Well done! Very well indeed.
Just for fun:
Canon (and Nikon) will need to get their act together, otherwise they will have their own "Kodak moment".
MILCs will surpass DSLRs in the future because they are inherently superior. It is only a matter of time before the last real advantage of DSLRs, fast autofocus, will be achieved somehow in MILCs, either through on sensor PDAF or whatever. For the rest, a MILCs is much more flexible due to shorter flange distance, which allows all kinds of adapters. They are more compact and more tailored to the coming generations of photographers, which have no SLR legacy.
The magazine will just hire the same photographers, but as freelancers and not as staff.
zeyno44: 2 x AAA Batteries? How many shots can you actually get? It would've been perfect if it had built-in rechargeable battery - in my opinion.
LOL. But if you are travelling, just buy AAA duracells (or whatever) in a shop.
You could always use rechargeable AAA batteries.
Did the camera used in photo #1 survive?
This technology is promising, but not mature yet. Just a matter of time. Look it at this way: the first digital cameras were also a lot behind film cameras.
Le Frog: "Its depth-of-field and light capture costs (it's most directly comparable to a Full Frame 70-200mm F5.6)"
No, no, no, dear DPR, in a telephoto, deep DoF is never ever a cost, it is always a benefit! Who wants (and why would he want) shallow DoF@200mm? And whenever you can use the 35-100 wide open, while, with an APS or FF camera, you would have had to stop down the lens, to get sufficient DoF, there is no light capture cost either.
Please, please, please, do not encourage the trolling of the shallow DoF brigade. Pretty please with a cherry on top and plenty of whipped cream and chocolate fudge?
Well, one very good reason to buy the f/2.8 lens: you can use higher (faster) shutter speeds in less than optimal light conditions. Important for action/sports photography and birding.
EXX: Wow, $1800 body only. The Sony A77-MkII with the 18-50mm F2.8 lens is cheaper than that. Looks a lot more attractive to me.
If you have already heavily invested in Canon lenses, then it is of course nonsense to switch to anything else. For new buyers however, this is a completely different matter.
Finally some competition for Sony in this market segment. I suspect Sony will now drop their price on the RX100 models. Good for us consumers.
Wow, $1800 body only. The Sony A77-MkII with the 18-50mm F2.8 lens is cheaper than that. Looks a lot more attractive to me.
That filled up quickly! Maybe a #2 in a few weeks?
Basic PP, so colour photographs only? What about panorama, since more and more cameras have a nice and easy to use (also for mom) built-in panorama function.
For all the folks still using 32 bit Windows 7 or 8.x
You can replace the 32 bit version by a 64 bit version with your current license key. AFAIK, the key is not related to 32 or 64 bit version, only to the fact that it is home/professional/ultimate/whatever edition. So you can legally download a 64 bit version of your current 32 bit Windows version and replace it.
Beware that you must replace the current installation, not put a 64 bit next to the 32 bit version.
ArturK: I just don't get it. If it has an EVF then why the translucent mirror? Can't the image from the sensor go directly into the EVF?
The image from the sensor does go to the EVF directly. The translucent mirror is just a beam splitter that splits off 30% of the incoming light to the AF module. The remainder goes to the sensor.
The mirror lens will be available in Sony Alpha mount, but which one? A-mount or E-mount?
Tough challenge, lots of really great photos.
A frog is not a reptile, but an amphibian.
Photomonkey: Did I miss the complaints about the lack of a FF sensor?
LOL. You have a point though: where is the Sony RX-1?