JJLMD: There's NOTHING on the market that is comparable because this camera offers 2 attributes that don't travel together in ANY competing product:
1. The constant f2.8 zoom allows me to snap quality pics of my kid's indoor performances (ie, ballet recitals). Previously bought the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 for my wife's Nikon D3200 and she made me return it- too big, too heavy, and she doesn't like changing lenses. I've considered a Sony 70-200 f2.8 for my SLT-a99 but also find it too big, too heavy...and it's $2k!
2. DSLR IQ from sensor + processor. I recently bought the Sony RX100m2 and its IQ surpasses that of my wife's Nikon D3200 + 18-200 f3.5-5.6 (!), especially in low light. The BSI architecture allows 40% more light gathering ability than the sensor size would predict meaning it'll perform on a par with the best MFT sensors.
This UNPRECEDENTED combo makes it the perfect camera for the enthusiast soccer mom (and dad). I ordered mine.
I do agree with the conclusion, however - its a great combo. I'm looking forward to seeing low light samples and some video before I consider buying it.
Wait a sec, he said the RX100m2 and its IQ surpasses the 3200 + 18-200. The RX100* doesnt have the reach for what you point out either.
You've given your wife the wrong lens for low light. Put a proper lens on the D3200 such as a 17-50 2.8.
munro harrap: Well, huge apologies, NOT! Do you really mean to say that a 1" sensor is NOT 1" at all? The sensor is only 13.8mm x8.8mm. This means that it has an area merely of 12,244 sq. mm. Well in the UK and I am sure elsewhere it is against the Sale of Goods Act and the Trade Descriptions Act to state that the sensor is a 1" sensor.A 1" sensor has an area of 64,516 sq.mm, and that's more than four times the area of this tinsy nail-clipping bodie sized chip, so the image quality will be absolutely no improvement on what the 7800 Nikon can already do, and Sony are plain daft here, unfortunately. I apologize from my previous post, as I believed a 1" sensor to meet that description.Surely Sony need to produce the R2, with the same abilities and a genuine APS-C sensor, to dare to charge this kind of money. I had a DSC-828 with a similar sensor but the Zeiss lens (28-200mm) was unusably beset by blue fringing, and I returned it to the store.
Ahh, I see where your confusion lies. You've had the 828 and woke up 9 years later. Yes, the world has changed a bit since then.
Is $1300 expensive for what this camera offers? I really dont think it is.My 17-50 2.8 and 90 2.8 lenses combined almost cost this much.The RX10 covers these lenses and also does 1080p60 video in one convenient (and 800g is fairly light weight) package.
I like what I'm seeing.
sigh.Do people press their noses against a painting and say, These brush strokes look terrible! - and therefore its a bad painting?
Do people get a magnifying glass and look at the skin cells of a woman's face and say, She's ugly!
Just because you can, doesnt mean you should.
Look at the PHOTO, not the PIXELS.
HawaiiVolcanoes: ohh STOP...the images are HORRRRRRIBLE. Anyone that thinks that these images can compete with (anything) is simply fooling themselves. DPREVIEW...this is a new low for you.
The basis of these types of negative posts is quite clear.By exaggerating, huffing and puffing, some posters think it makes them look like they passionately know what they are talking about and possess knowledge and skill that is superior to actual professionals.
They simply are seeking attention and enjoy seeing their names "in lights".
These photos look great on my 24" IPS display. If you need to pp them in any way, then go ahead. They still look great.. even more impressive that they came from a multi-purpose pocket device.
These are great photos regardless of what was used to capture them.Its always amusing and sad to see the "experts" come out with their 2 cents to find reason to complain or compare as if they have some need to feel superior.Enjoy life. Be happy.
MarioV: I have the previous Nexus 7. These are very good devices. Only issue is that, over a few months, the battery steadily loses the ability to hold a charge for very long when in standby mode. Higher res and 50g lighter are nice, but doesn't make me rush to upgrade.
Thanks. Will give it a try some time.
I have the previous Nexus 7. These are very good devices. Only issue is that, over a few months, the battery steadily loses the ability to hold a charge for very long when in standby mode. Higher res and 50g lighter are nice, but doesn't make me rush to upgrade.
Henrik Herranen: Quote: "In the "shareable" 5MP output of the same image, Nokia's imaging technology has cleverly produced a result with better tonal quality."
Except that the tonality is EXACTLY the same. Scaled to a fit a screen size of 1920x1200, there is absolutely zero difference in the tonality of the full-size and 5 MP images.
I'm glad someone else noticed this.The pixels are fairly clean and lots of detail is retained. But the tonality...it just isn't there. The lens is too small.
MarioV: My take is,the photo was rushed. You can see the camera movement.Rushed because it was a failed candid shot? Caught by the lady who looks a bit taken aback by a stranger sneaking a quick photo.
She looks like she's doing it because its expected and doesn't want to offend customers.Her expression is more like, "Oh not another one. Just get it over with." Otherwise she'd be smiling at least.Maybe the photo was successful because it portrays the tired life of a baker.
ok "caught" was the wrong word. She just doesn't look like a willing participant.
My take is,the photo was rushed. You can see the camera movement.Rushed because it was a failed candid shot? Caught by the lady who looks a bit taken aback by a stranger sneaking a quick photo.
Joe Ogiba: DPR needs to stop saying full 1080p and say 1080p30 or 1080p60 or 1080i60 or what ever. Most smartphones shoot full 1080p but none shoot 1080p60 and this camera also does not.
No matter how you look at it, they've crippled it with 1080i60.Why not 1080p60 ??
Why torture yourself. Invest in a dew heater.
Its not for me either, but I can see its just some light hearted fun. I guess its easier to be negative.
Anepo: As long as Canon continues to have this TERRIBLE Design which is VERY VERY Dust UNFRIENDLY I shall NEVER give them a penny again! I used to be a DSLR user (now micro four thirds) I have owned 5 different Canon DSLR models & I decided "Canon is quite good so I shall give my 56 year old FATHER the SX 210 for his birthday (cost me 400$ thanks to taxes and so on in my country), just after a month use his lens was FILLED with dust! And I have seen SEVERAL people online have the SAME issue where the camera has become UNUSABLE due to DUST!
Canon I want my money BACK! Also LEARN to Design a PROPER Compact camera!
I've never had a camera filled with dust, neither at home nor overseas. Either you live in a windy desert or you need to clean your house. lol
mpgxsvcd: F3.5 - F6.8. YES! Finally a company that gets it. They know exactly how to make a full sized camera take pictures like a phone.
Right, so you want the 20x zoom but keep your phone's f/2 lens? I guess you want to go back to the brick-sized phones again.