DJD29: I've settle with carrying around my 60D even when its bulk is inappropriate to the occasion. I gave my S90 to my wife which she soon wore down. I then gave her my LX5, a sad farewell. I enjoyed the LX5's fast metering, focusing presets, fast focus, and generally great image quality. I sold my G10 - not happy with its range, though the image quality was okay.
Now, that the game has changed, I'm back in the market for one of these "enthusiast" cameras.
I'm hung up on sensor size. I'm leaning towards the RX100. Am I for all the wrong reasons?
Could someone tell me what the sensor size accomplishes in terms of resolution, etc?
My pick would be the LX7 only because I loved the responsiveness of the LX5. What does "largest image area" accomplish in terms of resolution, etc?
Better low light quality and Swallower DOF.
wakaba: It has less than 50% capabilites of a Nikkor Nikon 35mm f/1.8G DX AF-S Nikkor, is 50% more expensive and goes on a camera that cannot keep up with a 8 year old Nikon D50.
Who buys this crap?
Oops, the sensor in D3200 is Sony-manufactured. And your comparison doesn't really make sense.
Try comparing NEX-5 with Nikon 1. Nikon 1 is much pricier (at least in my region), but yet produced worse images.
And D50's sensor is no way beating any of NEX's sensors.
Alizarine: I really really wish they made that 70-200 f2.8 in K-mount... they can take the VC out so it can cost less :D
If they ever made one, they will. But I don't think it will cost less. This happened all time to Sony alpha. :(
Why is the coating on the lens so bluish?
calmwaters: A lot of people are whining about a camera they know nothing about. I have the XZ-1 and it is a fantastic camera and deserved all the acculades it received at the beginning of 2011. The XZ-2 is an improvement with a better lens cap, better video, focus ring, battery and some small adjustments. The sensor is the same(wait for a more in depth review). The reason why this camera is so much like the previous one is because they got so much right the first time. Until you have used this camera or the XZ-1 you don't really know what you are talking about. Bigger sensor means bigger lens which means bigger camera. Can't be avoided.
Can't be more agreed with you. Bought XZ-1 for my girlfriend and it was a very promising compact, being the compact with brighter less (not brightest because of f1.4 on EX2F & LX-7), but brightest in telephoto, it' more usable when zooming in low-light.
XZ-1 was revolutionary as it has the first f1.8 lens on a compact p&s. XZ-2 in my opinion, should be addressed as an improvement.
Digiman69: Nothing of amazing considering the price point, maybe the best FF DSLR for videos, but for those just interested in photography: - 24MP? I have same resolution in my trusted oldy A850- 19 AF point?? not on pair with the one of the D800- Nothing to say against the EVF Oled technology (even coming from the bright big A850 OVF) but I was waiting for same if not better 0,74x magnification- high iso? It will be better than A850/900 but I don't think again on pair with the D800On the other "Nex" side the 6 is a great one! I will skip this A99
D800 is having a Sony manufactured 36MP sensor. It might be Nikon-tweaked but it's still Sony's technology. I don't think 36MP's sensor will have cleaner high ISO than 24MP's.
ogl: Is there focus-peaking?
I don't think you could get focus peaking from cameras other than Sony.
idbirds: Hi! Why do we want to adjust shutter speed and not aperture?
By doing so, the exact depth of field will allow you to combine more easily. It's basically because the details and the sharpness are the same among 3 pictures, only the exposure values are different, where you need them.
brendon1000: Not something I would use but I am happy Sony has launched such a lens and even more surprised at the low price of $300 (compared to the launch price of the Nikon 55-300 and Pentax 55-300).
Sony has done well coming up with some good quality inexpensive lenses like the 50mm f1.8, 35mm f1.8, 85mm f2.8 (wish it was f2 though. :( ) and now this lens which will replace the old outdated Sony 75-300mm and possibly compete well with the slightly cheaper Canon 55-250mm IS and the higher priced Nikon 55-300mm.
The more exotic lenses like a 50mm f1.2, 600mm f4 prime and a 300mm f4 prime are also important but considering Sony will sell many many copies of the 55-300mm compared to the above mentioned lenses I would wager Sony has given more importance in the right direction.
I do not agree with you. Canon & Nikon aren't having better optics in my opinion. And in my country, 70200F2.8 from both C/N cost extra 500USD than Sony's copy.
In my opinion, some C/N lenses & cameras are overpriced.