Peiasdf: RX100 / RX100 II is just too much camera in such small size that it renders small mirrorless / EVIL camera like GM1 and Pantax Q pointless. Unless the intent is to use 20 f/1.7 or 17 f/1.8 with the GM1, everyone is better served by a RX.
@Logawhich camera fits in which pocket is the most boring, pointless (and stupid) argument ever discussed on dpreview.
People (like you) expecting everyone dress the same dresses and puts cameras in the same "places" need just to look at reality.
write2alan: What good can the newest Mac OSX do if it can not be installed on a DuoCore Power PC with 16 GB of RAM. Apple is full of it....I won't spend a single dime on Apple products. I got robbed by Apple about $3000.00 a few years ago.
@groucherApple sold macs PPC for 9 years and actually they were faster than Intel based machines for the first 7 years.
@write2alan A 2008 G5 can exist only in your mind. Apple sold G5 macs up to 2006.
TurboElephant: "The Sony Cyber-shot RX100 offers more bells and whistles, but you're limited to its fixed zoom lens and smaller (albeit not that much smaller) sensor."
1" sensor = 116 mm243 sensor = 225 mm2
So GM1's 43 sensor s almost twice as big as the RX100, I wouldn't call that "not much smaller" ;)
Bart, obviously you're wrong again:DIAG0NALS RATIO AND AREAS RATIO ARE COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT EACH OTHERS WHEN CONSIDERING 2 RECTANGLES WITH A DIFFERENT SHAPE (3/2 vs 4/3 in this case)
M43 is about 100% larger than 1" whereas aps-c is about 50% larger than m43.Just consider the areas and do the math, it's simple.
Menneisyys: $750, that is, the same as RX100 MkII, while "only" having the major advantage of 24mm WA (apart from, of course, lens exchangability) while having much worse video and the lens being much thicker? Well, the price SHOULD drop quite a bit.
G6 and GX7 video IQ (latest Panasonic non-GH cameras) is far better than RX100 one.
And you're the one who stated "much worse video". Enough said.
@Menneisyys "60i vs. 60p and most probably no full-sized stills (unlike with the RX100 (MkII)) when shooting. Enough said."
Nothing said. Video IQ is what matters.
I meant: the ratios between them are NOT the same.
1/16000 silent shutter is great. Isn't awkward that Sony and Panasonic, two companies w/o a photographic history and background, try (and succeed) to innovate more than Canon, Nikon and Pentax?
@Bartyou're wrong the ratios between them are the same: m43 is about 100% larger than 1" whereas aps-c is about 50% larger than m43.
Wow, 1/16000 silent shuter!!!
Isn't awkward that Sony and Panasonic, two companies w/o a "photographic history", try (and succeed) to innovate more than Canon, Nikon and Pentax?
kwa_photo: Interesting concept. I like it. I know people are complaining about the price, but looks look at what we really have here in comparison.
Sony: 1" sensor (blows away other bridge cameras), very good EVF, constant f/2.8 24-200mm lens. Fantastic video functionality with full manual control, audio monitoring, level controls and mic input. A compete package and it appears to have some level of weather sealing as it's listed as "moisture and dust" resistant. That sensor should do very well up to ISO 800 and with the f/2.8, that's excellent compared to the slow kit lenses elsewhere.
If I wanted to get a bit larger sensor with that level of video control (incl critical EVF for video work, sorry, LCD just doesn't cut it for video), I could get a Panasonic GH3 body for $1000 on Amazon now, the 35-100mm f/2.8 for $1350, and the 12-35mm f/2.8 for $1135. Together, those give you a 24-200mm f/2.8 in micro 4/3. That's a total cost of $3485.
For a lot of people, the Sony is a sweet spot.
@kwa_photo"If I wanted to get a bit larger sensor with that level of video control [...] I could get a Panasonic GH3 body..."
1)Twice as large is not "a bit larger"2)Video control on this new sony has to be determined yet. However there are no chances video quality will be on par with the GH3.
"Together, those give you a 24-200mm f/2.8 in micro 4/3"Which means having 1 stop advantage over the rx10 in terms of noise (I know it depends on sensor technology too but more or less saying 1 stop is not inaccurate) and more dof control.
- - -
I like the sony rx10 but your comparison makes no sense: you pay more on the Pana side BUT you have more.
Sean Nelson: The price is in line with what this camera offers over and above an RX100M2 - namely a built-in EVF, top LCD display panel, and a very long range, constant-aperture f/2.8 zoom. Trying to get that combination in any other camera with a sensor at least this large would be a lot more expensive.
@zorglub76 Your 60D+18-200mm combo is 500g heavier (and 30mm longer) than this new Sony. Plus, although it's longer at tele end, it's also longer at wide end (24mm vs 29mm).
A Panasonic G6+14-140mm combo (although longer at wide end as well) would be a closer, and lighter, competitor. For both photo and video capabilities (1080p60).
Tim in upstate NY: Did someone post down below (or was it somewhere else) that the 75/1.8 is made by Sigma? Is it true? (seems unlikely to me.
....BTW For those here who may wonder where I've been since last year, my absence has been caused by an illness that involved major surgery (to the brain x2 and countless bouts of radiation and chemotherapy. If I ever get out of this wheelchair, I still hope to get some more usage from my OMD, 75/1.8 and several other m4/3 lenses . With partial paralysis in my left arm and hand, I may have to teach my wife how switch lenses or just use the one that's already mounted when I leave the house. I don't want go back to a P&S but who knows?
Have I missed much?
No, the 75/1.8 might have been designed by Sigma but is made by OLY.
1380 comments!!!Olympus products still grab people attention and that's what drives someone mad...
G Davidson: Just looking at the extreme amount of comments is telling. It seems there is a strong interest in m4/3, even if the time when just the right model to really take off is still to come.
One thing holding them back is the lack of pro use to aspire to. To my mind, with all the latest models offer, all they need are some very bright (f0.95-1.2), autofocusing affordable primes and there will be no need for using a larger format.
Nobody use a 24-xx zoom for DOF control.
P.S.I still have to see a 24-XX zoom for FF, regardless of its aperture, that is as good as my Zuiko 12-60.
had you spent more of your time taking picture instead of annoying people with things they already know (it doesn't take a lot of time multiplying a number by 2) you'd know that what impact most a lens price is its quality, both optical and build.
Saying that a lens shouldn't cost 1000$ (that will probably become 800$ quite soon) because of its FF equivalent aperture is just stupid.
Obsessed FF fanboys (like you and yabokkie) who thinks everyone should have a FF camera, are the ones needing help, not me.
For God sake... There's a part of human kind who doesn't give a f**k about FF!!!Ok? Got it?How can we get to make you understand this simple fact???
I don't want a FF: my m43 stuff is less expensive, lighter and give me all the quality I need.
M43 is a system, full stop.
yabokkie, seriously, what's wrong with your brain?