*facedesks* Pentax/Ricoh you will NEVER learn!
Anepo: What is the POINT of having a camera with interchangeable lenses that is worse than SEVERAL compact camera's with non nterchangeable lenses? This is basicly a TOY mirrorless rather than a REAL high quality mirrorless like the gx1, om-d, epl-5 e-pm1 e-pm2 & such.
@nathebeach it is an overpriced compact camera with interchangeable lenses delivering worse iq than some premium compacts. And your claim about dof on m43s and dslrs is an outright and outrageus lie. And you can stop ranting whenever you like, nobody is forcing you...
@drugarunda the ep-m1 has a far superior low light ability and stating it was better is pure false, also you claim the q7 will be better than several m43 cameras shows your false claims as it is not out yet and thus you are saying something is a fact while having no evidence to back such a claim.s
@jimmy jang boo my point is an overpriced under performng product that delivers less image quality than some premium compacts.
@sdribetahi that is utterly false, accusing someone of fanboyism is just a way to try to slander theyre credability, i have owned several slrs and dslrs made by pentax so dont even try this bs!
Craig Atkinson: two things that would make me switch to this from my GR - perhaps DP can help?Can the screen be turned off when the camera is in use, as the Ricoh can?
Has the start-up / shut-down time improved, based on the RX100?
So you want to shoot blindly? Not knowing even how to frame the shot? Smart move *coughs*
falconeyes: This lens has a varying equivalent aperture of F4.9 to F13. I just computed the real apertures, it is 5.7mm (wide end), 4.5mm (normal) and 7mm (tele end). This isn't much variation and can be easily compared to a camera with a prime lens, very high resolution and digital zooming (cropping).
So, I would have liked a direct comparison to the Nokia 808 Pureview camera which has the same sensor size. The Nokia's real aperture is a fixed 3.3mm which is not very different to the RX100's real aperture at normal perspective and where the 808 still delivers about 16MP. But the RX100 is much bigger. So, a direct comparison of the two concepts would have been interesting.
Not really seeing as one is a phone, the other a camera and the 808 images viewed at high resolution are as smudgy as lipstick on glass.
IonPortraits: My D70 in decent to great light gives me more natural and sharper images. The ones here have a very nice tonality and colour but they do look kind of "congested". I really think this camera with less pixels would be a stellar photographic tool. Shame..
Jon holstein, no camera manufacturer has ever tried to have big space between pixels, why? Your image would appear like an lcd screen in macro and is a big financial waste, you are basicly saying "what if toyota decided to make cars heavier just so they would waste more gas on purpose to make sure consumers would not buy theyre products"
bzanchet: Too bad they didnt release a firmware update... I love my RX100, but it has a much less pleasant skin tones on jpeg than my old Canon S100 and my Olympus E-PM2. It is great for landscape, not so much for people pictures.A 180º tilting lcd would have been so great for self pics, too bad!I wonder if the zoom while video remains so much slow...Except for this minor glitches, it is still the best pocket camera available, but for the amateur photographer, doesnt Worth the upgrade for the RX100 II IMO.
Self pics? Sounds like you purchased one to make your vain self feel better rather than do something artistic.
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.
Equal to high end dslrs? Sure and a single propeller 4 seat airplane can take out an f-22 with guns that shoot tomatoes...
peevee1: "We're told the lens isn't going to be available in the USA, at least for now."
I guess nobody was stupid enough to buy EOS M in the US? ;)
You are giving American's WAYYYYYYYYYYYY to much credit.
Shamael: 750$, they are kiddin'. For that price i will step over to the GR from Ricoh, i certainly have the missing 40$ somewhere in a drawer.
It is a bit to high for my taste as well I would of been happy with it as 600$ & I will not be purchasing it due to the price point, however I really like this camera but it is outside my price point.
I am sure it is one of the top 5 compact camera's out there but still it is to much for my taste.
tolleknolle: The claimed 1/2 stop seems to be in JPEG processing. RAW data puts the original RX100 well ahead of Mk2 at lower ISOs: http://www.techradar.com/reviews/cameras-and-camcorders/cameras/compact-cameras/sony-rx100-ii-1160503/review/5#articleContent
Someone actually trusts techradar? What next? believe in arstechnica & cnet? oh lord people these days, so misinformed.
What is the POINT of having a camera with interchangeable lenses that is worse than SEVERAL compact camera's with non nterchangeable lenses? This is basicly a TOY mirrorless rather than a REAL high quality mirrorless like the gx1, om-d, epl-5 e-pm1 e-pm2 & such.
To bad he did not show us an even slower video to show a "real bullet time" this was to fast to be counted even as a copy of the bullet effect.
Compared to how Ricoh camera's look I think this is the end of both Pentax AND Ricoh, after Ricoh purchased Pentax, I have ONLY seen UGLY DSLR camera's & I used to be a proud owner of the Pentax K10D & K20D.After the purchase Ricoh keeps pushing me MORE and MORE away from the Pentax brand & Ricoh brand & I am NEVER returning.
keeponkeepingon: Can we burry this phrase. It's overused, apologetic, meaningless and a bit silly:
"Photo quality isn't fantastic on the TG-2, but it's more than good enough for purpose and target audience. "
Olympus claims that "the Olympus TG-2 iHS was designed with the serious photographer in mind. ". If the target audience is the serious photographer, I would think IQ would be a concern.
I agree if Olympus claims it to be designed with the serious photographer in mind they should review it that way and to be honest it would be DEMOLISHED in the review then because of how stupid Olympus were to say that.
in my country we always say Carl Zeiss & we don't confuse it with anything because there is no company named Carl in our country because CARL is not a name in our country.
I had the GX1..... focus is crap & it is a very loud camera compared to other micro four thirds from olympus.
udris: Kids use smartphones and pretty effectively and have no inkling to go backwards in technology. Another few years and point and shoots are redundant
That has been said for YEARS. And they are still not there, nor will they EVER be, why? DEPTH OF FIELD. Compact's got them & cellphones do NOT