Lederhosen: Again with the complaints about the clickless wheel? Get over it, DPR. Some people like it, others don't. Your obsession with it is blinkered, subjective, and completely out of proportion. "The wheel does not click, therefore I cannot love this camera!" Please.
As a recovering devotee of clicky-wheels, let me say that when I first started using my RX100-I, it took me--oh--about 30 seconds to decide I could not possibly care less. All one must do is be a little flexible in the way one approaches camera handling, and it will all work out fine.
samfan: Pop-up EVF?? I just might need to re-evaluate my 'never Sony' stance.
I had a similar stance and re-evaluated it with the first iteration of the RX100. With this new version, I may start asking myself `why anything OTHER than Sony?'
viking79: Pop up viewfinder is nice, but how does one hold onto that camera? It looks like it has no comfortable way to hold it.
As an owner of the original RX100, I'll say that I can understand where you're coming-from. I'm a compact-enthusiast, so am inclined to be forgiving of the "handling difficulties" presented by really small cameras. But I can definitely sympathize with people that aren't so inclined. I'll say that of all the ultra-compacts that I've owned, the RX100 design is the easiest among them to deal with. With THAT said, however, I'll also admit that I've added a Franiec grip, which does improve handling by quite a bit. And I do prefer the after-market approach, on this issue, with a camera like this. I'd rather have the manufacturer do as little as possible with the handling ergonomics, and allow me to solve the matter to my own taste, with a personalized solution.
I own the first iteration of the RX100 and love it. For as amazing as it is, I'd love for it to have a VF. I am happy to see that Sony has decided it to be worthwhile to think through a rather slick solution to the problem of including one onboard an otherwise ultra-compact camera. At 800 bucks it is stupidly expensive, of course, but I predict I will cave, anyway, and pick it up.
I would hope that this has Google's attention, in the sense that they are seeing a huge opportunity in turning Picasa (or some variant) into a true Photoshop (or at least Elements) alternative.
Limitations of technology and physics dictate that compromise is necessary; anyone's "perfect" camera will be a reflection of what factors are most important to them. For me, portability and convenience are key, but I also want full manual control, reasonable photographic versatility, and excellent IQ. My Sony RX100 is very nearly perfect, for me, as it is. If I were able to do so, however, without compromising much on size, I'd add the following: full weather sealing, a usable VF (wouldn't have to be great--just usable), a couple more externally-accessible manual controls, slightly faster lens, and perhaps an even larger sensor. Price it at <$1,000 and I'll buy it immediately.
Is it just me, or is Canon's output in anything except their DSLR line increasingly yawn-worthy? As a former S-series owner & fan, this is disheartening. I'm now a Sony RX100 owner and have to say (hopefully without going too far down the road with the hype bandwagon) that it's now difficult to view these tiny-sensor enthusiast compacts as anything but irrelevant. My assumption was that Sony just happened to be lucky enough to be first to market with a large(ish) sensor in a pocketable form factor. I expected the next round of compacts from Canon, Samsung, and Panasonic to all sport larger sensors and be very significant upgrades to each respective model series... Instead: minor refreshes only, right across the board.
regehr: Quick questionAll the specs say 1" and then state 13mm ish sensor1" = about 25mm making this sensor about the same (a little bigger) than my 60d.
All the reviews seem to indicate that this has a smaller sensor than a G1X or aps-c dslr.
Am I missing something about the measurements of this sensor?
I believe the 1" figure is a diagonal measurement. Of course it's smaller than APS-C--by a lot. Point is, it's a far larger sensor than any other "true" compact. Roughly halfway between 4/3 and the sensors in other "enthusiast" compacts like the Canon S series, Oly XZ-1, and Panny LX series.
Adam Arwinowski: The most important thing is the camera effect. And this is a picture. My wife complains about Sony RX100 picture quality, and this is not her first camera. So I started testing and comparing with: Canon G11, G12, Canon A720 IS, the old Canon S45, Sony NEX-5 and FUJIFILM X10. I had a chance to have them in my possession for a longer time. Later I showed all pictures to some people, not indicating a camera. Excluding night pictures, always the picture from RX100 was chosen as a worst. Pictures were good after “the Photoshop treatment”, but Photoshop cannot add missing details.My conclusion: if you need average pocket camera, with a lot of functions, easy to use, and you don’t care about the price – buy it. If you want to spend some extra bug for better than average quality, stay away from it. There are better choices. Do not listen to Sony agents – a lot of them are here.
Yeah, this is some serious nonsense. I've owned a Canon S95, Lumix LX3, Olympus XZ-1, and now the Sony RX100. The RX100 has capabilities that markedly exceed all the other cameras, assuming you have any idea at all what you're doing. I've done a bit of my own "testing," comparing RX100 shots to nearly identical shots taken with a Canon 5D and Fuji X100. Given the size of the RX100, it actually stands-up very well for images taken under typical shooting conditions. Such was never the case for any of the other, small-sensor compacts. And--sorry--but a statement like pictures "...were good after `the Photoshop treatment'..." leads me to suspect you may not be entirely clear on how to use your camera.
mytake: My prediction is that this sensor will be trounced by Oly Em-5...just saying.
Hey mytake: I can't resist the spelling lesson, as regards your "grammer" lesson. I think you might have wanted the word "grammar," unless you were going for some sort of odd, vernacular reference to someone's grandmother.
So... slow news day at DPReview, eh?
wildeye: One problem with many of these small cameras seems to be battery life. How are people finding the RX100? I only got 105 shots from the first battery charge, but then I was enjoying the excellent detail the camera provides by previewing a lot. Hope the capacity will improve in future charges?
I would agree that this issue is probably the most glaring shortcoming of the ultra-compacts. I honestly don't know if it's a technological limitation thing, or simply the manufacturers saving cost by using lesser materials.
At $35, I think the Franiec grip to be a far better investment. I've found this sort of protective "shooting" case to be not only unnecessary, but obtrusive as well, for the ultra compact cameras. With my Oly XZ-1, I used the Franiec grip and an Op/Tech neck lanyard for carry-around shooting, and then just stuffed the whole business into a light, belt-clip pouch, for protective stowage and transport. I'll use the same system for my RX100.
cllcanada: Exterior charger will ship around 10/15/2012 according to Sony Canada...Expensive!
...or, go on eBay and score a third-party model, right now, for, like, ten bucks... Just sayin'...
Having just taken delivery of my RX100, I'll try to add my two-cents to the pile, here. Background for me is that I've never owned a Sony before, and it replaces my Oly XZ-1. What mystifies me about so many of the comments here are the things people point-out as "detractions" from the camera: e.g., "slow" aperture at the longer focal lengths, the "poor" macro focusing distances, even lack of a VF. It's like complaining that a Toyota Prius can't accelerate from 0 to 60 as fast as a Porsche. There's just no point to the comparison. You don't buy a camera like an RX100 if photographic versatility is your priority. You buy it because you have a need for a very small camera with the best image quality possible, given "normal" shooting conditions. You always have to give something up to get something else, and in this case you're giving-up on broad versatility in order to have a tiny camera with great IQ. Sony has done a great job, here, and basically created an entirely new camera class.
Tony Bromirski: Anyone know how long it takes Apple to release their RAW image support drivers for new cameras, specifically this unit the Sony DSC-RX100? I have Mac OS X v10.6 (Snow Leopard)
The I only see 3 Sony DSC models on Apple's list... ● Sony DSC-F828 ● Sony DSC-R1 ● Sony DSC-V3(Via their support site: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3825 )
How long? In my experience, Apple is almost always last to the party with their RAW updates. I waited for months after acquiring my XZ-1, and suspect I'll have an even longer wait for my new RX100. It's one of the things that constantly makes me question my choice of Aperture for import & asset management.
Michael Doleman: A year ago I would've been fairly excited about this camera. With the arrival of the Sony RX100, however, it just seems to me that every other offering in this particular niche is suddenly well behind the curve. Particularly considering that the RX100 is one of the most compact, and offers a much bigger sensor than any of its direct competitors. Neither this, nor Samsung's latest compact-enthusiast offering will sway me from my plans to replace my Oly XZ-1 with the Sony RX100.
That's a legitimate observation, for sure, but I like to look at all the various aspects in light of what each camera is attempting to accomplish, and then discount the shortcomings that are sacrifces for realizing the primary objective. For me, the RX100's convergence of big sensor/small camera hits the sweetspot of what I want. I rarely zoom much with a small camera (and my expectations are appropriately realistic when I do), so f4.9 seems plenty fast at the long end, for me. I agree that the high pixel count gives me some pause, but I'm reading nothing but good things about IQ, with the early samples.My main point in downplaying the LX7 is that Sony has proven it's entirely feasible to put a reasonably large-ish sensor into a truly pocketable, all-in-one camera. It's time, thus, to move on to the next phase of evolution for the compact-enthusiast niche. I would love to see Canon respond, for example, by refreshing the S-series with a ~1" sensor. And an LX9 with m4/3 sensor...
A year ago I would've been fairly excited about this camera. With the arrival of the Sony RX100, however, it just seems to me that every other offering in this particular niche is suddenly well behind the curve. Particularly considering that the RX100 is one of the most compact, and offers a much bigger sensor than any of its direct competitors. Neither this, nor Samsung's latest compact-enthusiast offering will sway me from my plans to replace my Oly XZ-1 with the Sony RX100.
I'm not "unhappy" with Flickr--for the pittance that I pay for a Pro account, it does everything that I think it could be expected to do. The interface & usability experience could stand a bit of sprucing-up, is all, and perhaps a few more interesting "social" features. The way groups/tags are managed could use some re-thinking, too.On the other hand, though, if Flickr wanted to charge more for various "premium" services, there are some interesting things they could do. The biggest example I could think of would be to offer a true cloud-based storage/backup service for entire archives, and make that service seamlessly integrate with Lightroom, Aperture, iPhoto, etc. Perhaps even go all the way and offer a bona-fide asset management system accessed directly through the site. That would be cool.
fberns: If this camera size, sensor andlens is possible, why the heck didn't anyone build a camera like that before???And why are all the peers much larger?
I'm at the same time happy about the seemingly great package in a small size and wonder what the camera engineers have been working at if not a camera like that?Dpreview got it exactly right: Size versus image quality and the capability for a shallow depth of field is the main problem that is to solve for a compact enthusiast camera!
My two cents worth would be that it simply took a while for the details of the technology to converge with the will, on the part of a major manufacturer, to go ahead and do it. And finally, too, there seems to be a market for this type of camera. Up until very recently, consumers of pocketable cameras couldn't have cared less about sensor size, nor about lens quality--it was always about pixel count and zoom length. Now there's a market among knowledgeable shooters for a larger sensor camera that can shoot wide, at larger aperture, and that can fit reasonably into a pocket. This is simply the first "true" example of a camera in that class.