ozturert: Horrible title. Even from the samples I wouldn't call it "destroys". But for 1500$, it destroys bank accounts for sure...
So you are allowed to dismiss he relevance of the word in relation to performance while in the same breath use the same word with authority in reference to pricing and people's monetary worth...
Keeping it classy as always DPR commentators, who think the universe revolves around them.
Kev The Doc: So a silver award camera beats a gold award camera? Do you then not need to change up your scoring system?
"Erm, awards are based on price also.......BURN :-)"
No they are based on category, within that category their is a metric for 'value' which isn't the same thing. What cameras are compared to one another for awards ratings are based on their category. This round up is based on a price bracket only.
All of which is a moot point considering that the A6300 and D7200 were actually in the same category anyway. The A6300 performing better on 8 metrics, the D7200 on 3 and 1 which was a tie.
andarioa: Other than "Dual IS" and truly articulating screen, I cannot understand, for the life of me, how DPReview considers the GX8 "as good as" the a6300 in the "Best for video" category. A problem I share with the overwhelming majority of the videographers out there, I suspect.
"The GX8 has a mic input something the A6300 lacks and thus requires yet another piece of equipment to be bought (extra cost and places the sony outside this category) needs to be charged and carried"
A6300 has a mic jack and not a silly 2.5mm one on an enormous body. Plus you can actually use it with the screen folded out, unlike the Pana. Plus you can get an XLR adapter designed for it or a wireless lapel, neither of which are options for the GX8.
"so aside from other features already discussed such as lens selection, IBIS etc. yes, the GX8 is a match and in many ways a better choice."
GX8 doesn't have IBIS for video (except electronic). So how is it a match? Inferior IQ, lacks picture profiles, no IBIS (A6300 doesn't either, but it's not a plus point for GX8), mic jack requires adapter, no advanced adapters, no clean HDMI, can't use tilt screen and mic at the same time, no 120fps 1080p, much worse AF... is there something it's better at?
"So a silver award camera beats a gold award camera? Do you then not need to change up your scoring system?"
Awards are based in category, this round up is based on price... understand the difference?
Mariusz Wozniak: When it comes to video it should be noted that 1080p of a6300 is considerably worse than GX8, so for people shooting predominantly at this resolution the GX8 is much better choice. Additionally, GX8 offers sensor stabilised 1080p which works very well.
"Additionally, GX8 offers sensor stabilised 1080p which works very well."
No it doesn't.
Both will produce better 1080p from their 4K output anyway. Plus the 4K can have digital stabilisation like the GX8 uses in 1080p mode.
JordanAT: I'm always intrigued at the size and cost of m4/3 lenses. I would expect them to be bright, small, and (relatively) inexpensive. If you're in the market for a fast zoom lens...they just don't exist. The cheapest zoom lens with a 2.8 aperture is $700, weighs 11 ounces and is 3" long.
Compare that with the LX100 - a m4/3 with a fixed lens of (roughly) the same focal length, 1.5 stops brighter at the short end, and yet the entire lens and camera combined is 14 ounces, less than 2.5 inches thick (long). And the entire camera and lens together only costs $700.
Are m4/3 (and, I suppose) APS cameras really only for people who shoot prime lenses, or don't mind really small maximum apertures?
LX100 isn't m43's (which BTW is a mount, not a sensor), it isn't 4/3's either, while the physical sensor is the whole thing is not covered by the lens. The lens has the advantage of being built in, which usually yields a smaller size. It is however, not at the same level as say the Oly 12-40mm f2.8 in terms of detail, it flares really badly also.
So yes, you save some size and weight, you lose on build quality and adaptability, plus in image quality.
Jonathan F/2: Lack of an EVF is a major con against the A5100. Any camera with no EVF/OVF should be bumped from contention.
Not a single camera here has an EVF...
EwanMC: The NX1 maybe a little bit better than an A77 II, but not for the price premium, especially with the 'S' lens, which is really a mandatory purchase. That's the another thing, the Sony's A mount range is extensive, with third party support too. Not that I am necessarily going to buy an A77 II, I'm waiting for the 36-50 megapixel A99II, or the A77 III -- LOL, I know that's never gonna happen!
""maybe a little bit better" - let me start: NX1 has better - DR, ISO, resolution, AF, EVF, LCD, top LCD, SD write performance, video, video AF, grip, remote control, frame rate. I'm sorry of I forgot something."
Bahahahaha! You made a funny.
2eyesee: I've got to say for the purposes of this article, the FZ1000 - that can be had for less than half the price of the RX10 III now - represents much better value. And I'm saying that as an original RX10 owner.
gskolenda: From a Video perspective, The RX-10 MII is a better camera. Just having the ND filter is big deal, I use it all the time.
The constant aperture is preferred as well.
Javierin: @Barney I currently own an RX100M4 and I am a bit frustrated with overheating during video recording. Have you experienced the infamous overheating icon during your testing? (I know you still haven't done video stuff, YET)
Other than that, I am also interested in a couple more things about video. Is 4K recording limited to 5 minutes just like the RX100 does? What is the minimum focal lenght for video recording?
RX10 II (which is very similar apart from lens and a few other minor changes) doesn't suffer from overheating. It is FAR better for video than the RX100 IV. While output is the same, it records up to 30mins (longer with hack) in 4K, has much nicer controls, can take an XLR adapter etc. It's bigger body affords all this, plus you get much better range, filters are easier to use, closer focussing which I find very useful etc. The III adds a longer lens (but loses constant aperture) and loses the ND filter. Body is mildly changed to accommodate.
The same people say the same thing whenever the RX10 series come up. FZ1000 doesn't do ANY of the things I own an RX10 II, so it's value is literally zero, for me.
If all you care about is sensor size + lens reach, sure, there are similarities. They end pretty quickly afterwards.
osan: Another one to sell bucketloads. If it can deliver acceptable results in IQ dept.
Are there 'bucketloads' of EOS-M users?
dulynoted: That is a brilliant idea. I bet other company's engineers are slapping themselves over this one. The idea is so obvious after you see it but nobody had done it yet. (I think I saw a medium format lens that was used for medical work that had a built in light but that is a long way away from the here and now)
As said there are compacts that do. I doubt traditional mounts support such a feature. There is a 3x macro for E-Mount and m43's that has built in LEDs.
EwanMC: A lot nicer to use than any of the Sony RX100 series
Yep! And guess what the RX100 has out of that list? LX100 has better controls (mostly) but it misses some aspects of the RX100 line. I've had both and each have their pluses and minuses.
Assuming you don't care about using the EVF.
graybalanced: The way Sony has come up from practically no presence in cameras to being a leader is nothing short of impressive.
But I also remember a time when my dad and his friends worshipped Sony audio and video products, and when the Sony Trinitron was the world standard in CRTs. Sony lost all of that when the industry went digital and Sony invested too much in proprietary formats like ATRAC and MemoryStick. Let's hope that the same minds who lost Sony's lead in audio and video aren't transferred over to the camera division.
Ah the old proprietary formats debate. All formats start this way more or less until they are adopted widely. New tech needs new formats, Sony is a big player in this, but not all their formats are adopted. It's not like the world was just given SD cards, do you also remember XD cards? Do you remember HD-DVD vs Blu-ray? You probably don't remember XD-CAM or HD-CAM SR but I bet you have watched lots and lots of content produced on these formats.
rrccad: yes, sony's making more profit at the expense of mount marketshare.. they are turning more boutique to make a dollar.
what happens when people decide what they have is "good enough" and no reason to upgrade?
while DSLR's for the most part have hit that "good enough" stage, MILC's are getting pretty close to that.
it's hard to argue that someone with a A6300 or a A7RII will see the need to upgrade next year, or in two year's time, as both cameras are excellent.
however it's good to always see sony recover from 5-6 years ago when it looked like they weren't going to be around too long.
and their latest innovations such as the GM line certainly shows they see a future.
I also notice that this sony advertisement missed the fact that they went from 8.5 million units to 6.1 million units shipped - a trend that Sony certainly needs to stop.
A drop in unit sales is not the same thing as a drop in market share.
It is a little ironic how people come on here to complain about a camera without an LCD screen that costs more than an average camera with an LCD screen, a website that is hosted on a computer without an LCD screen that costs more than an average computer with an LCD screen.
Marty4650: HOLY COW! I just saved $6,000!
I just discovered I can turn off the LCD screen of my Olympus EM5! All it takes is pushing that small button on the right side of the EVF housing. Push the button again, and the LCD screen comes back on!
This means I just saved $6,000, that I could use to buy a $2,500 300mm f/4.0 PRO lens, a $1,300 42.5mm f/1.2 lens, and still get a brand new Panasonic GX8 for the remaining $1,200!
Life is good! :)
Actually Marty, the Leica M with the same average construction costs more, so this IS cheaper than the more similar M Type 240. Yes there is another, cheaper M (Type 262), but that isn't constructed to the same level as this M-D.