EthanP99: Haters gon hate :)
Watch out people, Sony is going to eat your children.
Cant afford it? Sorry its not charity.
Good camera. Wouldn't spend that much on one but early adaptor's price notwithstanding its a nice effort.
lol at that 800mm lens, it must weigh a tonne
How can they make a 1" sensor produce such poor quality images? Add to that no RAW and I swear I thought this was a late April fools review!
AKH: Wow. Was a bit surprised to see that such an expensive camera doesn't even have a touch screen.
Never understood people's enthusiasm for touchscreen until I used a 70D. It really does have its uses and can make navigating menus much easier. Its not a deal breaker but for a £1000 body only camera I thought Sony would go that route.
fastlass: dpreview #fail for not making this the first Platinum camera.
Sony does it again! I hope Canon, Nikon, et al are on watch.
Rmontanta: I have the FZ1000, and for $800 it's a fun camera with stop motion, time lapse and a zoom range I can use to watch birds and get shots I otherwise could not. But at $1,500, twice the price of my FZ1000 I don't think it's worth it, at least not for me. Here's a few shots I took with my fz1000 showing the zoom.
Daniel Lauring Except the Af looks poor taking away any advantage the extra reach gives it :(
Still looks a good camera and I love the advances made in bridge cameras over recent years.
Biological_Viewfinder: EASILY WORTH $1500.
I took the Rx10 ii and a Nikon D7100 to an indoors event with low-lighting.I had to use a flash on the D7100. If I pumped up the ISO, the image got very noisy, very quickly.On the Rx10 ii, I pumped up the ISO to 2000 and I did not need a flash.Almost zero keepers from the Nikon.
Sunset and landscape with the Nikon is better. There is more definition in the details, and the Sony cannot handle the light of the sun. It makes a false ring around it that looks bad.
In Video, the Sony is better. No rolling shutter. It's easier to set, run; and has amazingly fun 1000 frames per second.
I would have paid $2000 for the RX10 or the RX10 ii.
Sony would not have made the RX10 iii or priced it at $1500 if their predecessors had not done well.
If you haven't used a Sony Rx10 series camera, then you literally don't know what you're talking about when you say it's too expensive. You must use the camera to make that assertion; Otherwise, you are speaking from ignorance.
biological-viewfinder what lens were you using in the Nikon? I cannot find any that would cripple the d7100 to the point where the sony bridge camera would beat it on noise levels.
mgm2: Drones, quadcopters or what ever you call them are becoming a real problem in natural areas. Wildlife are being harassed to the point where some game agencies are considering banning them from state game lands.
Its a safe bet that the UK is nearing some very restrictive laws where quadcopters are concerned thanks to the usual minority of idiots.
photomedium: rule no1: buyers of new products always get screwed.
Number one rule for buyers is after sales support.
I think 80%, given the list of 'cons' seems a bit generous?
Wow, not even a tube of lube included :(
matthew saville: Available in Pentax mount? Sweet baby Jesus!
Probably a printing error :p
bmwzimmer: Canon Crop Sensors are 1.6X vs everyone else which is 1.5X. So its 6.3% smaller and will obviously not perform as well. Even it it were the same size, it's still a bit behind but it's at a point, the differences in real world shooting is negligible...
As a reference to the 80d I think his point stands. The Canon is close enough now that it won't make any difference in real world photography and your friends would have an equal share of keepers.
Saying that its their brand new sensor and they should really be in a position where they are ahead and not still playing catch-up.
All those great features and they couldn't give manage good AF tracking?
I don't get it is their some technically limitation?
Ssoyd: I grew up with full manual film cameras. About the last thing I want is any camera that moves backward technologically, especially at this price!!!!! No "retro" for me.
Yes lets hope they didn't waste any time on reading Ben Laser's comments.
Maybe they have their free time which they gladly use to interact with the forum or maybe interacting with their readers is part of their job. Complaining that they give their time to answer questions comes across as childish.
"DxO ONE update"
Tremint: At ISO 400 the grain is terrible. Its great to downscale
Where are you seeing this terrible grain at iso400?
oriomenoni: High ISO does not look very good. At least compared to my A7R2
I would imagine not given one is a £2000 full frame camera and the other a £1000 APS-C sensor.
More disappointed by the lack of IBIS but still looking forward to the full reviews.
danmar: Sometimes I sit here contemplating the outrageous amount of natural resources that are wasted to make millions of completely useless products. It's pretty scary.
You mean like the computer you are using to post that comment?
Dave Waldrup: My switch from Canon (40+ years) to Nikon and the D810 with the Nikkor 24-120 f4 has been a game changer for my photography. Great dynamic range, amazing resolution and a fine lens combine to give images like this:http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/4159828533/photos/3345753/monterey-cypress-grove-shrp
That image could have been produced by any camera in the last decade.
Does prove its not all about the kit.