Oh, nice! It is very interesting what this startup is up to.
white shadow: "it has done very little to make it fun to shoot it" pretty sum up the gist of this otherwise quite capable camera.
There is a lot to like about this camera, its compact size, bright zoom lens and larger sensor size. However, the main concern for the photographer is the overall usabilty of the camera. Sony somehow has missed out on that and seem to continue to do so. Thus, I can't disagree with DPR's comment that its a camera that feel more like a camera that will somewhat grudgingly let you take control, rather than an enthusiast camera designed for the committed photographer from the ground up.
Sony need to get a real photographer in its design team to overcome these shortcomings if they are serious in developing its photography market. This seems to be true to its other camera categories as well.
What "it is not"? Width of 117mm is not more than 101mm? Height of 61mm is not more than 58mm? "It is not" my ass.
Sure it is, but GR is both higher and significantly wider, despite having much much simpler lens, and still does not have exposure compensation dial, for example.
Ben O Connor: Dear Olympus
Please put XZ-2's lens on E-PL5, and update it by EM-10's specs. and make this Sony history!
(how easy is that!!! :) )
"By my math, it's a lot worse than that, peevee. XZ-2 is a 4.7x crop sensor, so using that lens on a 2x sensor gives a 2.3x crop. "
Except Sony RX100 III does not have "2x sensor", it has "2.7x sensor" by your method of measurement, plus most lenses illuminate more than just its sensor - they illuminate a circle which is bigger in area than the rectangular sensor.
peevee1: Look at the video comparison. Despite the claims of full sensor readout, even at 1080p24/50mbps vertical resolution without moire (about 600 lines) is clearly WAY lower than on Pana GH3 (about 800 lines), which does not make such claims.
But here we have higher resolution of the sensor and claimed full-sensor readout, the final resolution should be better - but it is not.
It is a point and shoot, with theoretically available (but of course not optimal, which is not surprising given the form factor) interface for manual shooting.Fuji will make it better, although a little bigger.
Look at the video comparison. Despite the claims of full sensor readout, even at 1080p24/50mbps vertical resolution without moire (about 600 lines) is clearly WAY lower than on Pana GH3 (about 800 lines), which does not make such claims.
XZ-2's lens will illuminate only relatively small circle inside the sensor, about half of the sensor by area.
DPR wrote: "In contrast the Bionz X processor on the RX100 III is capable of reading all 20 million pixels sixty times per second"
I am pretty sure it does not read all 20 million pixels, it reads 16:9 crop of it, and cropped even further with Steady Shot, and even further in 120 fps.
Moreover, it probably does not skip lines only at up to 30 fps, and at 60 fps skips every second line.
Greg VdB: Considering the differences in production years, I'm gonna summarize these results as "fewer pixels don't have as much of an effect on signal/noise as some people claim". What could have more effect is the diameter (in cm, not just f-stop) of the front element of the lens attached to the camera...
Rishi, landscape photographers are limited by DoF, so when FF will use f/11, m43 will use f/5.6 and have the same DoF, amount of light and shot noise.
Hire MBAs as your management - suffer the consequences.
Jogger: The problem for third-party m43 lens makers is the huge incompatibility issues.
e.g. IBIS on some bodies, but, not others... so do you put in OIS or not?
e.g. DFD on new Panasonic bodies.. BUT, the profile needs to be created and Pana isnt sharing that proprietary tech anytime soon. So, for Tammy there's no point in creating anything beyond consumer lenses, where AF speed isnt that big an issue.
e.g. automatic software correction. Pana corrects somethings that Oly doesnt.
"More than half the existing Oly bodies have insufficient IBIS to handle 300mm EFL"
Which are these? Because E-M1, E-M5, E-M10, E-P5 have very good IBIS (3-axis in E-M10 is maybe lacking for macro a little, not for tele), and E-PM2 and E-PL5 are OK. 2 out of 6 current bodies are not "more than half".
tkbslc: Obviously 409600 looks like junk, but up to 51200 and even 102400 look pretty usable. Probably 2 stops better than any other FF competitor.
After normalizing, there is practically no advantage, certainly not a stop.
28mm is not wide enough. It is like selling a car with 3 wheels. Almost there, but no cigar.And f/6.3 is not bright enough for cameras with PDAF (for which it is made), only the central point will (barely) work.
Ruy Penalva: Tamron knows Panasonic will launch sensor stabilization
...and they know it because Panasonic already launched IBIS in GX7, like 8 months ago. :)
forpetessake: Many people complain this zoom is too dim, and traditionally Tamron superzooms have poor image quality, etc. You are forgetting that Tamron is a business, and as such is measured by profits, they must make the decisions based on those considerations. The stuff that sells and brings profits usually not the best quality. Never confuse saleability with quality.
A weather-sealed 11-110/2-4 (or even 11-70/2.4) for reasonable price would sell like hot pancakes. This... no way. If Tamron's product managers would be any good, they would know that extra lenses are mostly bought by high end OM-D and GH camera buyers, who get weather-sealed bodies and cannot get a weather-sealed superzoom, despite 3 m43 superzooms being on the market.
"e.g. automatic software correction. Pana corrects somethings that Oly doesnt."
Not anymore. Both now correct distortion separately in 3 planes (which corrects lateral CA too), and vignetting.
Artistico: I have been wondering when this super zoom would make its way to M43. I also find it a bit interesting from the point of view that one would normally expect this to be an IS lens (Or VR, as Tamron would call it).
I think it is about time Panasonic starts following the strength of the trend, making IBIS standard too, and drop OIS from their new lenses, or they are going to lag behind the others.
It probably seemed a good idea at the time, but I think they'd make more money in the long run. M43 being a universal mount, there is less incentive to stay with the brand than how it has been for Nikon and Canon and their choice to keep IS in lenses.
In order to have the best selection of lenses for M43, one needs both Panasonic and Olympus ones. Not having IBIS is a compromise that will make people more likely to choose Olympus bodies over Panasonic.
"as i understand, the really good IBIS (5-axis) is only available on the high end Olympus bodies. "
3-axis in the cheap E-M10 is still better than any OIS, lenses even in principle cannot stabilize for rotational movement.
$589? Good luck to Tamron, they are not going to sell anything at this price, Pana HD 14-140 WITH stabilization is $399, the new Pana 14-140 (with even better stabilization) and Oly 14-150 are about $600.
It is probably the kind of price to quickly take half off and call it a sale. In Japan it is 26,000 yen according to 43rumors, about $250.
peevee1: What's with people demanding RAW on a camera with 16 million pixels on a tiny 1/2.3" sensor? Look at the pictures, they have noise (VISIBLE IN JPEG!) even at base ISO! What do you expect from RAW, more encoded noise? Because JPEG at max quality already encodes 12 bit/pixel, and those tiny pixels don't have even 10 bits of information (as opposed to noise) in them!Want to correct the picture - go ahead and correct the JPEG. Same thing. RAW is not going to turn these 16 mpix into 16 mpix from D4s! Besides, except on Oly and Pentax at the very wide end, these pixels are way smaller than Airy disks, and even then Bayer-interpolated! Downscale 4:1 and stop fooling yourself.
"Buy a waterproof case for a Sony RX 100 III and "
...try to put the resulting contraption into your trunk pocket. :)