Peiasdf: So what's different from just tilting a high-res photo? Chain camera is cool if you know how to use it and clearly they don't.
But it is not very obvious! And that's the failure of this exercise. There is not much "wow" factor. If you put a rotating single image side by side with this, many uninitiated would not be able to tell the difference. It may even look better without those awkward jittery effect. OTOH, if you wrap the cameras AROUND the subject, the effect is much more stunning. Sure, we have seen it before, but it can still wow many people.
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..
Why would you want less pixels?The main determining factor for low noise performance is sensor size, and NOT pixel count!
Johnsonj: Again? I can't keep up! I need to totally ditch this company. I don't use half of what this program has to offer. I just get the idea that Adobe's trying to squeeze more money out of me. I'm sick of paying for this program over and over again! And their customer service SUCKS big time.
Wait till you buy a new camera....
No VR for a $900 lens?
All lenses except pancakes should have VR, IMHO.And it can't be used for hand held video then, pity.
nosnoop: Conclusion "Some apps (such as Multi-Frame NR and Time-Lapse) are free on previous Sony cameras or competitors"
Really? Other cameras have "intervalometer" functions.But how many other cameras (especially NEX-6's competitors) have the ability to produce a finished time-lapse video straight out of the cameras without the need to post-process the hundreds/thousands of images from intervalometer output?
As for the Wi-Fi Apps, you did not mention the fact that once you bought the App, you can use in up to 10 cameras/devices. So you can buy a new NEX camera in the future, and continue to use all the Apps you have bought! To me, that's a bargain.
The Apps are being updated, just like your iPhone Apps.You are not downloading the same old ones. So any compatibility can easily be fixed by an updated Apps.
Conclusion "Some apps (such as Multi-Frame NR and Time-Lapse) are free on previous Sony cameras or competitors"
nosnoop: What takes you so long?There has been only one DSLR/Mirrorless REVIEW in the whole December/January; and only 4 DSLR/Mirrorless REVIEWs since September (5 months). At this rate, it would take you many more months just to finish the products announced at Photokina.
People would like to come here to look for information for their purchase decision. So a timely review is essential; a preview just doesn't cut it.
Your first preview was written 4 months ago. So you have 4 months to work on the NEX-6 and all we get is just an extended preview?
@Revenant @Barney BrittonThe NEX-6 was available for purchase on Oct 30. So if you use that date, it would be 3 months. The pre-production model should allow them to complete all the specifications/body&design/handling/menu etc sections. They then just need the test shots from the production model.
IMHO, that is just too long. If you want to stay relevant and be the "go-to" site for people buying cameras, you would have to work faster. Now, instead of users coming to this site with the question "what camera should I buy?", we can only have users coming to siite wondering "did I make the right decision when I bought the camera a few months ago?"
What takes you so long?There has been only one DSLR/Mirrorless REVIEW in the whole December/January; and only 4 DSLR/Mirrorless REVIEWs since September (5 months). At this rate, it would take you many more months just to finish the products announced at Photokina.
Why no 5-axis stabilization?
If they can put the 5-axis stabilization in lower priced SH-50, why would they not put it in their "premium" XZ compact? This would go a long way to justify its price.
Griffo 155: A 20mm f2.8 lens about a 34mm f4 ish, then at full frame, at $350 (about £250) thats a lot of money for that type of lens - Can Sony warrant that price? I dont think so... When you compare the Nikon 1 lenses (in this case 10mm f2.8 @ £179) which are sharper and probably better made, the Nikon 1 range is beginning to look like a viable product... In addition to that the resulting images from the Nikon 1 are better than that of the Sony Nex range despite having a smaller sensor sizes.... All in all Nikon have got the market right no interference on their Dx range...
In your dreams, maybe?Nikon 1 will the the orphaned system when Nikon releases their APS-C mirrorless.
Joe Ogiba: What is up with Sony with only 720p in 2013 and 1080p60 in 2012 ?
720p is for their cheaper CCD line up.The better "X" series (WX, TX...) has the newer and more capable EXMOR R CMOS sensor and can do 1080/60i or 60p depending on which model.
iudex: So downgrading from 1/1,63" sensor to 1/1,7" sensor and asking 600 bucks for it? Hmmm, what a progress...
Sorry, "CameraExpert": you are the one who got it wrong.1/1.63" is bigger than 1/1.7", which in turn is bigger than 1/2.3" (sensors found in most consumer compacts); while it, itself, is bigger than the 1/3.2" sensor found in iPhone 4S.
No IS?Can't use it for low light video then....
Could it be that the reason that you did not fall in love with RX100 is because you have no need for a *pocketable* camera in the first place?
I don't think enough credits has been given to RX100 as a break-through camera, and a very impressive technological piece. If you want a pocketable camera, then very few other cameras can touch the RX100.
But if you don't see the need for a pocketable camera, then obviously, there are a lot more choices out there; and little reason to like this camera.
Or maybe you should rename the Gold award to "I Love it" reward, and Silver reward to "I like it but I don't love it" reward; then there would be much less arguments.... :)
Roger Knight: Without a viewfinder it cannot be classified as a serious camera but it is obviously a terrific; point-aim-(to some degree)-and-shoot, image taker. It’s just not quite enough of what is required for taking valuable travel photos.Any camera without a serious viewfinder capable of shot framing is definitely unsuitable for travel photos. Period!Just the sheer volume of photos that one takes means that the great majority of shots taken with a viewfinder-less camera that need post processing is quite seriously appreciable if one is as picky as me and I have better things to do when travelling than spend all night fixing not quite right photos. After all; exploring the night life in all of it or their vagaries’ is a large part of just why we do travel, unless of course one is totally ‘photography obsessed’ rather than being a normal, curious, experience seeking person.That was a seriously good review. Thank you.
Why would you apply your standard to everyone else?I don't care one bit about a viewfinder, and I much prefer the current RX100 size to making it bigger to accommodate a viewfinder. So that makes me a non-serious photographer?I am very comfortable in using the LCD to frame my shots, thank you.
Maybe only for people who never takes handheld video?
It's almost impossible for most people to take any useful handheld video without IS.
Corkcampbell: Shouldn't that (second price - with zoom lens) be dollars instead of euros?
No, apparently, they are not selling the 18-55mm bundle in US!Tell me it ain't so!
mpgxsvcd: Basically Panasonic is the first manufacturer to figure it out. Even with the much larger sensor of the DSC-RX100 the shallowest 35mm equivalent aperture is F4.9.
None of these cameras will produce a shallow depth of field shot. So why not just make the sensor a little smaller and the the F number a lot better.
They finally got it right. Shallow depth of field is not important for these cameras. Low light performance is. They have a winner on their hands in that respect.
If only we could convince the novice user of this fact since they will need to be the ones buying this camera for it to be a success.
mpgxsvcd wrote:> Shallow depth of field is not important for these cameras. Low light performance is.
By your logic, there is more reason to go with bigger sensor.Bigger sensor would definitely improve your low light performance.
Yehuda_: The statement about the LX7 lens being faster than the XZ-1 is not accurate.
The XZ-1 starts at F1.8@28mm (effective), reaches F2@60mm and by 90mm it's at F2.2.The LX7 starts faster F1.4@24mm and reaches F2.3@90mm.I don't know how fast it loses the F1.4.
Anyway this is really splitting hairs - Both cameras are much the same lens speed.
Regarding the much talked about Sony RX-100 - the lack of a hotshoe is a real deal killer imho. External flash bounced off the ceiling yields much cleaner, nicer, higher quality images(you can stay at ISO 100) allows much faster shooting, freezing kids running indoors.This holds true regardless of your system (be it an LX7, CSC camera or the best DSLR).I wrote a post about it in the past.Google "xz-1 + yinyan cy20 = fun" and you'll see what I mean.
And another point - I wish people stop comparing the S100/RX100 to the XZ-1/LX7 cameras. The slow lens @ tele renders the S100 et al as very slow lensed cameras (with no external flash to compensate)
External flash is relatively unimportant to me, as the whole point of these cameras are being pocketable and take everywhere. And external flash is the last thing I would take everywhere.
In situations where I would want to use external flash or bounce flash, I might as well bring my camera bag with my DSLR or mirrorless cameras.
Shallow DOF is not only useful at the tele end or portrait.For RX100, you get F3.5 at 53mm and F4 at 66mm
Thomas Richter: Dear Sony,
Make such a camera with 6..10 megapixel and I'll buy it blindly!
I can't believe that there is still so much misconception about high pixel count. High pixel count sensor only looks worse if you do pixel peeping or at 1:1 zoom level (as you are effectively checking the image at much higher magnification level).
OTOH, if you compare the images at the same output size (e.g. 8"x12" prints), you would find that similar size sensors with similar technology (e.g. BSI, CMOS) would produce similar image quality REGARDLESS of pixel counts. And as you increase the output size/prints, higher pixel count sensor would gain advantage of having more details.
So go ahead and buy it blindly, as making such camera with 10MP would have no advantage over the RX100.