SLOOPB: One has to really go out of their way to prefer this camera to other options available.
i am sorry i fail to see how a 30-100mm lens is pocketable ...a pocket that can hold that combo can also hold an a6000 . as 1inch cameras go the nikon if i remember correctly is actually larger than the others not smaller .prices of its lens is just as high . i am talking about non ziess lenses of course cause nikon's ones are not ot the top tier as well
MFiftysomething: I had V1 and now have V2, which I like but Nikon has given me no reason to upgrade to V3. A system also needs lenses and while there are a couple of nice ones, it is just not enough choice, competiton is so good all round these days, Nikon need to wake up.
If you care about higher ISO performance . just check DXO scores and every other comparison site to see how this nikon line falls short of its class in that regard . the only thing actually going for the nikon is its blazing FPS , but thats for less then 2 seconds . and then wait 40 seconds for buffer . you would have to be one seriously lucky guy to catch action like that .
yea im sorry . paying over 60% more for a lesser camera or if some would have us believe, an equal camera to DSLR sounds insane in my mind . not to mention the price of the lenses
rinkos: sweet ...i would much rather pay 1200$ body only opposed to A6000 + kit 799$and invest 800$ in another lens to fit it..and learn to time my shooting just so so i can squeeze a 2 seconds shootout to the 20fps.
truly ..nothing wrong at all here . ( sarcasm alert )
good idea ..poor performance . lesser price , cheaper lenses ,and a bigger buffer then 2 seconds .
capturathat is a very good idea . its always important to see actual truths among all those bombastic name dropping systems each company has for its AF .
as accurate AF is one of the most important parts in a would be camera (some would say the most important ) . i think its crucial to make from time to time AF shootouts comparisons . especially for cameras who boast of high FPS such as these two .
at $500 cheaper . i think the fz1000 has earned the title of the ultimate ( so far ) superzoom camera .its basically what most bridge camera owners wanted all along ..a super zoom with a big sensor . sure you get a bit more aggressive NR then the rx ( which u notice at 100% peeking on 1600-3200 iso range , and the lesser aperture . but in return you get so much more .. and at $500 cheaper :) and i have sony cameras so im not suppose to like panasonic .
sweet ...i would much rather pay 1200$ body only opposed to A6000 + kit 799$and invest 800$ in another lens to fit it..and learn to time my shooting just so so i can squeeze a 2 seconds shootout to the 20fps.
John _ Finn: I have the original Sony RX100 and I love it for its superb IQ and portability. I shot my successful Royal Photographic Society Associateship portfolio using it (print sizes 15 inches x 10 inches). Anyone considering buying this latest version should not hesitate - it's worth every cent.
i prefer the panasonic solution ..a true 1" superzoom ..i have a dslr now but if i was just coming up from the superzoom 1/2.33 line i would get that one
munro harrap: Additionally, and like the Sony RX10, although you can use the ring around the lens to zoom, it zooms AT ITS OWN SPEED, it is motorized. It does not zoom as and when you want it to like any ordinarily available zoom lens does, so the entire concept is dead in the water-like the RX10.
I ordered and paid for an RX10, like a fool, as it seemed the ideal gizmo for an ageing population, and for their grandchildren, light, enough resolution and fast enough prefocussed to outgun a Leica, with a Leica lens, but elsewhere I discovered the thing could not be zoomed manually, so I cancelled. And both using a teeny sensor give great graphic quality- the Sony especially, yet fail to reproduce reality, which is what I have always naively thought a camera is for.
An old film camera will always give better results than this can, so what's the point, eh?
a film camera with lens the size of this one even fully extended is capable of about 11mp . as for dynamic range .it doesnt really matter if you cant PP a photo you know . and you cant PP a film photo . dynamic range is basically the amount of data in the image a person with a PP software can play with and restore .
as for depth of field . at 2.8 minimum i doubt you will find any film camera lens that has both the range this lens has and the aperture values . ..so this is not a good comparison .
im not even talking about simple speed of photography . you can have the best lens and body there are but what good are they if you keep missing the action .
Photomonkey: Seems to be a brilliant addition at an especially sharp price compared to Sony's offering.It would seem that apart from the super shallow DOF fanboys this camera would make most photographers very happy.
I would also observe that most pros would not be averse to using this for paying jobs except for the concern of being accused of using amateur gear.
so long as the lighting is descent enough who can tell :)stil its not on par when you want to PP a landscape shot
jkokich: Serious question time! I have a Sony A57 which I love. I've shot short films that have been accepted to festivals. Given the FZ's sensor and processor, do you think/how much do you think the video would be improved over the A57, or does the Sony's larger sensor win out?
its a video .a 1080p is 2mpand a 4k is 8mp
non of them is that issue when you are buying a "still " camera though .i would say that given that panasonic so far has super results showing off its FHD and 4K movies and that this nifty camera has a super zoom on it .safe to say you will probably get better results with it . dont forget its quarter speed 1080p mode .. so bottom line is that your artistic's skills will give you access but as a tool the fz1000 is probably better for videos then the a57
while i cant comment for your lack of love for the this type of cameras , i will say this .old film cameras couldnt come anyway near this ? .reality ? . the whole point of today's film plugin packs sold everywhere is to give your picture that uniqe edge that came from some brands .
if manual is still what you want i suggest getting a superb A6000.
James Booba: Sony lost me with:
Continuous shooting: Max. 2.5fps, Speed Priority Continuous shooting: Max. 5.0fps
such a small MP sensor fast processor and barely 5fps? wtf? guess i have to wait for a7h - high speed full frame with more fps.
yea but he is right ..if the image is just 12mp then a faster FPS should be a non issue..especially when the tiny new a6000 can go to 11fps !! ..i think atleast 8fpt would be expected here
Eric Peltzer: One, there are phones that can shoot 4K video. I'm sure the bitrate leaves much to be desired, but still. So it's a little hard to believe Sony couldn't fit the 4K electronic recording capability into the body of this camera, at least at a reduced bit rate, in addition to making possible external hi bit recording. Two, 12MP seems like a big hit, a step back for what is still predominantly a still camera.
Though I'm sure there are a few video shooters who will love this and be willing to put up with these compromises for the low light ability. But this sure looks like a halting toe dip into 4K to me. I will wait a year or two when surely they will be able to combine more of the better aspects of these three different cameras into a single body: fast focus, high resolution sensor, on board 4K. Oh yeah, and get a decent selection of ff lenses. I'm rooting for you Sony but you have a ways to go.
bitrate is everything ..just go and check out youtube..or better yet vimeo ones to fully appreciate how a good bitrate 720p can take on even a 4k bit.
as for 12mp ..unless your in the fashion line there is nothing u cant get out of the 12mp sensor...so long as the image is good ..and on that note its still remains to be seen how well the actual shot of this camera would be .
Rooru S: OK SONY
I want that sensor in a high-end A-mount body with OVF capable of at least 10fps. I would pay 6500USD for such a camera.
get with the program man .. OVF days are gone
blah blah blah ..cannon stays cannon ..all the new shiny freaks will rush on buying a camera that is basically the same as the one they had 3 years ago .no true innovation from cannon for a long while now .
just for once i wish they would atleast try to innovate something new
Rick Knepper: Looking at the images at the file size I commonly use, moire is hardly an issue. OTOH, moderate cropping would probably bring the moire out into the open. But, image quality is not the bottleneck for me here. A fixed 35mm FL is the problem. A 28mm lens would be better for my style but then, deeper cropping would be occasionally necessary which would tend to expose the moire and whatever noise that might be present more readily so, hmmm...
I agree with others on the price. It's a non-started for me. This cam vs a the price of a D800 (on rebate)? No contest.
I also agree with others concerning the size and weight. Sony has demonstrated that it is possible to get a FF sensor into a small package. One of the three, C&NorS, should design a FF DSLR for compactness of size and weight and see if it sells.
comparing the two cams is the real problem here
while the D800 or D600 are cams u can change lenses with ..big cams the sony are anything but...first the obvious ..no lens changes..second..they are small and meant to be very non obtrusive while providing with a leica like quality ...if u judge them by that they do a lot better then a leica and a whole lot cheaper ..not to mention the best fixed lens + D600 combo u can pit against them .
its all a matter of style...I for one do not have that style and in that price i most likely same as u would always opt for something with a non fixed lens .\
as usual Sony left the traditional guys with something something in their hands hanging :(what about the A580 ?!!!!! what about it?!!
Stephen McDonald: I'd like to know just what "engineering feat" Panasonic performed to make it possible to have F2.8 at 600mm. For many of my longrange shots, I wouldn't want an even more shallow DOF at 600mm. I'd have to manually stop-down the aperture, slowing the shooting process. If the aperture stayed wide in video mode at high zoom points and couldn't be manually controled, that would be bad. For many sports and wildlife videos, I'd want maximum DOF.
macro portraits .artistic....u name it f2.8 is very very impressive...if u wanne find how much look for regular full f2.8 on the market..see how they cost
seriously do you have any idea how much each of this inks costs???? its much cheaper and better to get them done at some pro printing store with not a 800 euros machine but 20000 euros Canon printer ...much cheaper in the long run
jonikon: After test driving both the Sony NEX and Nikon V1, I feel that Nikon has the better camera for moving subject photography. The Sony NEX has better high ISO IQ, but the Nikon V1 has much faster and more accurate tracking focusing, and that is even more important than high ISO IQ in any camera. (How many times have you heard someone with a pocket camera complain they missed the shot because the camera was too slow?) The focusing speed and accuracy of the V1 is surprisingly fast, and puts the Sony NEX cameras pocket camera focusing system to shame. Also the Nikon lenses are much better optically and more compact than the over-sized, overprices and optically poor Sony NEX lenses (check the reviews!). I think Nikon has a winner with their new Nikon 1 system. The powered zoom lenses (that other systems lack), and more powerful telephoto power of the smaller sensor size will be Nikon's advantage, and make the Nikon 1 system the darling of soccer moms everywhere!
Best regards, Jon
thats really funny since these smallest cameras were not made for sport tracking nor do any of them have the lens for that ...so searching through to a camera which does that is funny ..more over since its low iso rating the V1 J1 cant do a proper sport to print it big...something like football night is quite simply beyond any A4 and above big prints from them.
so yea..the Nex's may use contrast detection which is slower than the SLR's full size phase detection ..yet the Nex's and the V1 J1 nor the 4/3 were ever made to be "sport cams"
and as for "poor sony lenses" i suggest u go look at the real numbers at photozone.de ..u might be surprised.
in all honestly i highly doubt u even test drived a nex...much less the nex nex5N to be talking like that..why dont u educate ur self and go into the Nex forums and see what is really true..
and Troj..well put :)