If P&S cameras are dead, why doesn't there seem to be fewer of them?
wolfloid: Why has Pentax never got around to producing a small, fast reporter's lens in the 35-40mm equivalent range? What is the point in a small, quiet, ergonomic camera if there is nothing small and fast, in the right focal length range to put on it?
Please don't mention the 21/3.2, since it is neither fast nor in the right range (nor very good). It is really a mystery to me. Are they not able to make one?
You mean like the small 35mm f2.4 or 31 f1.8? You could also buy a Sigma. The lens doesn't have to say Pentax on it does it?
Another slow 14-42 kit zoom. How many does that make?
They made two and demand was for four. Due to the high price, this was not anticipated.
Red G8R: They should be licensed based on power and range.
Yes, just what we need,more government regulation! Whoohoo! Great idea, have an more?
Artistico: For most of the shots, he'd be better off using a real macro lens. And of course this is nothing new. There have been view camera adapters around, certainly for Nikon F mount and Canon EOS, for a very long time. Even some that allow some movement along the image plane for panorama shooting, which makes the whole exercise a bit more worth the effort.
It's definitely fun, of course.
Has anyone at home ever calked you a stick in the mud?
Paul Kersey Photography: as someone not obsessed with having a camera stuffed in my pocket, the RX100 III fails to eclipse the a6000, even with the 16-50 mounted on it.
At the same cost(though there had recently been a $50 rebate) what's really a substantive edge for the RX over the a6000? I don't see one.
Paul, you talk about compromise, but the reason people get this camera is the compromise they make is leaving a bigger camera at home and not getting any shot at all. I would buy this as a backup camera, when there's no way I am lugging a regular size camera around. If I really need better image quality, I have another camera for that that's better for that. Every time I walk out the door, my shooting needs are not the same. This camera covers one end.
This camera is all about size, nothing more. If you are going to take that out of the equation, there's no point in the comparison. It's like saying you aren't interested in the Ferrari because speed isn't something your obsessed with, but towing a boat is. Well.....ok?
white shadow: "it has done very little to make it fun to shoot it" pretty sum up the gist of this otherwise quite capable camera.
There is a lot to like about this camera, its compact size, bright zoom lens and larger sensor size. However, the main concern for the photographer is the overall usabilty of the camera. Sony somehow has missed out on that and seem to continue to do so. Thus, I can't disagree with DPR's comment that its a camera that feel more like a camera that will somewhat grudgingly let you take control, rather than an enthusiast camera designed for the committed photographer from the ground up.
Sony need to get a real photographer in its design team to overcome these shortcomings if they are serious in developing its photography market. This seems to be true to its other camera categories as well.
No it's not. It actually fits better in a jeans pocket. You need to try camera size compare dot com again.
erichK: Looks like a great carry-around camera, except for one thing: the 24-70 zoom range is just too short at the long end to really be useful.
Really? Long lenses are for the birds.
tecnoworld: Very nice camera. I think that all the cameras aimed to ppl not satisfied with a phone cam should include an evf. So basically every stand alone camera.
And the pop up evf is simply a smart solution. It's great to see so many innovations thx to Sony.
Plenty of people are not satisfied with a phone camera but also don't take pictures at eye level.
chiane: The Ricoh GR is about the same size, why is it not a rival?
Raist, how would you classify them, or say their best use differentiates? I am looking at both and don't see them as that night and day. The zoom on the Sony isn't that large, the Ricoh has crop modes and UWA accessory. They aren't identical, but probably the closest two in quality that fits in a pants pocket.
They both have a fixed lens, one just zooms and one doesn't. That's also just one feature. If we play that game, every camera can be knocked out for having this feature or that feature that differs.
The Ricoh GR is about the same size, why is it not a rival?
Still more interesting than BIF pics.
VadymA: Wouldn't consider it even for $0.99/month. I just despise PS counterintuitive concept of layers.
Someone please jot this down for the record. Vady is out.
Why are we saddled with an industry full of point and shoot sensors and marginal image quality, or we have to buy like a $2000 dslr housing? There's not much in the middle between pro and soccer mom.
Fuji needs to stop crying wolf with the words, 'fast AF'.
So I take it you would need to spend like $400 for a second battery, with machines aluminum cover, if you wanted extra battery life? Totally worth it!
Not nearly as good as bird pics from the back yard feeder.