out there, this one has the greatest focal length range while having a lens fast enough to distinguish it from its smaller-sensored compatriots - and it has a lot of features such as (presumably) good video, weather sealing, etc. which may have attracted people to M43. Yes it's large and heavy, but not really any more so than carrying around an M43 body and two zoom lenses or even an M43 body and the 14-140.

Like it or not, for a certain slice of the market this is an M43 competitor. I've been waiting for the right M43 camera to show up for quite a long time, and I'm now considering the RX10 instead. I can't be the only one out there thinking this way.

For a smaller sensor, and the IQ sacrifice that entails (admittedly minor) why isn't it smaller?  This camera is bigger than just about ANY M43 camera other than the GH3.

 dougjgreen1's gear list:dougjgreen1's gear list
Olympus Stylus XZ-10 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Nikon 1 V2 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital 11-22mm 1:2.8-3.5 +11 more
marike6
Senior MemberPosts: 5,070Gear list
Re: And it will face the same Questions......
In reply to dougjgreen1, Oct 19, 2013

dougjgreen1 wrote:

Sean Nelson wrote:

marike6 wrote:

I have no problem with the Sony RX10 (other than the price which seems high for a bridge camera). The point is was trying to make is: why should an almost 2 lb camera (heavier than virtually every APS-C / m43 mirrorless, and most mid-range DSLRs) be of interest to m43 users?

It's because this camera has just opened up a new point on the sensor size / capability spectrum, and that point is directly adjacent to M43. Before the 1" sensor cameras were introduced, there was a huge gap between M43 and "compact" cameras. Now the 1" sensors provide a new choice for those who don't quite need the capabilities of the M43 system but who aren't satisfied with small-sensor compacts.

Just as M43 users have decided they don't need FF or APS-C capabilities, some of the people who choose the RX10 will do so because they decide they don't need M43 capabilities. And of all the 1" sensor cameras out there, this one has the greatest focal length range while having a lens fast enough to distinguish it from its smaller-sensored compatriots - and it has a lot of features such as (presumably) good video, weather sealing, etc. which may have attracted people to M43. Yes it's large and heavy, but not really any more so than carrying around an M43 body and two zoom lenses or even an M43 body and the 14-140.

Like it or not, for a certain slice of the market this is an M43 competitor. I've been waiting for the right M43 camera to show up for quite a long time, and I'm now considering the RX10 instead. I can't be the only one out there thinking this way.

For a smaller sensor, and the IQ sacrifice that entails (admittedly minor) why isn't it smaller? This camera is bigger than just about ANY M43 camera other than the GH3.\

It's bigger, it's heavier and more expensive than even almost ALL m43 cameras w/ kits.

I have no problem with 1", I've owned both the RX100 and Nikon V1, both excellent cameras. But the RX100 is great for scenics, not selective focus type images. The Nikon V1 absolutely need fast, large aperture lenses to be interesting. Otherwise DOF is hideously deep.

So no 1" cameras are NOT a strict 1 to 1 competitor with m43. I find it hard to believe that m43 users think so little of their chosen format to think camera with a small 1" sensor camera replace it for a little bridge camera convenience.

I thought the point of m43 was SMALL with DLSR IQ. DSLR quality not just based on a DxOMark sensor rating number, or an arbitrary DR or color depth number, but true shallow DOF, selective focus type images that only larger sensor with fast max aperture lenses cameras are capable of.

Sorry, but a 24-200 f8 DOF equivalent camera sounds OK. But tell me it's the same price as a Fujifilm X-E2 / 18-55 f/2.8-4 kit, or D7100 kit and I'll try not to laugh, I promise.

 marike6's gear list:marike6's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +7 more
marike6
Senior MemberPosts: 5,070Gear list
Re: Why should the RX10 be interesting...
In reply to Sean Nelson, Oct 19, 2013

Sean Nelson wrote:

marike6 wrote:

I have no problem with the Sony RX10 (other than the price which seems high for a bridge camera). The point is was trying to make is: why should an almost 2 lb camera (heavier than virtually every APS-C / m43 mirrorless, and most mid-range DSLRs) be of interest to m43 users?

It's because this camera has just opened up a new point on the sensor size / capability spectrum, and that point is directly adjacent to M43. Before the 1" sensor cameras were introduced, there was a huge gap between M43 and "compact" cameras. Now the 1" sensors provide a new choice for those who don't quite need the capabilities of the M43 system but who aren't satisfied with small-sensor compacts.

Nikon 1 cameras were already competitive with the 12 mp m43 cameras.  But that doesn't mean they or the RX100 or RX10 can completely replace a larger sensor cameras.  For some maybe.  The question was "why should RX10 be interesting to m43 users?".  So your answer is because some m43 don't even need the capabilities of m43 cameras?

So I suppose after everyone here buys the RX10, your next post will contend that the new Panasonic FZ300 Bridge camera with a 2/3" sensor is interesting to Sony 1" users.  Why?  Because Sony RX10 users don't really need the RX10.

I guess by the end of 2015, all m43 users will be using smartphone cameras because that's "all they need".

Just as M43 users have decided they don't need FF or APS-C capabilities, some of the people who choose the RX10 will do so because they decide they don't need M43 capabilities.

So the $1400 RX10 is interesting because m43 cameras are overkill for the majority of users here?

Wow.  That's just sad.  I've seen some extremely high quality images here and I know that they are tons of m43 users here who care about the craft of photography and what you have just said is just sad.

 marike6's gear list:marike6's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +7 more
Dheorl
Senior MemberPosts: 2,636Gear list
Re: And it will face the same Questions......
In reply to marike6, Oct 19, 2013

marike6 wrote:

dougjgreen1 wrote:

Sean Nelson wrote:

marike6 wrote:

I have no problem with the Sony RX10 (other than the price which seems high for a bridge camera). The point is was trying to make is: why should an almost 2 lb camera (heavier than virtually every APS-C / m43 mirrorless, and most mid-range DSLRs) be of interest to m43 users?

It's because this camera has just opened up a new point on the sensor size / capability spectrum, and that point is directly adjacent to M43. Before the 1" sensor cameras were introduced, there was a huge gap between M43 and "compact" cameras. Now the 1" sensors provide a new choice for those who don't quite need the capabilities of the M43 system but who aren't satisfied with small-sensor compacts.

Just as M43 users have decided they don't need FF or APS-C capabilities, some of the people who choose the RX10 will do so because they decide they don't need M43 capabilities. And of all the 1" sensor cameras out there, this one has the greatest focal length range while having a lens fast enough to distinguish it from its smaller-sensored compatriots - and it has a lot of features such as (presumably) good video, weather sealing, etc. which may have attracted people to M43. Yes it's large and heavy, but not really any more so than carrying around an M43 body and two zoom lenses or even an M43 body and the 14-140.

Like it or not, for a certain slice of the market this is an M43 competitor. I've been waiting for the right M43 camera to show up for quite a long time, and I'm now considering the RX10 instead. I can't be the only one out there thinking this way.

For a smaller sensor, and the IQ sacrifice that entails (admittedly minor) why isn't it smaller? This camera is bigger than just about ANY M43 camera other than the GH3.\

It's bigger, it's heavier and more expensive than even almost ALL m43 cameras w/ kits.

And almost all m43 cameras with kits have less range and over most of that range less control over DoF.

I have no problem with 1", I've owned both the RX100 and Nikon V1, both excellent cameras. But the RX100 is great for scenics, not selective focus type images. The Nikon V1 absolutely need fast, large aperture lenses to be interesting. Otherwise DOF is hideously deep.

If you can't make interesting images without resorting to gimmicks such as shallow DoF I think that says more about you than it does the cameras you use.

So no 1" cameras are NOT a strict 1 to 1 competitor with m43. I find it hard to believe that m43 users think so little of their chosen format to think camera with a small 1" sensor camera replace it for a little bridge camera convenience.

I thought the point of m43 was SMALL with DLSR IQ. DSLR quality not just based on a DxOMark sensor rating number, or an arbitrary DR or color depth number, but true shallow DOF, selective focus type images that only larger sensor with fast max aperture lenses cameras are capable of.

The point of m43 is to have another point on the scale of IQ vs size and convenience, the RX10 just adds another  point on this scale.

Sorry, but a 24-200 f8 DOF equivalent camera sounds OK. But tell me it's the same price as a Fujifilm X-E2 / 18-55 f/2.8-4 kit, or D7100 kit and I'll try not to laugh, I promise.

Is DoF really all you think about? It has so much going for it over either of those cameras that I think the price is justified.

Dheorl
Senior MemberPosts: 2,636Gear list
Re: Why should the RX10 be interesting...
In reply to marike6, Oct 19, 2013

marike6 wrote:

Sean Nelson wrote:

marike6 wrote:

I have no problem with the Sony RX10 (other than the price which seems high for a bridge camera). The point is was trying to make is: why should an almost 2 lb camera (heavier than virtually every APS-C / m43 mirrorless, and most mid-range DSLRs) be of interest to m43 users?

It's because this camera has just opened up a new point on the sensor size / capability spectrum, and that point is directly adjacent to M43. Before the 1" sensor cameras were introduced, there was a huge gap between M43 and "compact" cameras. Now the 1" sensors provide a new choice for those who don't quite need the capabilities of the M43 system but who aren't satisfied with small-sensor compacts.

Nikon 1 cameras were already competitive with the 12 mp m43 cameras. But that doesn't mean they or the RX100 or RX10 can completely replace a larger sensor cameras. For some maybe. The question was "why should RX10 be interesting to m43 users?". So your answer is because some m43 don't even need the capabilities of m43 cameras?

So I suppose after everyone here buys the RX10, your next post will contend that the new Panasonic FZ300 Bridge camera with a 2/3" sensor is interesting to Sony 1" users. Why? Because Sony RX10 users don't really need the RX10.

I guess by the end of 2015, all m43 users will be using smartphone cameras because that's "all they need".

As i said everyone has a different point on the size vs quality scale they're willing to settle at. M43 that can offer the same quality and range as the RX10 will be able to is often still to big for me to take with me aa lot of the time (or missing other factors such as weather sealing). I wouldn't want to go much lower on that scale though.

Just as M43 users have decided they don't need FF or APS-C capabilities, some of the people who choose the RX10 will do so because they decide they don't need M43 capabilities.

So the $1400 RX10 is interesting because m43 cameras are overkill for the majority of users here?

Wow. That's just sad. I've seen some extremely high quality images here and I know that they are tons of m43 users here who care about the craft of photography and what you have just said is just sad.

And I'm sure most of those wonderful images would have looked just as wonderful taken with the Sony. Do you think no owner of an RX10 can take a good image because if you do that's just sad.

marike6
Senior MemberPosts: 5,070Gear list
Re: And it will face the same Questions......
In reply to Dheorl, Oct 19, 2013

Dheorl wrote:

marike6 wrote:

dougjgreen1 wrote:

Sean Nelson wrote:

marike6 wrote:

I have no problem with the Sony RX10 (other than the price which seems high for a bridge camera). The point is was trying to make is: why should an almost 2 lb camera (heavier than virtually every APS-C / m43 mirrorless, and most mid-range DSLRs) be of interest to m43 users?

It's because this camera has just opened up a new point on the sensor size / capability spectrum, and that point is directly adjacent to M43. Before the 1" sensor cameras were introduced, there was a huge gap between M43 and "compact" cameras. Now the 1" sensors provide a new choice for those who don't quite need the capabilities of the M43 system but who aren't satisfied with small-sensor compacts.

Just as M43 users have decided they don't need FF or APS-C capabilities, some of the people who choose the RX10 will do so because they decide they don't need M43 capabilities. And of all the 1" sensor cameras out there, this one has the greatest focal length range while having a lens fast enough to distinguish it from its smaller-sensored compatriots - and it has a lot of features such as (presumably) good video, weather sealing, etc. which may have attracted people to M43. Yes it's large and heavy, but not really any more so than carrying around an M43 body and two zoom lenses or even an M43 body and the 14-140.

Like it or not, for a certain slice of the market this is an M43 competitor. I've been waiting for the right M43 camera to show up for quite a long time, and I'm now considering the RX10 instead. I can't be the only one out there thinking this way.

For a smaller sensor, and the IQ sacrifice that entails (admittedly minor) why isn't it smaller? This camera is bigger than just about ANY M43 camera other than the GH3.\

It's bigger, it's heavier and more expensive than even almost ALL m43 cameras w/ kits.

And almost all m43 cameras with kits have less range and over most of that range less control over DoF.

But very few if any serious m43 photographers stick with the kit lenses but opt for the optically better, and more interesting large aperture primes like the 12 f/2, 20 f/1.7, 25 f/1.4, 45 f/1.8, not to mention the few large aperture zooms.

I have no problem with 1", I've owned both the RX100 and Nikon V1, both excellent cameras. But the RX100 is great for scenics, not selective focus type images. The Nikon V1 absolutely need fast, large aperture lenses to be interesting. Otherwise DOF is hideously deep.

If you can't make interesting images without resorting to gimmicks such as shallow DoF I think that says more about you than it does the cameras you use.

Shallow DOF is not a gimmick. Selective focus something that distinguishes large sensor cameras from bland smart phone and compact snap shots. But yes if you just want to record some scenics or family events and don't care about DOF control, by all means don't shoot m43, APS-C or FF.

So no 1" cameras are NOT a strict 1 to 1 competitor with m43. I find it hard to believe that m43 users think so little of their chosen format to think camera with a small 1" sensor camera replace it for a little bridge camera convenience.

I thought the point of m43 was SMALL with DLSR IQ. DSLR quality not just based on a DxOMark sensor rating number, or an arbitrary DR or color depth number, but true shallow DOF, selective focus type images that only larger sensor with fast max aperture lenses cameras are capable of.

The point of m43 is to have another point on the scale of IQ vs size and convenience, the RX10 just adds another point on this scale.

The RX10 is as large, heavy and expensive as most DSLRs. Not sure what point it adds on any scale or how it relates to m43 at all. m43 is about small size, low weight cameras with DSLR level IQ in all kinds of natural light situations.

Sorry, but a 24-200 f8 DOF equivalent camera sounds OK. But tell me it's the same price as a Fujifilm X-E2 / 18-55 f/2.8-4 kit, or D7100 kit and I'll try not to laugh, I promise.

Is DoF really all you think about? It has so much going for it over either of those cameras that I think the price is justified.

No DOF is not everything nor is price. But I have no interest in a $1400 Sony bridge camera that's less versatile, has worse IQ, and cannot mount any lenses below 24mm or above 200mm.  But photography is a very personal thing, and everybody has different needs. If you want the camera, buy it.  I see little need for m43 users to be interested in such a camera when a EM-5, GH3 or EM-1 will provide better IQ, and access to a ton of primes and zooms.

 marike6's gear list:marike6's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +7 more
marike6
Senior MemberPosts: 5,070Gear list
Jumping ship?
In reply to Henry Richardson, Oct 19, 2013

So judging by these recent threads, half the m43 are jumping ship for the RX10 and half are jumping ship for the A7.

Is this the end of m43?  Kind of sad for all those nice m43 primes going to waste for the shiny Sony cameras.  But judging by all these answers in this thread, m43 is even overkill.  People just want snaps and convenience.  So all the small size vs DSLR arguments I've had were really BS.  It's not small size, or low weight but convenience with sort of decent IQ up to ISO 800.  At least now I understand.

 marike6's gear list:marike6's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +7 more
Dheorl
Senior MemberPosts: 2,636Gear list
Re: And it will face the same Questions......
In reply to marike6, Oct 19, 2013

marike6 wrote:

Dheorl wrote:

marike6 wrote:

dougjgreen1 wrote:

Sean Nelson wrote:

marike6 wrote:

I have no problem with the Sony RX10 (other than the price which seems high for a bridge camera). The point is was trying to make is: why should an almost 2 lb camera (heavier than virtually every APS-C / m43 mirrorless, and most mid-range DSLRs) be of interest to m43 users?

It's because this camera has just opened up a new point on the sensor size / capability spectrum, and that point is directly adjacent to M43. Before the 1" sensor cameras were introduced, there was a huge gap between M43 and "compact" cameras. Now the 1" sensors provide a new choice for those who don't quite need the capabilities of the M43 system but who aren't satisfied with small-sensor compacts.

Just as M43 users have decided they don't need FF or APS-C capabilities, some of the people who choose the RX10 will do so because they decide they don't need M43 capabilities. And of all the 1" sensor cameras out there, this one has the greatest focal length range while having a lens fast enough to distinguish it from its smaller-sensored compatriots - and it has a lot of features such as (presumably) good video, weather sealing, etc. which may have attracted people to M43. Yes it's large and heavy, but not really any more so than carrying around an M43 body and two zoom lenses or even an M43 body and the 14-140.

Like it or not, for a certain slice of the market this is an M43 competitor. I've been waiting for the right M43 camera to show up for quite a long time, and I'm now considering the RX10 instead. I can't be the only one out there thinking this way.

For a smaller sensor, and the IQ sacrifice that entails (admittedly minor) why isn't it smaller? This camera is bigger than just about ANY M43 camera other than the GH3.\

It's bigger, it's heavier and more expensive than even almost ALL m43 cameras w/ kits.

And almost all m43 cameras with kits have less range and over most of that range less control over DoF.

But very few if any serious m43 photographers stick with the kit lenses but opt for the optically better, and more interesting large aperture primes like the 12 f/2, 20 f/1.7, 25 f/1.4, 45 f/1.8, not to mention the few large aperture zooms.

In which case the resulting kit is bigger than the RX10, especially if you want to cover anything like the same range. Pick one argument or the other because you can't have it both ways.

I have no problem with 1", I've owned both the RX100 and Nikon V1, both excellent cameras. But the RX100 is great for scenics, not selective focus type images. The Nikon V1 absolutely need fast, large aperture lenses to be interesting. Otherwise DOF is hideously deep.

If you can't make interesting images without resorting to gimmicks such as shallow DoF I think that says more about you than it does the cameras you use.

Shallow DOF is not a gimmick. Selective focus something that distinguishes large sensor cameras from bland smart phone and compact snap shots. But yes if you just want to record some scenics or family events and don't care about DOF control, by all means don't shoot m43, APS-C or FF.

So you think a photo which has deep DOF is automatically bland. Dear me there really is just no helping some people. I'm sure Ansel Adams would turn in his grave if he heard that.

Also I've got perfectly nice separation at the long end of a kit lens with m43. The RX10 is capable of narrower DoF than that.

So no 1" cameras are NOT a strict 1 to 1 competitor with m43. I find it hard to believe that m43 users think so little of their chosen format to think camera with a small 1" sensor camera replace it for a little bridge camera convenience.

I thought the point of m43 was SMALL with DLSR IQ. DSLR quality not just based on a DxOMark sensor rating number, or an arbitrary DR or color depth number, but true shallow DOF, selective focus type images that only larger sensor with fast max aperture lenses cameras are capable of.

The point of m43 is to have another point on the scale of IQ vs size and convenience, the RX10 just adds another point on this scale.

The RX10 is as large, heavy and expensive as most DSLRs. Not sure what point it adds on any scale or how it relates to m43 at all. m43 is about small size, low weight cameras with DSLR level IQ in all kinds of natural light situations.

Because to get equivalent range with a DSLR of similar specifications requires a bigger kit. I'm sure the RX10 will be able to get DSLR quality in many natural light situations and will be a smaller size than many m43 cameras trying to accomplish the same. Also that might be what m43 is to you but that doesn't mean that's all its good for. I like it just as much for the fact it has DSLR style bodies with an electronic viewfinder and great ergonomics.

Sorry, but a 24-200 f8 DOF equivalent camera sounds OK. But tell me it's the same price as a Fujifilm X-E2 / 18-55 f/2.8-4 kit, or D7100 kit and I'll try not to laugh, I promise.

Is DoF really all you think about? It has so much going for it over either of those cameras that I think the price is justified.

No DOF is not everything nor is price. But I have no interest in a $1400 Sony bridge camera that's less versatile, has worse IQ, and cannot mount any lenses below 24mm or above 200mm. But photography is a very personal thing, and everybody has different needs. If you want the camera, buy it. I see little need for m43 users to be interested in such a camera when a EM-5, GH3 or EM-1 will provide better IQ, and access to a ton of primes and zooms.

I'm a m43 user and I'm interested in it as are seemingly many other people. If it doesn't interest you then why are you even bothering to discuss it? Do you feel you're doing us some sort of service telling us our photos will immediately start to suck if we buy one because trust me, you're not.

Dheorl
Senior MemberPosts: 2,636Gear list
Re: Jumping ship?
In reply to marike6, Oct 19, 2013

marike6 wrote:

So judging by these recent threads, half the m43 are jumping ship for the RX10 and half are jumping ship for the A7.

Is this the end of m43? Kind of sad for all those nice m43 primes going to waste for the shiny Sony cameras. But judging by all these answers in this thread, m43 is even overkill. People just want snaps and convenience. So all the small size vs DSLR arguments I've had were really BS. It's not small size, or low weight but convenience with sort of decent IQ up to ISO 800. At least now I understand.

I don't think I've taken a "snap" since I was 16. I do however regularly want to go to extreme environments to take photos and normally use  24-200mm range. I really can't see why you think as you do with regards to a very slightly smaller sensor being completely pointless.

Also the "sort of decent iq" comment is just laughable.

Thomas Karlmann
Senior MemberPosts: 2,683Gear list
Re: The screen articulates
In reply to cgarrard, Oct 19, 2013

cgarrard wrote:

honeyiscool wrote:

If the next G series model, the G7?, has the GX7 sensor and finally adds a headphone jack and perhaps IBIS (not necessary), the RX10 will have zero appeal to me.

As it is, the RX10 is interesting to video shooters, although in typical Sony fashion, they've managed to muck it up in one obvious fashion: no articulating screen.

UP and down. The flip and twist style LCD isn't the best solution for everyone, so lets not pretend it is. Some shooters don't even want a flip and twist and prefer the simplicity/purity of a fixed screen. Sony met them in the middle.

So they didn't muck up the design just because they didn't want to pay royalties to use the flip and twist style screen that only maybe half of users would want over the flip up/down type.

Different users, different desires.

We (all of us) never agree 100% on any one style of anything. Thank god.

I'm one who does not like the twisting screen -- but require the tilting screen.  The BEST screen tilt mechanism I have ever seen is the one on the Sony a99.  Fabulous, IMO, YMMV.

-- hide signature --

Thom--

jim stirling
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,372Gear list
Re: Jumping ship?
In reply to marike6, Oct 19, 2013

marike6 wrote:

So judging by these recent threads, half the m43 are jumping ship for the RX10 and half are jumping ship for the A7.

Is this the end of m43? Kind of sad for all those nice m43 primes going to waste for the shiny Sony cameras. But judging by all these answers in this thread, m43 is even overkill. People just want snaps and convenience. So all the small size vs DSLR arguments I've had were really BS. It's not small size, or low weight but convenience with sort of decent IQ up to ISO 800. At least now I understand.

The whole rationale behind mFt is a smaller lighter more convenient to carry system with decent image quality. If you are looking for the best resolution, or the best high ISO ,or the best DR or the best colour depth , mFT wouldn't be at the races .

All camera systems are sacrifices with mFt compared to larger formats you sacrifice absolute image quality for small and convenient , perhaps you have not noticed the thousands of posts here that mention exactly that .For very many uses mFt is overkill each to their own

 jim stirling's gear list:jim stirling's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Sony Alpha 7R Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Nikon D810 +13 more
marike6
Senior MemberPosts: 5,070Gear list
Re: Jumping ship?
In reply to Dheorl, Oct 19, 2013

Dheorl wrote:

marike6 wrote:

So judging by these recent threads, half the m43 are jumping ship for the RX10 and half are jumping ship for the A7.

Is this the end of m43? Kind of sad for all those nice m43 primes going to waste for the shiny Sony cameras. But judging by all these answers in this thread, m43 is even overkill. People just want snaps and convenience. So all the small size vs DSLR arguments I've had were really BS. It's not small size, or low weight but convenience with sort of decent IQ up to ISO 800. At least now I understand.

I don't think I've taken a "snap" since I was 16. I do however regularly want to go to extreme environments to take photos and normally use 24-200mm range. I really can't see why you think as you do with regards to a very slightly smaller sensor being completely pointless.

I don't think 1" is pointless at all.  You misunderstand.  The OP said specifically that the RX10 should be of particular interest to m43 users.  And as a m43 user you know that an overwhelming majority of m43 users value small size, low weight in a system.  Many people are interested in bridge cameras, that doesn't mean bridge cameras have relevance to m43 any more than they do to APS-C or FF users.

As for 1" sensor cameras I've owned 3: the RX100, Nikon V1 and Nikon J1.  They are all excellent in their own way.  But the RX100 I could put in my pocket, it has an f/1.8 decently fast lens at the wide angle and it was only $650.  The Nikon V1 I could mount any lens from ultra wide angle zoom, a fast 50 f/1.8 to a 100-300 type zoom.  And it offers the very best AF performance of any MILC I've ever used with DSLR style PDAF tracking.

If I had a fixed 24-200 f/2.8 on a Nikon 1 or Sony RX10, it might be OK, but it's not all that exciting for the things I like to shoot. And definitely a 2 lb version for $1400 is not something I'd run out and buy. I don't shoot sports and but when I used to I always used a DSLR. Now I prefer large aperture primes and I have a FF DSLR with a bag of lenses.  When I want to travel light or shoot on the street of Manhattan or in Europe, my preference is for a small m43 or Fujifilm mirrorless camera.  $1400 buys a lot of good primes and a decent large sensor camera.  YMMV.

 marike6's gear list:marike6's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +7 more
Dheorl
Senior MemberPosts: 2,636Gear list
Re: Jumping ship?
In reply to marike6, Oct 19, 2013

marike6 wrote:

Dheorl wrote:

marike6 wrote:

So judging by these recent threads, half the m43 are jumping ship for the RX10 and half are jumping ship for the A7.

Is this the end of m43? Kind of sad for all those nice m43 primes going to waste for the shiny Sony cameras. But judging by all these answers in this thread, m43 is even overkill. People just want snaps and convenience. So all the small size vs DSLR arguments I've had were really BS. It's not small size, or low weight but convenience with sort of decent IQ up to ISO 800. At least now I understand.

I don't think I've taken a "snap" since I was 16. I do however regularly want to go to extreme environments to take photos and normally use 24-200mm range. I really can't see why you think as you do with regards to a very slightly smaller sensor being completely pointless.

I don't think 1" is pointless at all. You misunderstand. The OP said specifically that the RX10 should be of particular interest to m43 users. And as a m43 user you know that an overwhelming majority of m43 users value small size, low weight in a system. Many people are interested in bridge cameras, that doesn't mean bridge cameras have relevance to m43 any more than they do to APS-C or FF users.

Well if your a m43 user chances are you already decided to sacrifice a bit of IQ for a smaller more convince t package, the RX10 is just going one step further so I would have said it made perfect sense for it to be of more interest to m43 users than to DSLR users.

As for 1" sensor cameras I've owned 3: the RX100, Nikon V1 and Nikon J1. They are all excellent in their own way. But the RX100 I could put in my pocket, it has an f/1.8 decently fast lens at the wide angle and it was only $650. The Nikon V1 I could mount any lens from ultra wide angle zoom, a fast 50 f/1.8 to a 100-300 type zoom. And it offers the very best AF performance of any MILC I've ever used with DSLR style PDAF tracking.

If I had a fixed 24-200 f/2.8 on a Nikon 1 or Sony RX10, it might be OK, but it's not all that exciting for the things I like to shoot. And definitely a 2 lb version for $1400 is not something I'd run out and buy. I don't shoot sports and but when I used to I always used a DSLR. Now I prefer large aperture primes and I have a FF DSLR with a bag of lenses. When I want to travel light or shoot on the street of Manhattan or in Europe, my preference is for a small m43 or Fujifilm mirrorless camera. $1400 buys a lot of good primes and a decent large sensor camera. YMMV.

So we've established that it doesn't work for you but lots of other people are still very interested in it... So remind me again, why aare you still here saying it is a pointless camera and belittling those who want one?

Sean Nelson
Forum ProPosts: 10,527
Re: Why should the RX10 be interesting...
In reply to marike6, Oct 19, 2013

marike6 wrote:

Sean Nelson wrote:

marike6 wrote:

...why should an almost 2 lb camera (heavier than virtually every APS-C / m43 mirrorless, and most mid-range DSLRs) be of interest to m43 users?

It's because this camera has just opened up a new point on the sensor size / capability spectrum, and that point is directly adjacent to M43.

So your answer is because some m43 don't even need the capabilities of m43 cameras?

Exactly. Again, what I'm saying is that there was a huge gap between M43 and the small-sensor superzooms. It seems obvious to me that in the very diverse spectrum of photographers there would be some who would have wanted a camera somewhere in the middle of that gap. At least some of them would considering the RX10 or an M43 camera, because they are neighbors in the spectrum of capabilities.

So I suppose after everyone here buys the RX10, your next post will contend that the new Panasonic FZ300 Bridge camera with a 2/3" sensor is interesting to Sony 1" users.

If such a camera was really built then that's a possibility. But the smaller the gaps get the more the overlap is between adjacent models. The RX10 was plugging the biggest gap this side of medium format. The remaining gaps are a lot smaller.

I guess by the end of 2015, all m43 users will be using smartphone cameras because that's "all they need".

What is it about "RX10 is the next step down from M43" that you don't understand? I"m not saying that all people are going to downsize, and I'm not saying they're going to jump halfway across the range of sensor sizes. I'm saying that the RX10 is plugging a particularly large hole in the spectrum of camera capabilities. Some people are going to move up to it from cameras like the FZ200, and some are going to move down from cameras like M43.

You seem to be focused on the idea that people have downsized from DSLRs to M43 and that I'm suggesting they'll further downsize to the RX10.   You're ignoring the people who have upsized from smaller camera systems.  It works both ways.   It's some of those people at the lower end of M43 requirements who might consider a move down.

Just as M43 users have decided they don't need FF or APS-C capabilities, some of the people who choose the RX10 will do so because they decide they don't need M43 capabilities.

So the $1400 RX10 is interesting because m43 cameras are overkill for the majority of users here?

Stop putting words into my mouth. I said that there would be some M43 users that would be interested in the RX10. Nowhere did I say or imply "majority", and I certainly don't believe it to be the case.

Wow. That's just sad. I've seen some extremely high quality images here and I know that they are tons of m43 users here who care about the craft of photography and what you have just said is just sad.

You seem awfully defensive, as if any sales of RX10 cameras are some sort of threat to you.

What I said is the truth for some people. It doesn't apply to those for whom the RX10 is inadequate, any more than it applies to APS-C or FF users for whom M43 is inadequate. We all have different needs and should choose the camera best suited to them. The RX10 plugs a hole in the range of sensor sizes and capabilities and so of course some people with needs that closely match its capabilities are going to choose it.

marike6
Senior MemberPosts: 5,070Gear list
RX10 Sample images
In reply to jim stirling, Oct 20, 2013

jim stirling wrote:

marike6 wrote:

So judging by these recent threads, half the m43 are jumping ship for the RX10 and half are jumping ship for the A7.

Is this the end of m43? Kind of sad for all those nice m43 primes going to waste for the shiny Sony cameras. But judging by all these answers in this thread, m43 is even overkill. People just want snaps and convenience. So all the small size vs DSLR arguments I've had were really BS. It's not small size, or low weight but convenience with sort of decent IQ up to ISO 800. At least now I understand.

The whole rationale behind mFt is a smaller lighter more convenient to carry system with decent image quality. If you are looking for the best resolution, or the best high ISO ,or the best DR or the best colour depth , mFT wouldn't be at the races .

Yes, but the argument for m43, especially with the advent of the EM5 and GH3 16 mp class of cameras, has always been IQ is not far off from the APS-C DSLRs with bodies and lenses significantly smaller. The RX10 at close to 2 lbs (816 g) hardly qualifies as smaller or lighter, does it? And you are giving up a heck of a lot of low-light ability vs m43 and APS-C (See the sample JPEGs below), and all of the m43 lenses that you've worked so hard for do not mount. Apart from being an all in one design how is such a camera convenient?

All camera systems are sacrifices with mFt compared to larger formats you sacrifice absolute image quality for small and convenient , perhaps you have not noticed the thousands of posts here that mention exactly that .For very many uses mFt is overkill each to their own

But again the RX10 is neither small or lightweight. And DOF control is not great and it's super pricey.

And as you can see by these sample images below, it's noisy as early as ISO 800!!! I just bought a new Fujifilm X-E1 kit. Even as a mostly RAW shooter, if I had downloaded JPEGs of this quality (see below) there is no way I would have purchased it, it's that simple.

So the RX10 whose main attraction, as you claim, is convenience, is likely a RAW-only camera because mushy Sony's JPEG engine? You be the judge. Have a look at the images from PhotographyBlog below.

Note: Embedding the full-sized RX10 images below was forbidden, but click on link to view. Make sure you look at 100%.

RX10, ISO 800

http://img.photographyblog.com/reviews/sony_cybershot_dsc_rx10/photos/sony_cybershot_dsc_rx10_19.jpg

RX10, ISO 640

http://img.photographyblog.com/reviews/sony_cybershot_dsc_rx10/photos/sony_cybershot_dsc_rx10_22.jpg

RX10, ISO 80

http://img.photographyblog.com/reviews/sony_cybershot_dsc_rx10/photos/sony_cybershot_dsc_rx10_24.jpg

 marike6's gear list:marike6's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +7 more
Stephen Kovac Jr
Senior MemberPosts: 2,422Gear list
Re: Sony RX10 is interesting for m4/3 users
In reply to Henry Richardson, Oct 20, 2013

The Sony RX10 is just too bulky for my taste. I already have a Sony RX100 which I really like and I carry it with me in a belt case. I also have a GF1 and a GX1 with 6 lenses. I just pre-order the GM1 which will be an additonal to my Micro Four Third system.

marike6
Senior MemberPosts: 5,070Gear list
Re: And it will face the same Questions......
In reply to Dheorl, Oct 20, 2013

Dheorl wrote:

marike6 wrote:

The RX10 is as large, heavy and expensive as most DSLRs. Not sure what point it adds on any scale or how it relates to m43 at all. m43 is about small size, low weight cameras with DSLR level IQ in all kinds of natural light situations.

Because to get equivalent range with a DSLR of similar specifications requires a bigger kit. I'm sure the RX10 will be able to get DSLR quality in many natural light situations.

See for yourself how it does in low-light. (click on link below and download the RX10 samples) Be sure to view at 100% and let me know if you still think it's DSLR quality.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52363767

Sorry, but a 24-200 f8 DOF equivalent camera sounds OK. But tell me it's the same price as a Fujifilm X-E2 / 18-55 f/2.8-4 kit, or D7100 kit and I'll try not to laugh, I promise.

Is DoF really all you think about? It has so much going for it over either of those cameras that I think the price is justified.

No DOF is not everything nor is price. But I have no interest in a $1400 Sony bridge camera that's less versatile, has worse IQ, and cannot mount any lenses below 24mm or above 200mm. But photography is a very personal thing, and everybody has different needs. If you want the camera, buy it. I see little need for m43 users to be interested in such a camera when a EM-5, GH3 or EM-1 will provide better IQ, and access to a ton of primes and zooms.

I'm a m43 user and I'm interested in it as are seemingly many other people. If it doesn't interest you then why are you even bothering to discuss it? Do you feel you're doing us some sort of service telling us our photos will immediately start to suck if we buy one because trust me, you're not.

I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, just mentioning that the RX10 really has no relation to Micro43 as it's not "micro" and it's not a system camera.  The OP said that it should be of interest to m43 users because of some tenuous connection to an expensive Panasonic zooms.  But other than that, nobody has explained why the RX10 should be of particular interest to m43.  Best of luck.

 marike6's gear list:marike6's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +7 more
Dheorl
Senior MemberPosts: 2,636Gear list
Re: And it will face the same Questions......
In reply to marike6, Oct 20, 2013

marike6 wrote:

Dheorl wrote:

marike6 wrote:

The RX10 is as large, heavy and expensive as most DSLRs. Not sure what point it adds on any scale or how it relates to m43 at all. m43 is about small size, low weight cameras with DSLR level IQ in all kinds of natural light situations.

Because to get equivalent range with a DSLR of similar specifications requires a bigger kit. I'm sure the RX10 will be able to get DSLR quality in many natural light situations.

See for yourself how it does in low-light. (click on link below and download the RX10 samples) Be sure to view at 100% and let me know if you still think it's DSLR quality.

Why are we suddenly talking about low light? I thought you said natural light. Meh, either way I don't think it does badly and since I've got my GH3 I've only had one situation where I had to go to properly high ISO and even that failed pretty bad.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52363767

Sorry, but a 24-200 f8 DOF equivalent camera sounds OK. But tell me it's the same price as a Fujifilm X-E2 / 18-55 f/2.8-4 kit, or D7100 kit and I'll try not to laugh, I promise.

Is DoF really all you think about? It has so much going for it over either of those cameras that I think the price is justified.

No DOF is not everything nor is price. But I have no interest in a $1400 Sony bridge camera that's less versatile, has worse IQ, and cannot mount any lenses below 24mm or above 200mm. But photography is a very personal thing, and everybody has different needs. If you want the camera, buy it. I see little need for m43 users to be interested in such a camera when a EM-5, GH3 or EM-1 will provide better IQ, and access to a ton of primes and zooms.

I'm a m43 user and I'm interested in it as are seemingly many other people. If it doesn't interest you then why are you even bothering to discuss it? Do you feel you're doing us some sort of service telling us our photos will immediately start to suck if we buy one because trust me, you're not.

I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, just mentioning that the RX10 really has no relation to Micro43 as it's not "micro" and it's not a system camera. The OP said that it should be of interest to m43 users because of some tenuous connection to an expensive Panasonic zooms. But other than that, nobody has explained why the RX10 should be of particular interest to m43. Best of luck.

I did explain. M43 users are already people who have probably sacrificed a bit of IQ for covinience. The RX10 is just taking it a step further... A step that wasn't previously there. FF DSLR users are i would assume more interested in out and out iq than convenience so it would interest them less. When a new type of camera is introduced that iq wise sits right next to your current camera i would have said it made sense to be interested in it.

Jay Kim
Junior MemberPosts: 27Gear list
Re: My Take
In reply to Henry Richardson, Oct 20, 2013

I used to own GH1, GH2 and G6 and now just recently sold all my bodies to find my next m4/3 body as I still have the 14-140mm lens with me. I now only need it for family photos and videos... So I had my eyes fully fixed on the GX7 as it seems to be the best overall body in terms of IQ, performance, features, size and price.

Then RX10 was announced and I can get the RX10 for about $1000 via a connection.

So now I'm a little tempted. I'm now 70 30 GX7 way.

- Well built, weathersealed, G6/GH3 sized body / grip.
- Enough DoF (or better) to match a GX7 with a 14-140mm.
- I prefer the wide 24mm of RX10 vs tele 280mm on GX7.
- Built-in 3 stop ND Filter to compensate the 1/3200 max shutter speed.
- 0x45x Macro performance. Can focus down to 3cm at 28mm. Close enough for me.
- Back-lit top LCD panel. (I'm old school as I used to own Canon D30, 10D, 20D with it)
- Love the mechanical dials such as fixed EV comp dial & aperture ring on the lens.
- In terms of high ISO IQ, it's near impossible to tell the GX7 and RX10 output apart.
- In fact, I think high ISO IQ is better than GH2/G6 that I had before it!
- Video IQ seems to be comparable to GX7. (But doubt it's better than GX7)
- Smoother electronic zoom during video.
- Mic input which GX7 doesn't have.
- OIS performance seems to be MUCH better than my 14-140mm lens with GH2/G6.
- Just see how close you can go and how stable the video is using OIS. Impressive.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuqHMKN9zx8

But yeah, I think I'm not all sold et on the RX10 as GX7 still has some things I want:

1. Can become much more compact smaller lenses.
2. Much shallower DoF if I need it using nicer primes or zoom lenses.
3. Silent Mode.
4. Slightly better high ISO IQ. (seems to be about 0.5 stop)

Now.. Point 1 & 2 are really alll due to interchangeable lenses. In total, it'll be about double the price of RX10 in order to have a prime or two plus 14-140mm. Point 3 is more of a want than a need. Same goes for point 4. The extra 0.5 stops in high ISO IQ isn't going to ruin ANY photos over the RX7 photos.

I tried really hard to come up with more things for the RX7 but couldn't.
I know I would love to have some nice primes... But at the cost of $$$ and convenience...
Heck, with the money I save by not buying GX7, I could buy a RX10 + GM1(12-32) combo!
So which you reckon? (All 3 are within my max budget)
1. RX10 + Panasonic GM1 with 12-32
2. RX10 + RX100 II
3. Panasonic GX7 + 20 1.7 + 14-140

Interesting decision to make eh?

 Jay Kim's gear list:Jay Kim's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G6
jim stirling
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,372Gear list
Re: RX10 Sample images
In reply to marike6, Oct 20, 2013

marike6 wrote:

jim stirling wrote:

marike6 wrote:

So judging by these recent threads, half the m43 are jumping ship for the RX10 and half are jumping ship for the A7.

Is this the end of m43? Kind of sad for all those nice m43 primes going to waste for the shiny Sony cameras. But judging by all these answers in this thread, m43 is even overkill. People just want snaps and convenience. So all the small size vs DSLR arguments I've had were really BS. It's not small size, or low weight but convenience with sort of decent IQ up to ISO 800. At least now I understand.

The whole rationale behind mFt is a smaller lighter more convenient to carry system with decent image quality. If you are looking for the best resolution, or the best high ISO ,or the best DR or the best colour depth , mFT wouldn't be at the races .

Yes, but the argument for m43, especially with the advent of the EM5 and GH3 16 mp class of cameras, has always been IQ is not far off from the APS-C DSLRs with bodies and lenses significantly smaller.

The image quality gap  between the RX10/100mk2 is signifcantly smaller than the gap between mFT and the best APS

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/%28appareil1%29/896|0/%28brand%29/Sony/%28appareil2%29/865|0/%28brand2%29/Nikon/%28appareil3%29/793|0/%28brand3%29/Olympus

As for the lens size difference that rather depends on whether you compare effective apertures. .Which you invariably do when you mention the RX10 . F/1.8 on Nikon APS has the same effect as F/1.2 on mFT

The RX10 at close to 2 lbs (816 g) hardly qualifies as smaller or lighter, does it?

You forgot to add in the 12-100mm constant F3.7 lenses to your calculation

And you are giving up a heck of a lot of low-light ability vs m43 and APS-C (See the sample JPEGs below), and all of the m43 lenses that you've worked so hard for do not mount. Apart from being an all in one design how is such a camera convenient

All camera systems are sacrifices with mFt compared to larger formats you sacrifice absolute image quality for small and convenient , perhaps you have not noticed the thousands of posts here that mention exactly that .For very many uses mFt is overkill each to their own

But again the RX10 is neither small or lightweight. And DOF control is not great and it's super pricey.

Please try and include constant aperture 12-100mm F3.7 weather sealed lenses in your weight and size calculation. Haven t you read here that shallow DOF is a crutch and cliche :-).

As for pricey show me a weather sealed mFT body with built-in EVF and lenses that are at least fast enough to cover a 12-100mm range at F3.7 then get back to me about pricey.

And as you can see by these sample images below, it's noisy as early as ISO 800!!! I just bought a new Fujifilm X-E1 kit. Even as a mostly RAW shooter, if I had downloaded JPEGs of this quality (see below) there is no way I would have purchased it, it's that simple.

So the RX10 whose main attraction, as you claim, is convenience, is likely a RAW-only camera because mushy Sony's JPEG engine? You be the judge. Have a look at the images from PhotographyBlog below.

I have zero interest in default JPEG output from any camera large or small so I would use RAW anyway. Judging a camera by default JPEG output on a pre-production model taken in a rush are very far from what I would use to judge image quality.

Looking at the low light studio samples from the RX100mk2 compared to the E-M5 { RAW} sure the RX100m2 is behind the E-M5 at 800ISO probably by about .7 of a stop .Though I wouldn't say that the E-M5 was exactly crystal clear

Opened in RAW

No additional processing, no resizing just a straight comparison of a detailed area in shadow

 jim stirling's gear list:jim stirling's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Sony Alpha 7R Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4 Nikon D810 +13 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads