(unknown member): Really guys? Is this a bad thing? Photographers are usually used to the safety of being behind the camera and never really being in a picture. Why shouldn't we ever be a part of a picture that we're taking? Besides, the camera is great and if you don't like the cheesy rear facing camera then don't use it. This is designed for new photographers that don't always want to hide behind the camera and put everyone else on the spot.
You edited your comment 32 seconds after posting for a reason.
Who has no story to tell, can now create one.
Ever new products help the customer to becoming dumber and dumber. At the end of this story there is a customer who doesn't have to do anything, but has everything at his/her disposal. Luxury for all, but also stupidity for all.
CM WORKS: I'm waiting for Steve Huff's pics of the Rx10 tomorrow hopefully. This guy always bring out the best real world test images.
Why does it help to wait how Steve Huff photographs with it? That surely does not mean that you can do it as good as him. So, the above images are a good average example of the average consumer. And alternately - if you are better than Steve Huff, then surely you won't need anybody's opinion in order to buy a camera.
The review states that the RX100 II is "peerless". This is wrong. There is the cheaper RX100.
What s the point of this review, if the camera is not compared to the IQ of the RX100?
keeponkeepingon: I'v seen at least one review (digital rev?) trashing the ergonomic of the X-M1
issues included how you have to reach over a control wheel to get to the shutter button and a touch thumb dial on the back that was too easy to easy to hit accidently.
Could any users of the X-M1 comment on how good/bad it is to handle?
You guys sound like Germans – I mean the 'old' Germans. I am sure the Fuhrer also would not have accepted any kind of ease and humor in online camera reviews. Lighten up, it is only stupid gear for intelligent art.
Ricoh introduced this lens-sensor-module system. From a photography perspective it makes sense, since the sensor is perfectly adjusted to the lens. Still, smartphone business works differently, it is all about quick snaps, and if you get a decent quality along with it, the better. But smartphones are not for elaborate set ups in general. So, Sony's concept may appeal to some photo nerds, but it feels wrong in practical terms.
It doesn't look more impressive than the 808 or even the N8. The 41MP shots look way over-processed and blurred. Also there is an issue with dynamic range that was also the 808's problem. The 1020 may be better in low light though, but don't hype it only because it is a new development. In compact camera /camera phone business new developments very often lead to a decrease in IQ. For example, the N8 video is better than the 808 video. I am not convinced that this time it is different.
In a few years time this whole touchscreen business will turn out to be perceived as one giant mistake and misunderstanding.
Daniba: Nex-3NYOk guys, I bought it, tested it, and returned the thing. A lot of the pictures I took were wrong focused. Around 25-30%, with both lenses tested. The DOF is a lot of times terribly small: a picture of my son has super sharp focus on the collar of his T-shirt but his face was allready out of focus. The loss of PASM wheel was'nt a big problem, but every change of other settings require you to go deep into the menu. Multiple actions for the little settings weel, or even the lens, proved to be a step to much. For fun, try zooming in a bit, then manual focus with 9.6 magnification: you will need a third hand...Every 3 pictures I had to clean the screen, it smudges so easily. In sunlight it is hard to see what's on screen, even with the brightness turned op to the maximum.But most of all: the wrong focussing. When it is sharp, pictures are razor-sharp. But sadly enough there is to much chance of coming home with wrong focussed pictures...Dear Sony: the Nikon D3200 is on my list...
Focussing is the photographer's job, not the camera's. Above description has to do with dof, not with a particular camera fault.Wrong camera for wrong photographer.
zoranT: Samsung copy everything, first Sony's NEX series, and now they go a bit towards the retro concept of Fuji. And IQ-wise they have been always a bit behind, no surprise. They could bring it on however, if they wanted to be more serious about leading the market.
Yes, they all copy from each other, but sometimes it is too obvious (wasn't there recently a dispute with Apple about tablet design rip off that Apple won?). Just look at the NX100 onwards, clearly NEX rip off land. On the other hand, their NX 5-20 series appears quite genuine. More of that.
Samsung copy everything, first Sony's NEX series, and now they go a bit towards the retro concept of Fuji. And IQ-wise they have been always a bit behind, no surprise. They could bring it on however, if they wanted to be more serious about leading the market.
rusticus: a "Cyber-shot", that nobody needs really -much for eur and ugly with the viewfinder
I feel sorry for you guys.
Pedro Moreira: How could they forgot Nokia 808? Much more innovative to me!
so Nokia claims
gadgets: What a stupid mistake by TIME magazine. RX100 is obviously the BEST INVENTION EVER. Not just 2012. Even better than money, the wheel, fire, you name it.
too many edits to come over funny
Simon97: Sony missed the mark (but was quite close). 20mp is overkill. It is actually rather noisy at high ISOs. 16mp 4/3rds and Nikon 1 are much cleaner. Go to raw comparison tool, select ISO 1600 and see for yourself. I think the RX100 would have been better served with a sensor in the 15mp range.
Secondly the lens is disappointing off axis. Looking at the samples, even stopped down the softness of the images that starts about half way to the edges is a shame. This is what drives my crazy with Sony. They make all these great cameras, yet some of their lenses are disappointing.
If Sony could shave $100 of the price, they would own the enthusiast P&S market.
try stepping down aperture and use RAW - best compact there is – end of discussion
why isn t global shutter implemented in all cameras? too expensive tech? what s the disadvantage?
welcome back to the 1990s
Welcome back to the 1990's.
Just put Nokia's N8 or 808 samples next to it, just a different league I d say. Comparisons have been posted on the internet many times. iPhone is not about the camera, it is about the package. The two Nokia's are not about the package, they are about the camera.