Lucas_: Reading the Review, comparing images taken with the Pany and Sony RX10, and having had experience with both Panasonic and Sony cameras, the only excuses to give an 82% rating for the DMC-FZ1000 and 80% for the RX10 would be maybe due to the longer lens reach of the Panasonic and the higher Sony price. Even though I'd keep the Sony for its superior build, better IQ ( mainly in RAW shooting ) and ergonomics.
.... and the Sony RX10 have better build with metal chassis, superb Zeiss glass with constant f2.8 aperture throughout its zoom range, weather sealed against moisture and dust, have ND filter, headphone jack and better out of camera jpegs if you don't do post processing.
Both are great bridge cameras. If you are more into photos, the RX10 is for you, and if you are more into videos, the FZ1000 is for you with its 4K video capability. I would go for the RX10 because I am more into photos. The RX10 has sturdier build with metal (magnesium) chassis (vs the plastic FZ1000) , is dust and moisture resistant, have constant f2.8 aperture across its zoom range, have built-in ND filter, and a headphone jack for monitoring sound when I occasionally go into video mode. The RX10 also have better out of camera jpegs in case you prefer not to do post processing.
Olympus can keep their E-PL6 in Japan. The likes of Sony, Fuji and Panasonic already grabbed the wider market with better cameras in that class and price point.
arcane93: I bought the RX100 II when it came out last year, and I've loved it enough that I would have actually considered upgrading to the new model this year with the right set of new features. The improvements in aperture by themselves would have been enough to sell me, but a loss of 30mm at the long end? That's a deal breaker as far as I'm concerned. I use my RX100 II a lot for concert shooting (one of my main reasons for buying it, actually), and I need all of the telephoto range that I can get. If anything, I wanted more, not less. Maybe next time, Sony!
The laws of physics dictates that there has to be a trade-off between zoom range and aperture to retain the compact size of the camera which is the hallmark of the RX100 series. Most of us prefer large aperture wide angle with shorter zoom than small aperture with longer zoom. Thank you Sony for listening.
This video also illustrates how essential weather sealing can be if you live at, or travel to places with wet weather, high humidity and extreme temperatures. Thanks for the video Canon, now let's see your line of weather resistant DSLRs and lenses.
JaimeA: This camera is demoralizing the competition.
All they need to do is listen to their customers and not arbitrarily decide which features to include to protect the sales of their other models.
deploylinux: Specs looked wonderful until I noticed lack of hotshoe. Ouch.
Where do you suggest putting the hot shoe now that it have an EVF (that is important to most people) without increasing the size? If hot shoe is more important to you then consider the RX10 which also has longer zoom.
photo perzon: Still a tiny sensor compared to m4/3 and aps-c no?
It's still about 4 times larger than a typical pocketable point and shoot camera. This sensor size is a nice balance between form and function.
Calvin Chann: To all those posters who post saying no EVF no sale. Well here you are!
But I'm sure you'll find something else to stop you buying it.
Something like the EVF resolution is not good enough compared to the Sony Alpha 7R?
My guess coming up next is the pricier Alpha a7000 (which replaces the Nex7). It will have things purposely missing from the a6000, like level indicator, higher resolution EVF, stereo mic. jack, touch screen, etc.
Eyeglass10101: Here's a tip for the absence of a level gauge. If you really need one, try adding a bubble level to the hot shoe. Or, if using a speedlight, glue it to the camera. :)
The people who designed this model wholeheartedly agree. One can also stick a bubble level gauge to the forehead using Velcro from Home Depot.
justmeMN: With their mediocre-at-best 16-50mm lens, Sony decided that (small) size was more important than quality - a shame.
Yes I dare compare, if it costs under $200 like most kit lenses. That "Pro" (with massive distortion at the wide end) will also set you back $1000.
At $800, the electronic viewfinder should come with it. Canon shot itself in the foot, and not surprisingly so.
Perhaps next a K3 Mk II with improvements in movie mode, jpeg and WiFi implementation?
ManuelVilardeMacedo: No trolling, but judging image quality purely by this studio scene comparison, I'd have to say the Canon is the winner. The Nikon belongs in a lower rank and it shows quite badly here; the Olympus is good but doesn't come as close to the Canon as the X-T1. The latter (just like the Olympus) seems to have quite a bit of moiré, which may not be due to the absence of AA filter because it doesn't show with the Sony Alpha 7R. Besides, the Fuji seems a bit highlight-happy, even more so than the Olympus. Of course I'd need to confirm these findings in the field, but as it stands the pecking order would be: 1 - Canon; 2 - Fujifilm; 3 - Olympus; and 4 - Nikon. The first three cameras are extremely capable, but let's not forget that, being a DSLR, the Canon has an optical viewfinder and (arguably) better AF performance.
I guess that's what happens when Canikon got sucked into the megapixel race.
babalu: Really waiting now for DPR's full review . Speed it up , please.
Anything other than Nikon or Canon is old news to DPR.
EdHaady: A7 or X-T1?
X-T1 having less megapixels does make it a better camera.
Speed it up? The Pentax K3 (winner of reader's poll for best DSLR) announced on Oct 7, 2013 have yet to be fully reviewed.
Glad that Fuji is not caught up in the megapixel race. Would be nice if they start working on TTL wireless flash.
Would be nice if it comes with a weather resistant kit lens option.