jonrobertp: I would not want it at half the price. Short short lens.
People misinterpret such comments. He just means in his case - which is, when you read it, precisely what he says. You're free to decide otherwise. I personally tend to agree because I find the minimal telephoto ability here, especially for video, far too limiting. RX10 isn't pocketable. So when will sony make another model just slightly larger than rx100, and maybe at the expense of some lens speed, give us a bit more zoom reach?
Oh and also some better ergonomics/control. Enough with the 'high style' stuff; how about 'maximum usability' instead.
Why no mention of what type of video format or cameras they use? The quality on this is horrible - it appears to be cropped/scaled heavily. Yes, I had 'hd' turned on in the useless vimeo player.
BigOne: RX10 has more than enough space on top of the VF to fit a built-in flash. For me it'd be a deciding factor over its Panasonic counterpart.
The RX10 does have a built-in flash atop the VF area.
Beckler8: I've said this before but I'd gladly trade some of that RX100 lens speed for more reach at the telephoto end. 70mm means it effectively has no telephoto power at all, really, making this camera much more specialized. Just make a second version with say 28-150 f/2.8-4...much more versatile. Or better yet just make the lens removable and start a new micro lens line. This would be nice.
Yes G7X seems quite nice indeed. Btw, like RXiv, there's no hotshoe/external mic. I think if they really tried they could fit evf/hotshoe/flash all on a camera like this with only slightly bigger size, because all 3 of those are absolutely necessary when you think about it, esp. for an enthusiast camera. Tho personally I can easily do without the flash, or just have a tiny LED flash - better for video anyway.
The quality on that family picture is phenomenal! Hard to think it's from video; this is the future surely. I think another useful mode would be to leave markers, then it saves a region around them (say +/- 1 sec) and deletes the rest. Also about the markers - they are readable once footage is on your computer, yes?
I guess one awkward thing is the RX100iv outclasses RX10ii in some areas? How does that make any sense. Like the 16/14 fps - tho they don't specify how many frames at those rates. Anyway the big RX10 should have some more hardware advantages - with what are they filling all that extra room inside, if it is, seemingly, the same electronics as RX100?
I've said this before but I'd gladly trade some of that RX100 lens speed for more reach at the telephoto end. 70mm means it effectively has no telephoto power at all, really, making this camera much more specialized. Just make a second version with say 28-150 f/2.8-4...much more versatile. Or better yet just make the lens removable and start a new micro lens line. This would be nice.
cgarrard: HX90 needs 12mp sensor and raw to be more interesting
@cainn24 I dunno. Even if what you say is true sometimes, with a basically low-image quality compact, how often do you need to be enlarging enough to see 18MP resolution? Never. All the intermediate sizes you commonly view are much better served by larger pixels. I'm going to say 95% of users are viewing on their computer or 2MP TV or tablet (8MP if 4K). 18MP is pointless IMO.
Beckler8: HX90 looks v. nice but still. Why do they continue doing this. In this type of camera nobody needs 30x zoom and 20MP. I think 15x/12MP/larger sensor would make many more people happy. Fire all their marketing idiots, I would say...
@cainn24 Yes but that would make it a specialty camera then. Why would they want their top mainstream compact to be such? A small factor of practicality then but primarily marketing and Sony (and others) are a bunch of clueless idiots for it. They don't make the very best stuff they can and hope it will sell due to it, rather they plan products and features based on which ones think have the most psychological or advertising impact. As I say, idiotic.
HX90 looks v. nice but still. Why do they continue doing this. In this type of camera nobody needs 30x zoom and 20MP. I think 15x/12MP/larger sensor would make many more people happy. Fire all their marketing idiots, I would say...
SRHEdD: I have the RX100 and the WX350. I find I can crop the larger sensor to my desired image and get a better result than using the zoom on the WX350 to compose. Just the diff between the 1" and 1/2.3" sensors I guess. You can find the original RX100 for less than either of these now, AND it shoots RAW. That might be better money spent.
I have seen images to that effect and it's quite dramatic. It doesn't apply to video however and that makes rx100 extremely limiting depending on one's use.
Beckler8: Consider this a poor man's RX10. Constant f/2.8 is nice. But personally I can't consider larger cameras like this that don't have 4K - something that will very soon be as standard as 1080p.
@aramgrg You're joking right? If not, then you heard it here first folks on an internet comments section: 4k is dead.
BTW what an idiotic comment system, where you can't even reply to a specific comment properly.
Consider this a poor man's RX10. Constant f/2.8 is nice. But personally I can't consider larger cameras like this that don't have 4K - something that will very soon be as standard as 1080p.
So no IS at all in 4K or just no 5-axis? But either way, *why*?!
mpgxsvcd: I really thought that this was going to be a very interesting camera until I saw the price. $2500 for a 1 inch sensor 12 megapixel camera? No Thanks.
It has some nice features but there are so many better ways to spend $2500. They also never mention when this is going to be released. If it is like all of their other announcements lately then we can expect to see this camera on shelves by September or October at the latest. There will probably be new Sony and Panasonic products that compete with this that are announced and ship before then.
It's a tiny camera and has 10x zoom. Enough with the constant small-sensor talk.
Looks v. nice and represents some innovation. Would like to know what LCD resolution is. Also how can it be considered a real camcorder without a standard power zoom control which it doesn't seem to have - and which every single camcorder ever made does have, because it's necessary.
Nikon compact cameras, some at least, have a video problem where they can't even do AE smoothly (you see the steps clearly). I saw it even on a recent camera. I'd have to be sure that (and AF problems) are gone before I'd even consider Nikon at all for non-slr.
Btw I consider it very telling that I've never seen mention of that (or much of any other video considerations, really) in DPR reviews. It's because they have no idea what they're doing (i.e. clueless).
Homam: What good is 4k at 15 fps!!??
No good at all. The only way to look at it is it's better than not having it, which is the case with 99% of cameras today.
" ...4K support, though at a piddling 15 fps." It's clear why you don't mention this at the beginning because many people would have ceased caring about this camera at that exact point.
Beckler8: I'm disappointed the 24-240 isn't a power zoom lens. This reduces its versatility as a video lens.
But it would still have the manual zoom ring. Like the beautiful 28-135 power zoom I see Sony has (it's $3k unfortunately!)