papa natas: "...Sony has lowered the price of its Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 premium superzoom. The MSRP in the US is now $998, down from $1299, and prices in Europe have dropped as well (though it's unclear if they're official)..." (?)As for this moment July/5/2014 (2:25pm EDT)I'm here to report that the Sony.com home page STILL maintains the price of this camera at $1299.Say, you guys at DPREVIEW...Are you rainmakers?Do you just blast a rumor without verifying the source?OMG...Anybody with a keyboard can write ANYTHING nowadays.Meanwhile...Those pigs are flying in formation all over the Eastern Board.
779.99 euros matches around 1060$
Catalin Stavaru: If Sony can afford to drop the price by $300 in an instant, can you imagine what profit margins they operate on ? Talk about customer rip-off.
Who needs 36 mpix 1080 video and 3200$ to pay, while the trend is 12 mpix, 4k and 2500$. Now, I ask myself some days that good ol' question, "should I laugh or should I cry."
Donnie G: As nice as the RX100 III is, its most drool worthy impulse buyer's feature, that pop up EVF, will wind up making more enemies than friends for Sony. Why? Because it's not idiot proof. The pop up EVF is the one feature that the new owner is going to want to play with and show off the most, and it's also the thing that will suffer the most abuse and break, or, will be the culprit that constantly drains the battery due to being left in the up/on position. When this happens to enough owners, there will be a revolt, and Sony will get blamed for the operator errors of those owners. This is an easy prediction to make based on what I've seen even experienced photographers do to their new toys. Now imagine that pop up EVF being operated by the casual user, or, dare I say it, your teenagers. Idiot proof? Not! :)
dslr shutters stand for 100k to 150k actuations, now look on e-bay all that 5 to 8 year old dslr's sold and how many shutter actuations they count. The pop up viewfinder is here different, it is a mechanical piece that is submitted to human force, every one will treat it differently, and, it is surely used much more often then any pop up flash. If Donnie's claim will become true is something we will see in less then a year time from now. My impression on this was the same, I have some doubts about the solidity of the gadget. But, as said, let's wait and see what will happen.
adegroot: not the sharpest compact, those honors go to the Sigma DP Merrill series; even though those cameras work their magic best in good light.
there is no real sharpness in nature, nor is anything straight. Digital systems modify everything, and so often it is more a disadvantage.I find those new Led Tv screens terrible in image quality, all is looking like cut with a knife into the picture. For me, a good plasma looks much more natural.
Much wind and low amount of rain, like so often. So, all in all we buy a camera with a D40 resolution, FF dynamics, and ISO ability to shoot a stop better than high resolution chips for a lousy 300 to 500 bucks more. This camera is targeting video, and not stills, and here, the difference we get reported here is just peanuts. I still think that a A7 with 24 mpix is the best solution, it's right in the middle of the 2 and offers all one needs. It's interesting option in stills shooting is on the end the silent shutter only, since when it comes to speed and performance, it's just a snail.
tkbslc: Seems like the only advantage comes at 51200+ and then really it's not that usable anyway. It's like bad vs worse, so it doesn't really matter who wins.
in full size view, 25600 is not even useable anymore. The tests shots I downed in full size at imaging resource show that A7S starts noising at 3200 ISO, just like all other FF sensors. The only factor that plays here is until where the noise can be mastered by soft ware and where does noise takes it over. I have cleaned a A7S 80000 iso shot and got a perfect useable shot, the only thing is that the resolution looks like my D40, and there is no mystery about that, it is the same pixel pitch and higher than 12500 iso, it has no dynamic advantage anymore. Simply, we gain on one side what we sacrifice on the other. Bigger pixels and less pixel count kill resolution, smaller pixels and higher pixel count kills sensitivity. All is to know what one wants and when I see A7R noise compared to A7S noise at 25000 ISO, I see no reason to buy the smaller pixel count camera. The difference between 7 and 7R is not that much visible, both perform almost the same, 7S is a world back here.
It is stunning how much detail she can resolve compared to Nikon's DF. Despite this, all over, it is the IQ of a Nikon D40 with the dynamic range and dof of a FF.
Leo "Zoom": Differens lenses require different sensor curvature. So this is more like one lens sensor...
If the sensor is fixed and the curvature is the same on all camera brands, with a unified mount, that could be a hit. But as I know Canikonolypana, they want all to have their own system and angle of curvature. This will end by a mess and no lenses will be useable on other brands, not even with adapters. Imagine a common sensor and mount, lenses form all brands fitting one system....., come on let's stop dreaming.
GRUBERND: cool! soon a new lens-mount from Sony!
maybe we will see soon cellphones with pro IQ :-)
godwit: The Kodak Brownie 127 film camera from the 50's did just the same. In plan view the camera is elliptical (looked rather trendy in 1953!) and the film was supported at the back in the curved bakelite film guide. That allowed Kodak to use a cheap single-element plastic lens. They were very popular. I have one in my collection. It has only taken 60 years for this to come around again!Of course the ideal shape for the new sensor would be spherical, not cylindrical. That was tricky with roll film but possible with electronics?
maybe in a few years, the print them on a 3D printer, who knows?
Johannes Zander: "The former is suited well for a fixed-lens full-frame camera (such as the RX1)..."
So not for interchangeable lenses and DSLR?
And I think you need a different curveture for each focal length.
That is the main problem that occurs if you make ILS cameras with that system. It asks for a new mount and a totally different lens park. Now, if all camera makers would adopt one curvature angle and one common mount, this could work. It would boost the market, since lenses from all manufacturers would then fit the same mount, similar to 4/3. The problem is to make that step and since they all work so "close" together, this will be the major problem. If all do then their own system, different angles, it will just become a big mess.
the thing was to say, "we do it".
I asked camera manufacturers on exhibitions 10 years ago why they do not curb the sensors, it would make lens construction simpler and IQ a lot better. Here the problem was that they have to do then completely new lens parks, what asks for a different mount and body system.
Today, Sony does the step, despite the fact that many old lenses will not perform well on this technology. If Sony builds the cameras with e-mount we will have to find out how much old lenses will do a good or fair job on it.
For fixed lens cameras in small size, this is it, makes the lens smaller, what is the main problem in pocket ability. RX2 is supposed to be seen on Photokina, let's hope it's true.
is that a new windows 9 wall paper wee see here?
Boky: The photos look bland, lifeless and dull with colour cast that is off completely. There is no sense of perspective, and the camera is anything but pocketable and costs $800 US (or AU$1000 !!! <- a complete joke). The latest set of sample photos are by far the most unappealing I've seen in a while. Lens extends to 70 only and is useless for portrait work.
I better go and get one because we are approaching 3000th comment -> this must be a fantastic camera.
the only thing I agree with Nick is that ridiculous excessive price. Pants with big pocketq exist, in one of my Dickies low down I can even pack 3 a6000
I would like to have a pocketable camera that makes huge shots, has a viewfinder and has an acceptable price range. Sony has just a little bit of that, unfortunately.
Arsen: I just picked up mine about an hour ago.. Must say for a small camera the image quality is very good. Still no comparison to my Nikon D800E , but for a light camera has lots of features that my wife wanted in a small package. Overall very satisfied with it. I bought it with the kit lens, Ok overall, but like the compact size. The reason that I bought this camera was to use it when my D800E would be too big to take along. Its hard to sacrifice great IQ. So Far I am quite impressed, but time will tell based on various shooting conditions..
who wants to use a 50mm prime on an APSC camera to go in a restaurant, except if your intents are to shoot your steak or the bartender on the other end of the room. I use a 20 or better a 24 mm for such events, eventually a 28, but that gets close.
JanMatthys: every day there is either a Sony RX100III review or a review for a Sony camera, I guess the marketing dept of Sony is bankrolling DPreview
the only thing that is on the right place on a Canon is the button to switch it off. Hope that is said something good about Canon now...sic.
Ross the Fidller: I am looking at this because of someone buying it, but why do you have to be region specific, "when it was introduced in the Fall of 2012.", with the timing of its release? I'm sorry, but as an Australian, I 'fall' about laughing at that term for Autumn. ;) Could you please remember it isn't just North Americans reading this & refer to the time of the year by month or quarters or something else that isn't region specific.
autumn, what is that, I live at the equator