jimkh: I don't understand this vague putdown of the RX100 and the RX100II with the "unengaging experience" tag. While this is obviously a very personal reaction by the reviewer it cries out for a more detailed explanation. What is "unengaging" and how do other cameras reflect engagement?
I agree. If you are after engaging shooting experience you will use a bigger camera. Rx100 is all about fitting in the pocket and bringing back the best image. The only downside is the price. Knocking it because the wheel does not click is malarkey. Rx100 crushed it's class when it was released. It still crushes every other camera in the segment. Rx100II is supposedly even better.
Hugo808: I got as far as number 7 before deciding that if I'd taken them they would have gone into the bin and never been seen by anyone!
Pixel-peep much? What do you not understand about history and the value of candid pictures taken by someone who probably was close to the band. Go back to taking photos of your cats...
Well, if the image is correct, the achilles heel of this camera will be the bulbous lens front element. It will get scratched in no time and bye bye clean videos. It looks like a really questionable design decision. I don;t like GoPro, but at least there you don't have to worry about scratches.
To the commenters: what have you shot late;y? Give me a break, the comments on the dpreview are asinine... when was the last time you were sent out on the streets with a camera and produced a bunch of masterpieces? Those photos do the intended job perfectly well. Whoever shot them did a good job. Some aspects of the sensor are amazing, some are not so. Eagerly waiting for the full review...
oh... the pouch...
A consumer video camera done right. I bet this baby is capable is some serious high quality video shooting that would challenge the presumed consumer video king GH3. And I bet it can shoot decent photos too. If I had to shoot videos for a website, a blog, or a school newsletter, that would have been a near perfect option. As stupid as super zooms are, people are carrying them, and this one is probably as good as they come. The ony question is the price, and unlike the specs or hardware it's has room to change.
Despite what the armchair experts on this site are saying, this move makes a lot of sense. To survive in the smartphone business you need to be a software company (this is what Jobs said about Blackberry and he was right). Nokia could only survive and keep its identity if it used Android and that meant competing on cost with Samsung (not going to happen). So Microsoft was the only natural partner and a sale made a lot of sense. Windows Mobile is actually a terrific phone OS. Use it before sh&tting on it. No apps, which is a huge bummer, so it will be an uphill climb.
Hey, Monday morning quarterbacks- what have you got? Show me your sunset pictures... It's so easy to sh&t on someone else's work, right?
In my experience the redesign is a disaster, because it breaks the continuity with the old site and there is no obvious way to keep the structure. if you have large heavily structured site, you need to essentially rebuild from the ground up. For a pro-oriented site this is rather amateurish. The customization instructions also are not very clear.
This is butt-ugly, no way around that... Someone at Hassy needs to take a design class... or rent some Sony designers...
Lots of corporate customers will be upset about paying the monthly fees. Lots of people use the CS products only occasionally and that cost does not justify the monthly fees. Lightroom is definitely the biggest concern for most people on this board. I doubt most people are willing to pay the monthly fees and/or use the cloud services.
10 years too late (and too little)
john Clinch: I think that this is a great little set of reviews. The conclusion seem intelligent and balanced.
I'm glad that the RX100 is not seen to bulldoze all that stand in its way. Its a great camera and may be one day I'll own one. But it would be sad for the industry if no one else could compete or if IQ was seen to trump user experience every time. I think its great that Olympus have got things right again. Ive played withthe previous model and thought it was great
I look forward to DXO mark catching up with some numbers!
Why is it bad for the industry if one camera bulldozes the competition? It is a wake-up call for the other guys and an incentive to catch up. IPhone has bulldoze the competition when it was released and look how far the smartphone industry came.
Does DPR want to revise its Silver award rating? I think it was a intake. RX100 is a game-changer in the compact camera category, (even given its flaws). Time is right.
Well, take Fuji XPro-1, put on their latest zoom lens, and you get something that si not too far from what you describe.
Ha...ha...ha...ha....There are probably, what, 25 people in the world that could REALLY justify the cost of this software... I am sure a lot more people will buy it though... DPR does need to think about the value of giving those companies exposure.
skytripper: Very stylish, but not nearly protective enough to be useful. A functional case needs to protect the camera from scuffs and scrapes when it is in a bag full of other stuff. Otherwise, it's useless except perhaps as a fashion statement.
Like to baby your gear much? Good luck getting it out from your overpadded overprotective case when you need to take a quick shot. I am sure your camera will be in mint condition for the inevitable EBay listing.
Suntan: The title says it all. Bla, bla, Guy uses iphone at Olympics, bla, bla.
When was the last time a photographer wanted to be primarily known for the camera he uses? That's right, when he's going out of his way to make a hipster comment about technology.
I'd have a lot more appreciation for his effort if he used a higher quality camera, then transferred or uploaded the pics to his phone (or other mobile device) for posting in near real time. You know, like what the umpteen thousand other professional photographers are doing because they are taking their job seriously over there.
@Suntan: Dan gets a press pass at the Olympics and you don't precisely because he can get a great picture with an iPhone, and you most likely won't even with a $5K camera. That's why a guy showing up at the Olympics with a big camera and a backpackful of lenses does not get an automatic press pass... @Larry: That's why LeBron James will kick your b$tt with el-cheapo ball from Target, that's why Michael Phelps will outswim you even if he wears a diver suit. Its called talent, skills and professionalism, and nothing that you see flogged on DPR is going to get you any of those.
dylanbarnhart: What Dan Chung really proved is the limitation of the iPhone. Just compare to other professional photos like those on olympics.org and you can see what's lacking:
. Resolution. Athlete's face expressions. Actions at their peak. Sharpness for low light actions. Subject isolation
Now imagine what the pics look like without binoculars and the clip-on Schneider lens, and without Dan Chung. Actually you don't have to, there are plenty of them from the audience posted on Flickr and Facebook. Horrid.
Yepp, Larry, you just don't get it. There are plenty other photographers shooting the Olympics with pro-sports kits. This is a different experiment, and you got to give Dan props for trying it, as a challenge, as an experiment. As for taking the place of other photographers, well, 100% f people on this site would never get a press pass at the Olympics, because they suck, even if you give them a 600mm Canon lens with a 1D. Dan earned his press pass an not by using an iPhone. So, chill out. As for you picking your daughter's wedding photographer based on his/her gear- well, luckily, this will be her decision, not yours, otherwise you will get crappy perfectly exposed pictures. Maybe news to you, but good photography takes talent, not just technique.
larrytusaz: I agree with (qwertyasdf) why would a PRO use the wrong tool for something like this? Gee whiz, I just came back from a vacation in the Ozark mountains, I took an Olympus E-PL1 and Nikon D5100. The camera in my phone never saw the light of day--and I know what I was doing was hardly as significant as this.
The gear doesn't matter, not one bit--okay, fine. I guess it's time for Nikon & Canon to close their doors? Maybe the chefs there who cook for the important people can bring their Stouffer's microwave "meals in a bag," since--you know, "if you're a good cook you should be able to make a great meal using a hot plate and a bag of dirt." Or--maybe the reporters can write their stories using a box of Crayons & coloring books. If these guys are such good swimmers, wouldn't a mud hole be good enough, why bother with a pool with specific dimensions--after all, "it's all in the swimmer's skill level?"
Ugh. Enough of this. Just change your name to "cameras-are-for-luddites.com" already.
Larry- And why exactly did you lug TWO interchangeable lens cameras to your vacation? I hope someone was paying you to take pictures... And what exactly did you E-PL1 could not do that you had to take your Nikon? Just curious...
When I travel, I take one camera with a 35 mm prime lens. That's it. I am on vacation, not on assignment.