Adrian Harris: I just get impression that a lot of comments on this thread are from people who have not used an RX100 much. It is an awesome camera. In many situations it takes photos equal to hi-end DSLR's. The RX100 II has improved features and yet people are moaning.
After agonising for months about should I pay so much for a compact camera (for when I do not want to drag a DSLR around), I took the plunge. That was nearly a year ago and I have never regretted it one bit.
Good kit is expensive - and this is very good kit.
It's as good as APS-C DSLRs with their kit lens in terms of low light capabilities and bokeh. The only drawback in terms of IQ is sharpness, especially at the corners.
Which means, if D7x00 would be released with a 16MP sensor, we would see 7.5FPS without grip!
tinzi1: I don't think there are too many people out there asking for 5200. Anyway, I was anticipating for the next gen of D7000. well...
lol. Most people I know either buy D3x00 or D5x00. On the Canon side, I always see ppl buying 550D/600D or 1100D. lol
Still no CLS?
G3User: There's a lot of noise in that image, especially in the clouds. He should have use a Nikon D4.
@Nishi, we are not requesting for noise free image, but we would want a low noise photographs, or else we wouldn't buy newer cameras.
No, he should have used Topaz Denoise.
Sony RX100 with - More buttonsMinimum shutter speed based on focal length and focus distanceFocus distance displayAuto hyperfocal distanceWhite clipping controller (with %)Touchscreen for better focus and exposureArticulating screen24-105mmConstant f/2.8 or f/2.0-4.0 (or better without increasing thickness by more than 10%)SharperISO 25/50Double control ring (front back on the lens)Stereo soundStronger flashMore intuitive menu system, there are some stupid design flaws
The price is crazy. I could see Lightroom implementing this.
magneto shot: my heart stopped at "4k camera" but then i realized...whats the point of a 4k video that have no shallow DOF. next...
IMO, equivalent of f/4.0 on video cameras are a maximum for anything at 10 feet. Any less or more either makes it too shallow or too deep.
Infms: "In qualititative terms it's not the best camera out there, and nor is it the best camera on a smartphone (the Nokia 808 has that honor, for now)"
Surprisingly, the 24 month old Nokia N8 still holds this honor too. With the general consensus being:
#1 Nokia 808#2 Nokia N8#3 Galaxy S3/iPhone 5/etc.
iPhone 4S/5 is better than S3 actually.
Thinkman: The bigger problem is that pointing any lens at the sun can permanently damage the camera's imaging sensor. SO STOP POINTING YOUR CAMERAS AT THE SUN!
You should add "in my opinion".
limlh: From the samples, I think the Bayer sensor has reached its limit. The X-Trans sensor of Fujifilm X-Pro 1 is now king of high ISO. So will be the X-E1.
lol. Artifacting should be easily fixed with good software support. But noise wise, there's no difference for Bayer sensors or X-Trans sensor, since they are gathering the same amount of light.
I absolutely like RX100. Pocketable is my utmost importance for non-interchangeable lens camera.
But this camera? Neh... For its big size, I'd rather get a NEX, with much better flexibility. And when Sony releases fast pancake primes for NEX, this camera will be irrelevant.
Sosua: Rah rah rah DXO rah rah rah, said my camera sensor was bad, rah rah rah I don't know how to interpret test data.
Do note that DxOMark is testing raw RAW data, not those which had noise reduction applied. The reason you might not agree with (say that you are a Canon user) the test is because Canon applies a stronger noise reduction than Nikon for its RAW files. And I'm guessing, one big reason might be because Canon has very efficient noise reduction in comparison to Nikon. But I'd still prefer a RAW file without any noise reduction at all, so that I can reduce it on computer, with greatly higher processing power.
Lee Jay: By the way, in my opinion, lens resolution tests are all entirely invalid if they are shot through an AA filter.
The only valid lens resolution tests are the one with infinite pixels, by your logic. A 15MP camera is still gonna get 15MP even if it loses its AA filter, only that the one with AA filters are slightly worse. A conventional 35MP camera is still going to beat a 15MP sensor without an AA filter in terms of resolution.
Karl Gnter Wnsch: For what it's worth - I wouldn't bother with DxO results, their testing procedures are so far off any reality that these values serve no one - as often as they contradict reality they should really refrain from publishing anything. Anyone trusting their data is IMHO up a creek without a paddle...
You're just not understanding what they are trying to show you. They are pretty much right. Maybe you're just a Canon fan. Who knows?
cordellwillis: Good news. Now let's just hope IPhone lenses are not part of the testing.
iPhone won't seem to be tested until there is support for RAW images.
Jogger: How about DXO sensor measurements as well.. e.g. instead of factory default jpgs for testing dynamic range.
@Karl - You just need to understand what they mean for each factors. They are not biased or irrelevant, just a bit sophisticated for your simple mind. These are not computer benchmark and is very relevant for real life situations.
Denis James Evans: Keep dxo's biases out of the camera reviews. If dxo has any influence in the camera reviews, I will never visit this site again. Dxo is a blight on the industry!
lol. You're the one who's biased.