"...significant progress for mirrorless (it's too bad we can't say the same for the a6300's ergonomics)"
I'm glad to see dpreview can understand this. Sony is out of control with its idiotic design decisions. They're not thinking of usability and ergonomics. There's no reason not to have some more useful customization and controls. (Let's say it had just 2 more C buttons - why not. You don't have to use them if you don't like them). There's a whole empty canvas of area to add useful controls and experiment with innovation in UI, but instead we get nothing. This is ok for some $200 'stylish' models but is WAY out of place for serious cameras. They're complete and utter fools in that regard, I'm certain of it. The top model (a7 series) looks like some ridiculous apple toy.
Don't get me wrong I'm consdering the 6300 because I think it will surpass anything on the market in this range for video but the design is garbage.
Eric Glam: Impressive AF and frame-rate, but:- LCD is very low-res.- Flash sync limited to 1/160th.- No touch-screen- Battery life is too low. Should be at least 600 shots.- No mention if the 14 bit RAW is lossy or lossless compressed.- No mention if the menus have been re-arranged to make them easier to navigate and quickly find what you're looking for.- No IBIS like in the A7r mk2.- $1000 for the body is a little expensive.
All in all, the camera should be fun to use, but too many negatives to really want one.
" LCD is very low-res."
Is it though? It's only slightly lower than Alpha 7ii series (0.9 vs. 1.2 Mdot). 3" is small and you'd have to look way too close to see more detail if it was say twice the resolution. Would be nice but I don't see it as a showstopper at all. EVF is there for detail work.
Zoron: I would rather Sony change their design language......now it's too straightforward compared to Olympus Pen-F.
True, but no reason to randomly go retro either. They should be designing for maximum usability, as SLRs are trying to do. This has little semblance to an SLR which is a bad thing.
I like what I'm reading esp. the 4K video. Consider this a poor man's a7. :D But I will as usual complain about the ergonomics. No reason not to have another button or two on the top and front - there's plenty of empty space. They're still going for the 'plain minimalist' nonsense. There should be a zoom control on the body too and hopefully they will come out with more power zoom lenses.
Beckler8: The B&H website confirms the stupidity (IMO) of the design:
"...a versatile point-and-shoot marrying both form and function. Designed to be as sleek as possible, the ZS100..."
But ok, maybe some people want "sleek" instead of usable. So why not release the same camera in a version designed to be used? I'm talking proper button/dial size and layout, grip, something innovative like illuminated and more custom controls. I have zero interest in an all-smooth design to satisfy some subjective 'style' desire. I say subjective because I find the clean layout of a pro-dslr look infinitely more pleasing than the dumbed-down apple-look of this unit.
I think the point is that this and RX series are both completely unique in the marketplace, expensive and surely aimed at enthusiast crowds who are a little more than casual shooters. Why make the decision then to go the ugly and function-crippled "style" route on them all? That stuff is ok in its segment but way out of place in this one.
@Street: Ahahaha. Funny. But why not address what I say instead. I challenge you.
The B&H website confirms the stupidity (IMO) of the design:
Beckler8: ZS100 bridging the gap between the no-zoom rx100 type and the way-too-much zoom tiny sensor type. Finally!! With 4K no less - an exciting camera. Will Sony have a response or will they let Lumix trample all over rx? :D
Androole: But cameras like this are so versatile they can be your only camera. In which case you want the ability to add an external mic when you want to. I have the stereo external mic from sony and it's quite small. You then have a high quality video camera + mic that fits in a very small case.
@darngood: (wow this is a HORRIBLE commenting system). Yes that's what i mean - who knows how much space it would add. Real innovation would involve something like a plug-in or slide-in hotshoe (and other modules like grips). They allow you to add what you want or go compact if not needed. Not suitable for cheap P&S but for these premium models, yes.
@Marty: Yes the intentionally incremental theory :) My theory: it's the best they can do and they don't actually put much thought into it. I.e. they're not very good. Like the RX100. It's a $1000 serious enthusiast compact camera but designed like some stylish toy-camera that's not meant to be used seriously. Or my sony TV that doesn't even have a powerful enough processor for the menus to work smoothly and half the advertised features don't even work. Getting off-track here but just examples of ridiculous design that I don't think are intentional.
Well that empty spot on the left. Would need a little raised area. The problem with no hot shoe is it means the spectacular 4K video has garbage audio to go with it. Please nobody mention external recorders as that's irrelevant.
ThePhilips: ... but still not even a tiltable screen.
Yes. Isn't this even more important in a pro camera? Being able to hold the camera way above your head, around a corner, etc. etc...when you really have to get the shot? Pretty stupid if you ask me (and no one is btw).
After looking at it some more: 2 problems. No hot shoe (there's a huge empty space on top, no reason to omit it), and mimicking RX100 silly style-type design instead of best grip/usability.
ZS100 bridging the gap between the no-zoom rx100 type and the way-too-much zoom tiny sensor type. Finally!! With 4K no less - an exciting camera. Will Sony have a response or will they let Lumix trample all over rx? :D
Beckler8: What would be interesting would be actual innovation - something unexpected. Like a 15M-dot EVF so no more mirror required. Or something like slo-mo 4K video. (120fps maybe?) Or dual sensor: it can internally switch between two different sensors, presumably a sensor carrier would slide side-to-side; that would revolutionize things. I've never heard that proposed but would clearly be disruputive and relatively easy to do; do they even try to think originally?
But we know nothing even remotely close to innovation will happen but rather it'll be a full 8% improvement over the D4's AF performance and that's about it. :(
HowaboutRAW - To clarify, I don't mean two sensors for image and VF but just different sensor types: one low and one high res., or one for still and one optimized for video, etc...
Since this has turned into a discussion of mirrors, what's so special about a mirror/OVF compared to a really good EVF again? Just want to make sure I'm not missing anything. EVF advantages are huge.
Dual (or more) sensors should be easy. It just isn't something they (or any other camera maker apparently) have thought of; I have zero expectation it'll be on D5 or any camera, ever, because as I say innovation isn't common. :)
What would be interesting would be actual innovation - something unexpected. Like a 15M-dot EVF so no more mirror required. Or something like slo-mo 4K video. (120fps maybe?) Or dual sensor: it can internally switch between two different sensors, presumably a sensor carrier would slide side-to-side; that would revolutionize things. I've never heard that proposed but would clearly be disruputive and relatively easy to do; do they even try to think originally?
Beckler8: Why doesn't Sony just make a camera in-between HX90 & RX100? Seems to me that would be ideal for most people. I have HX50 and rarely use the 30x zoom - image quality goes down too for whatever reason; it looks more compressed and noisy at high zoom. 10 or even 8x would be enough, enabling a little larger sensor and faster lens.
Both of those seem very nice options, tho a little bigger than HX/RX (esp. Olympus).
Edit: The Stylus 1s intrigues me the more I read about it! Thanks...
Why doesn't Sony just make a camera in-between HX90 & RX100? Seems to me that would be ideal for most people. I have HX50 and rarely use the 30x zoom - image quality goes down too for whatever reason; it looks more compressed and noisy at high zoom. 10 or even 8x would be enough, enabling a little larger sensor and faster lens.
They're going for some ridiculous minimalist plain design (including no labels - completely absurd) but little do they realize, it ends up looking like some super-junk generic chinese product, esp. that back side. Something you'd see on a site like dealextreme for $149.95: "Large sensor digital camera".