This is by far the most impressive announcement by Panasonic. instead of shovin a pocket cam and a phone in your trousers, you just have one thing for everyday purpose. And for serious photography, bigger cameras are required anyway. it is only too expensive.
Please explain the reasoning behind wanting to buy this, provided that 'pocketability' is not the main criterium (which it isn't, as mentioned in the review). Why wouldn t you go for Fujis or Sony NEXes mirrorless etc. that also are not pocketable? Certainly bigger lenses etc., but remember, pocketability is not the criterium. Yet, much bigger sensors and thus better IQ. I simply fail to understand why someone wouldn t prefer bigger sensors including a comparable price range, when size is not the main sales point.
Impressive, but simply too big. Why not go for APS-C size cams that are the same size then? GM1 size was really impressive.
It should have speakers and you should be able to listen to music while shooting.
Finally a Canon innovation, superzoom with a curved lens. Love it. -- Guys?
zoranT: Liers. They try to cash in on their legacy as long as possible - I honestly feel sorry for folks who run around with Leica digital compact cameras. They pay so much money and are cheated into believing it's worth it.
Because it is useful?
If you subjectify everything ("liking"), you can justify anything. I reach judgement by comparing things. If other people don t do it, they are entitled to do so, but that doesn t mean they are right.
"We at Nikon think that our brand has such a strong standing that we can put out any product at any price and customers will buy it."
zoranT: RAW IQ is practically identical in all three RX 100 variants. The additional cost you pay for Mk. 2 & 3 has to do with handling and video capabilities. If IQ is the most important criterium, no need to switch to 2 & 3.
It starts at 1.8 like all RX100s. Why should it have better IQ? The Mk 3 lens is sharper and probably of better quality, but the results look almost identical, when you look at the RAW images. So what s the point if you virtually can t see the difference? or only minimal difference.
With Leica, the term "charging" I rarely associate with batteries.
I find the vacuum cleaner mode (VCM) truly remarkable.
None of what you guys mentioned has to do with IQ. A wider angle and EVF are great features, but have nothing to do with IQ. Compare the RAW images of the three RX100s, they are virtually indistinguishable.
RAW IQ is practically identical in all three RX 100 variants. The additional cost you pay for Mk. 2 & 3 has to do with handling and video capabilities. If IQ is the most important criterium, no need to switch to 2 & 3.
SeeRoy: When the VF's "popped up" there's an empty space in the camera which it occupied when it was "popped down". So why not integrate it in the first place? Less vulnerable mechanical complexity. Gimmick.
yes, the screen is in the way. But IMO I could live with much smaller screens if EVF is implemented and more space is gained for buttons & controls. Remember the first digicams with tiny screens? Absolutely sufficient for composition & exposure.
DPREVIEW: Can the flash be tilted to point to the ceiling?Does the LCD switch off when using the EVF resp. is it switched on, when you disable it?THanks
One day, cameras will come with pop-up photographers as an upgrade.
Liers. They try to cash in on their legacy as long as possible - I honestly feel sorry for folks who run around with Leica digital compact cameras. They pay so much money and are cheated into believing it's worth it.
Bhima78: Is this direct from the camera at 1080P? Or is this adding the $1,000 Shogun thing to record it in 4K then downsampled?
how do you know? no exif
bobbarber: Two thoughts:
2) Aperture was f2.8. There are a lot of cheap f1.4 film lenses out there that could be adapted, which would get another two stops!
very hard to focus though with moving objects
hirisov: I live in Hungary, maybe i can help you guys understand the reason of this law. Those who guessed it might be that politicans currently ruling Hungary aren't the best friends of transparency and publicity are close to the truth. The history of this law is so typical and says so much about the current state (capture) of Hungary that it worths to know. Since 2010 when they were elected, this government sistematically attacking the freedom of press, opressing opposing media, turns public media their own propaganda channels, and created the most questonable media law of europe ( see eg, http://www.hrw.org/news/2011/01/07/hungary-media-law-endangers-press-freedom ), and now we are at that stage that reported frauds of the incoming elections are ignored by the authorities.
You didn't mention the anti-semitic wave in Hungary, on both mob and cultural level, including WW2 revisionism, the omission of the term "republic" in the constitution etc. - and then you are beginning to see the whole picture without taking any. Right wing "extremism" is non-existing in Hungary because it is the mainstream.