Tripodasaurus: The most convenient camera for a shirt pocket is a smartphone! I have the Nokia Lumina 1020. 34Mpx so can digitally zoom in if required. Picture detail quality can be breathtaking. Colour rendition is lovely too. It's slim with touch screen controls.Includes manual control options for Flash, White Balance, ISO, Shutter Speed, Exposure Compensation (brightness).Not to mention text messaging, internet (free at home and cafe WiFi hot spots etc) maps, GPS, sat nav. and apps galore if you want. Only £267 on Amazon UK today.
So a pocketable camera has to offer a much better camera shooting experience and or better image quality than a smartphone to justify carrying it in addition to the phone most people carry with them anyway.For more serious photography with viewfinders and larger controls etc. I'd choose a larger camera anyway.I'm my humble opinion the only way the pocketable cameras can survive is to take a leaf out of smart phones' book and include a phone circuit.
Well, you got the point, and it's really amazing so many people get hooked up with Mirrorless when smartphones replace them easily...
Paderborn: Why oh why have viewfinders disappeared from point and shoot cameras? Having to push the camera out at arms length to look at the screen virtually eliminates any possibility of candid photography. I find it far easier to shoot discreetly with a Canon 7D with a bolt on battery grip!
"Why oh why have viewfinders disappeared from point and shoot cameras?" - And why would you frame with a pinhole? Usefulness of viewfinders on such a tiny cameras is marginal. It's extremely uncomfortable to use viewfinder with such a tiny body, they tend to be so small that they're borderline useless, and in case of EVFs: they eat through that tiny battery way too fast.If you need viewfinder - you'd be MUCH better off with a proper DSLR.
Sdaniella: XQ1: Nov 2013 (I just came across one now in a store Sept 2014)
finally, a fujifim dcam (X-model) with FULL-TIME (not part-time) ES-LV (Exposure Simulation Live (Pre)View!!! good for them. (no finepix dcam models have it) not all X-models have FT ES-LV, some being only 'part-time', most none at all.
now fujifilm users can argue LV differences and usefulness of "WYSIWYG" exp sim LV in Full Manual mode ... 13 years after Canon Powershots/Sony Cybershots had Full-Time ES-LV in dcams back in 1999/2000 ...
Canon EOS LV dSLRs had ExpSim LV in 2005 (20Da) onwards, others followed later (offering only in pro or premium/high end produmer models)...
right now, some mfrs still lack ES-LV entirely in the various M capable LV dcams, milcs, dSLRs, etc
This "ES-LV" (love the marketing terms) is pretty much standard these days. Nothing to be excited about, really. For example: every single Sony camera with live view got it.
Digital Suicide: Smartphones wins.
TORN: Taking a snapshot wih this camera at Photokina felt like:
- switch on and wait for the camera to boot and then for the complex lens design to unfold and automatically zoom to a focal length which you most probably want to change
- use motorzoom to get the right zoom
- fiddle around with setting the right focus point
This process can easily take up to 5 seconds. At least this is something a buyer should be aware of. When using a zoom I much prefer a lens I do not have to wait for when switching the camera on and a second time when zooming.
RX is booted up as soon as lens extends. And yea... Some people can't get over the center focus habit, others can.
Bram de Mooij: About size:Take a RX100. It is good and it is small.Take a LX100. It is good and is somewhat bigger.Take a X100s or x100t. It is good and it is bigger.And then there is MFT with bigger lenses.APS-C and FF.
Take whatever suits you. So many choices.I like the size of the LX100. RX100 and GM1, too small.
Yep. That's a deal breaker if you're looking for a portable camera. If I want something that doesn't fit into a pocked during the summer - I'd much rather take a proper DSLR.
tigerye: No flash. I'll go with RX100iii.
They're exactly the same class. RX1 might be considered a different class, or if you push it - Fuji X100/Nikon Coolpix A/etc. But RX100 and this Panas are definietly a direct competitors in the same class.
yonsarh: so this is like another hasselblad ?
Noone made a mirrorless system here. Neither Hasselblad nor Phase One. These are just medium format cameras like many made over the years.
Paul Guba: Misleading headline at best. Similar camera has been made for years and is mirrorless the same way a view camera is. Like saying Sinar is now making a mirrorless view camera. Truth its: Phase-Alpha-Rodenstock bundle.
To be fair - Phase One used "mirrorless" term themselves. It's sort of like these people calling Fuji X100 mirrorless.
crisno1: In the spring i had error issues with my a99 and send it for a check up. They asked to ship the lenses i used the most with camera. I sent my zeiss 24-70 and 70-200G.After a week of tests they decided to send me a brand new a99 and they dust cleaned my lenses. I was surprised by the great experience with customer service.
It really depends where you live. In some places they got great support, in other places they got horrible support (but that's something that even Nikon struggles with - eg. in Central Europe they got next to the worse support of all brands - there was a huge scandal in Poland on that few years back with hundreds of people posting online stories on how they were scammed by Nikon support).
Plastek: Sony knows how to f*** up any good idea.Not only it's invitation-only but you also have to pay on top of that?! They can't be serious. I would expect something like that from Tamron or Sigma, but Sony? Jeez.... their stupidity keeps on surprising me.
On gmail everyone could invite whoever they wanted - here Sony is selecting who they want to invite. You see the difference?
And for me personally a deal breaker is that it's available only in US (eventually also in Germany) and not where I live. Price-wise though it's still hardly a best offer out there. Canon for example got a full scope of services - from free pro support to $10000 a year, but even their $100/year offers better value for money than what Sony does (to begin with - Canon support is available all over the world, so it's by far better for anyone travelling than what Sony has).
If Sony wants to get customers onboard - it needs to offer more and better support, not less and worse!
MPA1: I wonder if they will offer it in New Zealand. Nikon do not offer NPS here.
I'd be surprised if they'll offer it anywhere outside of US. Oh, apparently they plan to start it in Germany in 2015. Well... still invitation only, so it doesn't matter much anyway.
Marty4650: The FF SLT users will appreciate this, but I get the feeling this was designed for the Alpha 7 users. The 7 series is getting some serious traction now, and Sony is smart to add professional support.
I hope Nikon and Canon are paying attention. Sony is making a move on their turf!
What for You is "many" for Canon and Nikon is "next to none". Sony lost more user to the big two due to their irresponsibility and lack of ability to delivery quality bodies (in A-mount) or lens lineup (in E-mount) than it'll ever gain from A7 series.
ABisbano: I recommend VAIO Professional Support.I have subscribed, for more than 200€, to a 3Y-next-business-day On-Site professional premium service guarantee for my sony notebook.My Vaio SVZ13 broke in mid-August , after several week they haven't been able to repair it and they broke the hinges mounts reassembling it.They took it away and until now they still not have the right pieces. The service does not respond even to the reminders of the lawyer. I'm afraid I can only call the police to have it back... :-(
Their VAIO or cinema support service got absolutely nothing to deal with what they're trying to do here. It'd be more relevant if you'd start talking about how happy you are with Canon pro support than VAIO support (Sony shares few repair centers with Canon, eg. one in Poland).
tabloid: I think apple does a pro service…but you have to pay for it.
I use a A65 and as a full time professional photographer…Its more than ample for what I need.
There is no such thing as a "pro camera" .There is a simply camera that a professional photographer find adequate for the job.
You're not pro enough on a pro-meter.
Sony knows how to f*** up any good idea.Not only it's invitation-only but you also have to pay on top of that?! They can't be serious. I would expect something like that from Tamron or Sigma, but Sony? Jeez.... their stupidity keeps on surprising me.
thx1138: Good to see Canon still not innovating!
This is actually innovative. Very. It's the first time anyone patented liquid lens for DSLR. Till now every patent was either about smartphones or small sensor phones.
Plastek: From what I see comparing 7D mkII with Nikon D7100, Sony A6000 and Pentax K3:
Difference is clear in RAWs right from ISO400 - Sony's the worst one, then Canon, Nikon and Pentax are roughly identical. From ISO1600 Nikon starts to fall back behind others, Pentax and Canon go head to head.
As for JPGs - I won't comment on that, cause every camera can be adjusted to your liking. Canon got very aggressive sharpening on default setting, and that's the kind of edge-based sharpening I really don't like. Sony on the other hand uses sharpening similar to the photoshop unsharp mask, but one that's also causing weird artefacts (see: brush in bottom right corner - you can see ugly pixels on the edges). Nikon and Pentax got nice compromises between artefacts and sharpness, though I prefer Pentax saturation out of the box. But then again: Saturation can be adjusted too. Overall: don't shoot JPG, regardless of camera used. Even batch RAW processing will give you better results than in-body JPGs.
Fair enough. Each person got it's own margin of what is considered acceptable and what isn't. And yes: we both agree that at this ISO lens can't really help A6000 with anything.
Yves P.: As far as détails go, the Nikon seems to be showing a little more details than the 7D MKII from my screen at least. That is what I see from the RAW files. Jpeg seems equally good. The blacks are deeper and darker from the Canon.
Most of this is manageable thru ACR or any Raw editor.
I just don't like their bodies, hate the Wheel in the back.
Interesting, cause many people seems to be saying that Sony is the one showing most details (which makes sense considering that they used the best lens on that body).
PedroMZ: Am impressed ,given its considerably smaller sensor, how well the Olympus OM-D compares to the others . Jpegs have obviously been sharpened more but in RAW details are still very competitive at least to ISO 1600 .
Modern APS-C sensors on a market are all the same - plus minus a millimeter or two. AFAIK even Sigma stopped using their weird iteration of APS-C, and besides - Sigma is meaningless from the whole market perspective.