Doesn't rangefinder style imply a viewfinder built in or does it just mean any rectangular shaped camera? If not this means nearly every current compact is a rangefinder camera. I am probably just not up to date with the terminology though I cannot really see the significance of the term.
A more advanced Sony noise reduction system should scare even the most strong hearted person. Often it is akin to pouring water over the dots in printed output. I often wish my Sony TV would just leave the poorer picture quality alone rather than often turning it in to an even bigger mess.They up the nominal image resolution then have to scrub it to try and clean it up.
JackM: Any compact with less than a 1" sensor is DOA unless it is just a cheap mass-market toy.
Why don't you just say that any compact that is not a Sony RX100 and be done with it. By cheap you mean under £600 or equivalent.
clburton2: hello, will sony build the rx100II with a longer zoom range? why is this so difficult to find? I want a compact point and shoot camera with a larger sensor but more zoom range. is this impossible?
You cannot have it all ways so I suspect what you want is not possible. The consensus is that Sony have got the most into the least space that has been achieved up to now.
There can be no greater confusion than the Ixus/Elph range. Not only are there a hundred variants of the model but each one has 2 names. I do actually own one of these, which I always have in my pocket but which one it is I do not know.
JDThomas: "JK doesn't have a booth at the show, but we visited them in a hotel suite..."
Pssst. Hey kid, wanna see some top quality camera gear? Meet me in the back alley behind the Rio Hotel. I'll cut you in on a good deal.
How does this work? The quality of cameras relates to the money spent on the presentation is that it? So if you cannot afford a fancy booth at CES the product must be rubbish. It does show that throwing money at marketing is effective I suppose if people are so shallow and dismissive of a new market entrant before they have really started.
Red G8R: 34x zoom but what's the range?
What Digital Camera say it is from 22.5mm to 765 equiv so pretty wide.
It is a pity they did not make the camera a bit higher to match the lens. There is still that traditional Nex look of a camera designed by creative people sipping cappuccino in a artistic design studio coupled with a lens designed by a team in a converted Bavarian lager canning factory.
mpgxsvcd: They omitted the most important spec from this announcement.
F3.6-F7.0 and F3.8-F6.9! That is just absurd with a tiny sensor and 16 megapixels.
Plenty of megapixels and plenty of f's. To the average punter this is one powerful camera. I am sure it will do Canon no harm at the cash registers.
Samuel Dilworth: Let’s see, f/7 on a 1/2.3"-type sensor. Where are the equivalence hounds when you need them?
They are probably completely in the dark here.
If you did not know who was speaking you would think it was an academic talking about his research lab rather than a business manager.
Greynerd: Living in gale battered England it is always intriguing how in the US you can build houses on the beach. You must have very good weather most of the time punctuated occasionally by storms of the like we never see.
It is not just these pictures but the latest National Geographic has a picture of beach erosion in Virginia Beach, Virginia. The location of the buildings just looks a bit unreal to me. I suppose in the UK with the prevailing Westerlies we bear the brunt of the Atlantic wrath on a regular basis. Of course you get these extra nasty storms from the tropics South of you which are a bit of a lottery on where they will hit. An interesting subject and pictures and for many being near the sea justifies the risk if any, I can well understand that.
Living in gale battered England it is always intriguing how in the US you can build houses on the beach. You must have very good weather most of the time punctuated occasionally by storms of the like we never see.
You have to remember that putting the complex electromechanical device which is the mirror in a camera considerably reduces its cost to the consumer. We are not talking normal electronics here. You can get a mirrorless camera for the cost of an entry level DSLR but it will be stripped bare of controls, buttons, dials, built in flash, viewfinder etc. and involve a lot of wading through convoluted menus. Presumably to offset the cost of not putting the mirror in the camera. Until camera manufacturers can get over this cost hurdle I would think DSLR's have a good future.
AdamT: """ the only 'real' premium superzoom camera was the Panasonic DMC-FZ200. """
The FZ200 is no more premium than the SX50, P510 or Sony HX200/300, it`s still a plastic consumer megazoom with a pinhead sensor despite how fast the lens is ....... the only premium superzoom was and still is (until the RX10 lands) the Fuji XS1 . it wouldn`t be my personal choice due to being as big as a D7100 but regardless, unless the oly delivers, it`s still the next thing to the new sony in this area
Pin head sensor? Really? This sort of exaggerated hyperbole is more a symptom of a pin head brain.I suppose you are one of these people who want a 28-300 affordable compact the same size and made of titanium but with an aps-c sensor. The RX10 is twice the price and will have very limited appeal regardless of its merits.
JEROME NOLAS: Is this special for you enough?
It makes you wonder whether Timmbits main pleasure from photography is sneering at the users of smaller sensor cameras.
Nismo350Z: It won't be long before mirrors are finally obsolete in the digital age as other major brands will surely follow suit. Bravo to Sony for adding a milestone in camera history.
This is a well worn record. People if anything are wanting more compact kit so I cannot see a great rush to use these enormous full frame lenses
tkbslc: This article has to hold the record for unintelligent comments.
@jurgenvogtThat is disappointing. I was hoping for the record so we must try harder.
I thought Apple held the World rights to the rectangle. It is all very confusing.
The problem nowadays is that life is a comedy performed by people without a trace of humour.
Siff: The removal of the AA filter is very apparent especially on the little globe on top. Center "INDIAN" and you'll see the difference in details between RX1R and RX1.
Now here's my situation. I've actually decided to buy this camera. Now whether if you agree with me on whether if it's worth it or not is not the issue. Putting it's price vs value aside, which one would you recommend me buying? Which one would you recommend for me, and everyone else who's buying this camera? I'm very curious in the community's opinion. Thank you very much in advance.
I would go with the RX1R as the red R is so cool and not having an anti aliasing filter is just so now and the thing of the moment and makes it just a bit special.