brownie314: Yikes! In P1000169 the red umbrellas are pretty bad. Looks like the DR of the sensor/processor can't handle that pretty tame scene.
Yikes! I think these pictures look great, colors, contrast and sharpness are all superb for a small sensor, this will be a brilliant camera for taking macro and birding shots, and with that stunning lens, wow!!!!
perry rhodan: Is planet earth flat? Waste of resources IMHO.The FZ1000 beats both by a large margin.
MrTaikitso: I'm surprised no one has commented on how terribly noisy this pictures are! And at ISO 100 too. Anyway, this article has just validated why paid sports photogs use the still Canon 1D or on a lesser scale, the Nikon D3/4. You don't see those white lenses dotted around the edges of a sports arena for nothing.All said, I had a Sony NEX 5R a year or so ago, and the 10fps shooting mode did get me a few very good sharp in focus clean shots, but I had to preplan the shots, which were of some canoeists, not football players.We all know as photogs that LIGHT is the key to it all, and if you don't have a large hunking fast zoom lens and a large hunking sensor, you're never going to be able to get tack sharp CLEAN pictures of a moving object. The laws of physics are not negotiable! :)
Mr TaiKitso, I`did` second comment from top!
SteB: It's the game called football in the rest of the world.
Aye, weel said John ma freen. lol
tom1234567: Rx10-11 still a 1inch sensor and image quality is not very gooddon't know why DPR would want to waste time on this camera,The FZ1000 beats the pants off the RX10ii
so its one of the worst cameras Sony has ever brought out and the monies£1000 is a joke ,maybe £300 more realistic price for such a cr-ppy sensorTom G
Has anyone noticed the picture noise on the first picture taken with the RX10II? i note it was taken at iso 1000, the noise in the picture is terrible, even the FZ1000 is better than that, as i said in an earlier forum, the RX10II `fails` in picture quality, and i stand by that!
mikey fried: Not too good, unless you need slow-mo then I think the FZ1000 has much better image quality at half the price.
I dont give a crap about video, although its more than capable and sufficient on the FZ1000 if needed, in my dpt its still image quality that matters to me and the FZ1000 is the winner here compared to the RX10 MK II, build quality is a non-issue the FZ1000 may be plastic, so-what! its pretty sturdy enough, as i said its pic quality that matters and again i say it, this new Sony `Fails` to deliver in that respect, oh, and we all know you are a Sony `defender` nobody is denying the new Sony is terrible, so you don't need to `defend` its features and getting upset, just its pic quality could be a bit better that's all, the original RX10 MK 1 even has better pic quality than the newer model, most of the posters here are all saying that, oh yea, i almost forgot, even the Sony fans!!
Adamant: Based on still IQ, I can see absolutely no reason to prefer the RX10 II to its (now substantially cheaper) predecessor. The Mk I looks cleaner at low ISO. High ISO rendering on the Mk II is different, but not appreciably better.
I would say after looking at the comparison chart that the RX10 mark 1 has the edge in pic quality over the newer mark II version, its pictures look a tad softer to me, nice camera though!
I would agree with Jacques, yes, the FZ1000 has superior pic quality, the RX10 II has a bit better build and some extra features that Panasonic has still to catch up with, i think when Panasonic finally release an upgraded FZ1000 it will simply blow this Sony out of the water, i don't care if a camera is made out of putty, at the end of the day its all about picture quality and this new Sony `fails` in that respect, i will stick with the, as some say, i.e. the plastic built FZ1000, its build is spot-on for me, and its at the end of the day `Superior` Picture Quality `that` is the `most` important item on `my` menu with top-range Bridge Cameras`!
El Chubasco: I own the first version of this camera and its performance is rock solid. I share the views of this review and confirm that is the best all-in-one camera in the market. The image quality is excellent and the 24-200 2.8 lens is superb. This camera is so good that I am debating what to do with the rest of my gear.
I encourage all who criticize to go to the nearest store and try the RX10. Rent it if you can. You will be pleasantly surprised.
No! not `the best` all in one, yes a great bridger, but FZ1000 is better than the Rx10 mark1
munro harrap: I am still trying to understand, yet I cannot, as the format itself is so poor. The published samples here are worse than any 16MP APS-C camera, and are certainly not as good IMHO, as I get from an FZ1000: they do not have a photographic quality.
I try to be generous, I try to make allowances, but in a medium in which the lenses now cost as much as full-frame lenses do, why should anybody?
There is no comparison between the results here and those you can get from ANY full-frame SLR, and my ancient 20D and D200 both do better.
The mediums limitations have it stuck at 16MP as well, so it appears that nobody possessing excellent Olympus, Leitz and Panasonic lenses has any possibility of enlarging their work to match other more competent media, and I feel sorry always for people who have bought into the system when I see them.
As noted in the review several pictures show shake they ascribe to shutter shock I dont get ever with 10 year-old equipment. And certainly not with an FZ1000
Munro, i too find the FZ1000`s pics looking better than most micro 4/3 cams, i had a Panny G6 and still have loads of pictures i took with it, on a comparison bases, yes the FZ1000 seems to have better color, sharpness, etc, i find it amazing how good the 1" sensor really is, i believe it is of Sony manufacture!
photo perzon: Horrible skin tones. Bad high ISO results. Large obese camera.
photo perzon Thats `RUBBISH` ya `FOOL`!!!
`RUBBISH` ya `FOOL`!!!!!
Which camera - large sensor, small lenses etc. etc. - found the GX7 with the tilting viewfinder and never looked back. No more stiff neck for that different viewpoint. Will have to keep out of camera shops in case I spot the GX8. :) BTW I find screens useless in bright light. :( Am I alone in this?
You are not alone my friend, i will `NEVER` purchase `any` camera without a viewfinder, never, thats madness, on a sunny day 99.9% of rear screen lcd`s are useless!
AmateurSnaps: Makes the A6000 look like a bargain as a stills camera.
I would say the Olympus OMD5 MKII is easily the winner here in the picture comparison test, and no, i dont own one, i have an FZ1000.
lacikuss: Nice picks!
ryan2007 Oh dear! looks like you must have had a bad copy of the FZ1000, or given the fact that you are too fussy and a pixel peeper at that, i will tell you this, and its a fact, hundreds of ex DSLR luvvies have sold their heavy brick camera gear because after they bought the FZ1000 they found out how it `trounces` most DSLRs in focusing speed features, video quality, and its pic quality is not that far off APS-C, but as i said, it would seem you just purchased a bad copy of the unit, or you were just far too fussy, i would suspect the latter!!!
Chris62: Dissapointed camera - not much better than G5/G6 - next year will be far behind the competition.
I just used the compare mode above, tried the Fz1000 against the G7 and astonishingly, it shows the FZ1000 `beats` the G7 in nearly every respect, even pic quality, except ya cant change lenses on the FZ1000 (obviously)
justmeMN: Small sensor, big price. :-)
(The listed price is body-only.)
BIG things grow out of little things, and why wont you DSLR luvvies get it through ya heads that the 4/3 sensor pic quality wise aint that far behind ya beloved APS-C sensors in fact most modern 4/3 cameras pic/quality looks even better, hell, even pic quality from the RX10/MK2 and FZ1000 in good light can easily match APS-C and their sensors are only 1" theres more `technology` in most modern and some recent older 4/3 cameras than there is on most SLRS, and even in the 1" sensor cameras, Canon/Nikon wayyyy behinddddd in that field!!!!
Tom_A: I find it looks quite a bit like my XE-1.
The latest 4/3 cameras will trounce most good SLRs focus wise/speed period, especially over Canon and Nikon which are wayyyy to slowwwww!!!!
Greynerd: In the UK the G7 is going for £679 and the the GX8 for a stonking £1,149 both with the 14-42. On my part I would save myself a headache trying to figure out the differences and a lot of cash and buy the G7 which is not a lot larger. I really doubt the differences in IQ will be that great. They never are. Sony always like to soak up any sensor improvements with extra pixels if it is a Sony sensor.
Yep agreed, again we are getting ripped off here in the UK, this camera should only cost around £650, hell even the gh4 body only is advertised just now for £1049, but there is an offer on at the moment in which there is £100 refund making it £949, `cheaper` the the GX8 body only!!
Bruce702: After reading previous posts, I AM so glad I purchased the Panasonic FZ-1000 camera. Yes, it has a fixed lens, but the guts seem to have most of what the new G7 claims to have.
I did lots of reading up on 4K video. I almost purchased a Sony 4K video camera, but after reading all the negative reports on their rolling shutter issues, I read that the FZ1000 seems to have less of that problem. Also, using pan effectively, will reduce the effect.
Stills and video are terrific with this camera. Even if someone gave me a G7, I'd still be using the FZ1000!
Hi bruce, i also have the FZ1000, i think its a superb camera, after owning it for 3 days, my Canon 60D was for sale in E-Bay, it may have a 1" sensor, rumour says in many forums that its made by Sony, and boy what a cracker of a sensor it is, (thanks Sony) my 60d pics just were not as sharp or detailed as the FZ1000`s, i was not the only one to state this fact, also the 60D was left gasping at the starting gate feature and performance wise, video wise, its brilliant, i am not a silly pixel peeper, lets face it, if ya print an A4 picture from its 20mp setting ya cannot pixel peep the printed photograph, i know there are camera`s out there better than it, i admit that, but for me personally the FZ1000 is the best camera i have ever owned so far, i love it!