123Mike: Clearly, it's COOKED RAW ! ! !
People can "like" your Fuji confirmation bias till the cows come home. Fact is that other cameras give you true raw, the data from the sensor as is. Fuji does not. They apply a bunch of noise reduction to fool people into thinking that their camera has a better noise performance. It is called cheating!
Stephan Def: I hope very much that Fujifilm continue this concept in future models. For me the key feature is the very good OOC jpegs & film simulations, also the EVF and swivel screen. Also the overall very good build quality. (High-end AF is not important on this kind of a Camera).
If one can use a TV screen & do post-processing in-camera without the need for an addtional computer & software then that is a huge benefit for any user.
I don't think Fujifilm has to jump on the 4K bandwagon, just decent enough Video qualtiy would be good. Also the ability to record a short sound clip with a still image is very nice to have and would be technically easy to do.
What I would like to have is film-simulation bracketing, so that I do 5 shots in rapid succession using various film simulations & settings. At the end of the day I could then just choose which ones I want to keep. More stuff like that, neat features to have implemented by exploiting existing hardware thru better software.
It seems that it is not possible to turn off all the raw processing options. It's cheating left and right to fool people into thinking it's better than other cameras. Only people looking for confirmation bias will fall for it.
I feel like this is a lens from like 10+ years ago...
OH, there is lots of raw processing. Its raw is cooked.
Clearly, it's COOKED RAW ! ! !
Low noise performance wise, I'm not seeing any difference between the very first RX100 to every version to IV. Someone looking for good pocket camera for basic vacation use for instance, would be much better off buying a used RX100 older version from someone "upgrading" for kicks.
vesa1tahti: IQ is worse than with OM-D E-M10. This Oly body costs today 499 € in Finland. I get a couple of top quality lenses + the body for less money. No thanks, Sony.
They messed up the Studio Comparison badly! The focus is way off. Purely user error.
FOCUS in the Studio Comparison is WAY WAY OFF ! ! ! ! I don't buy for a split second that this camera is THAT blurry ! ! ! You have to COMPLETELY REDO this ! I'd take this down immediately ! ! !
Henry Richardson: Here are some of mine on the streets of Japan:
Neat! Loved browsing through it!
Eugene232: what do you think about LX100 vs Sony A5100 (A6000) with kit zoom in terms of IQ?
Sony has better sensor but Panasonic better lens?
1 stop advantage. WRONG!The Sony has a larger sensor and happens to be a very good one. Looking at comparisons, it places it among the best APS-C range.A 3/4 is not going to overcome that stop, sorry.Plus... (drumroll)....fffffrrrrrrrrrr.... you can mount an f/4 zoom lens, like the 18-105 for instance.Advantage: Sony.
The A6000 was in some cases back-ordered as well. Sony must be better at manufacturing than Nikon is. Besides, why bother, the A6000 is much better anyway.
Nikon is a very special sponsor. It's how they've manipulated exposure since day one.
123Mike: Conclusions:1) noise per sensor is equal (enough) on all 3.2) the A7r gives you more resolution without sacrificing low light quality.3) the A7r provides the most bang for your buck for image quality.
You're not comprehending the noise-per-sensor thing. The A7r is no worse than the A7s for stills.
Conclusions:1) noise per sensor is equal (enough) on all 3.2) the A7r gives you more resolution without sacrificing low light quality.3) the A7r provides the most bang for your buck for image quality.
Good grief that's a turn on.
photosen: Good review; it's an interesting camera, I don't see the interesting and affordable lenses... But I'm willing to be illuminated!
If you're willing to put up with the size, the 18-105 f/4 G lens is pretty good! Save the $150 on the kit lens, and apply that to this $600 lens...
ekaton: Put a decent lens on the a6000 and it leaves mft and Fuji in the dust, at least for stills and irrespective of price.
18-105 f/4 GProblem solved !
Menneisyys: Too bad its video IQ doesn't even approach that of the RX100 MkIII, let alone the even better RX10... It's on exactly the Nikon D3300 / D5300 level, resolution-wise. Otherwise, it'd be a tempting camera, apart from the lens problem, obviously.
BTW, two mistakes / overlooks in the article:
- "advantegs" on the Conclusions page
- "While some people will never step away from a DSLR, the a6000 makes a very strong case for being able to do everything a Nikon D5300 or EOS 700D/Rebel T5i can do, even in terms of autofocus." - the D5300 also has GPS (smething immensely useful if you don't want to keep a separate tracker and/or maintain a constant Wi-Fi connection to an Android / iPhone)
In the video still demonstration, the A6000 shows it was focused on nearer objects, like the bottle or that flock of hair. The D3300's version looks less sharp on those details. But the flat parts like the charts that are behind it, the D3300's look sharper. Also, it look like a sub-par lens was used for the A6000, which was probably the 16-50 lens (I haven't actually checked), which isn't very good at all.But scrutinizing and finding those focusing differences, I think that the A6000 is probably better for video than the D3300 is.Also question comparisons with other cameras as well. The focus is often what screws up these tests. This goes for their still tests as well !
ProfHankD: I can't believe that this is rated 3% lower than a Canon 70D, etc., but you'll notice the only non-subjective con is about flash exposure. "Lens range not as developed as rival systems" -- you mean like the EOS-M system? I suppose only about 25 of my 130+ lenses would quickly autofocus on an A6000.... ;-)
This is a disturbingly good camera at a very good price. Take a look at the IQ side-by-side against the full-frame A7. I'd buy one immediately except I have a NEX-7, an A7, and a wife who'd be unhappy if I bought another camera right now.
I think that's just sucking up to the hand that feeds it...DPR is not really a Canikon shop though. Fro that turns out doesn't really know photo that much, for instance, now THERE is the ultimate Canikon. He won't acknowledge Sony even exists. There are others like that. Those Hong Kong boys, the one with the British accent that one, doesn't fully appreciate Sony for obvious reasons also.
midimid: Wait - 'there's no real portrait prime' on E-mount? Isn't there a 50mm 1.8 from the original lineup? And a 55mm 1.8 on FE?
Believe it or not, but portraits using the 18-105 f/4 G lens come out pretty good!