damian5000: What about video shooting time. The technology sounds great, but fairly useless if it only lasts 15 minutes. How long can it record 1080p video for?
It's not a technical reason. It's to do with taxes. Any recording over 30min and the device is classed as a video recorder and subject to a differs import tax. That's why it's set to cut out. To record more in one hit look at connecting the hdmi out of the sony into a separate recorder like the atomos ninja blade.
Nikguy: I can understand the two leading cameras excellant and state of the art. However as we all dream of a pocket camera that can statisfy 80% of the needs of a big camera heavy (I know the Oly is somewhat small) my vote is with my RX100 the fun begins with pocketabilty and great photos. There are no losers to me in the list but we keep trying to pit one system against another, That keeps them all making better equipment and WE enjoy the results. Isn't the free market great!
totally agree.. It's an amazing camera. I took my M9 and lenses away for the weekend. I took 4 shots on the Leica and a load on the RX100 - and a whole load of video too. for the size- it's amazing.
Darn right we are all crops and social demographics. That's why whatever I write on Facebook is usually a load of useless whittering crap that they are welcome to.
I never put up images of my kids or other people's kids on any social media site.
perfect timing.. just about to order the RX100!
satureyes: The photos are great - but I dont see the point of trying to squeeze every inch of quality from what is essentially a small lens, average sensor and a phone.
There's some incredible compact cameras on the market now that would outperform the iphone my a mile.. think the Sony RX100. It seems like you're finding an end to justify the means.
I dont see why you'd not take a pocketable compact with you and use that. Apart from torturing yourself about shots you may have missed or the ability to print nice works of art on your return.
Why the need to edit in the field? I can see the benefit if you're shooting news stories - but not sure why you'd put yourself through this for the sake of a camera for 400 quid which you can pick up anywhere and be just as as the iPhone.
Then shoot with a basic film camera? I don't think the point of the article was to discover the photographer not the camera makes the pic - but actually - with a compact or film camera there would be no 'apps'.. not in the field anyway. The point is - yes of course you can get good shots from an iphone.. and yes of course it's the photographer that makes the shot happen - but you have a once in a lifetime trip and i'd not put it all in the hands of an iPhone..
The photos are great - but I dont see the point of trying to squeeze every inch of quality from what is essentially a small lens, average sensor and a phone.
Well.. I've owned a fair few lenses and never sent one back - I have Canon and Leica glass and I've never experienced an issue with any of them. Perhaps I'm lucky - but if i was to go by people whining on forums about 'soft copies' then I'd be forever adjusting and not shooting.
No client of mine - or publisher of my photos has complained they are 'soft copies'
Am i missing something here - but the ISO shots of the S100 at 1600 look crap. At 3200 unusable. The S95 is better? Weird.
not sure if you can have RAW output from EXR modes...