We've condensed everything you need to know about the Sony RX100 IV into less than the length of a pop record. Having shot, tested and lived with the little Sony for more than a month, we've summed up the findings of our review in video form. Is it worth the extra cash over the Mark III? Come join us in sunny Seattle as we look at the pros and cons of Sony's capable super-compact.
I played with the Sony RX 100 m4 today in my local store and the camera felt very cheap in the hands to me. I do own the original RX100 and see no reason to upgrade at all. Im also still using my Oly ZX1 and Sammy EX2F. By the way my EX2F is built like a army tank :-)
I don't own it or any version of the rx100 but I played around the the mkiv version in a store and it is a solidly built little camera. I think a lot of camera comments on this site are absolutely bonkers.
All four RX100 have more less the same build quality as far as I can see from my local big box store.
But M4 seems having better build quality than M3 as M3's EVF is kind of loose while popping up. I'm not sure if it is caused by people play M3 more than M4 as M4 is newer in store.
incredible little machine. the LX100 seems like stiff competition also having a larger sensor and much nicer controls. both lack a touchscreen. the face detection worked fast. tough call. the rx is more pocketable. the lx100 lens is amazing, at 12mm I loved it more than the oly 12mm.... tough call or win win situation.
What is your link supposed to show? Which camera has more mass appeal?
In that case, the smaller, less-expensive Sony with the better name recognition and more of the all-important megapickles is probably going to win over the larger camera with manual controls and dials that will likely confuse many camera users.
Mass appeal is not high on my list when shopping for a camera. I owned the RX100-II and then the RX1, and for me the LX100 is a better camera. Not to take anything away from the RX100, but it's not the best camera for everyone.
"the smaller, less-expensive Sony ... is probably going to win".
"less-expensive Sony". Really?
On the TOP of the list is SONY RX100.M4, which is almost $1K.
The "less-expensive" LX100 is way out of TOP 100.
BTW, RX100.M3 is $800 in TOP 20 while the cheaper RX100.M2 is out of TOP 50.
Check the LIST again. LX100's selling point is CHEAPER, but still less people are buying it even it is $200 cheaper than RX100.M4, and same priced as RX100.M3.
I forgot about the price increase of the M4, but the bulk of my comments, which you did not address in your haste to correct me on the price of the M4, still apply.
The various RX100's are probably more approachable for the average camera buyer than a camera like the LX100. My point is that mass appeal or relative sales figures don't make a camera better or worse.
I bet that 99% of the people I know would not know what to make of the aperture ring, shutter speed dial, or exposure compensation dial on the LX100. Most people would probably find the camera intimidating, so I am not surprised at all that it would move less units than a camera like the RX100, which looks about like any other digital camera from the outside.
It seems to me that the RX100 is a niche camera, while the LX100 is a niche of a niche.
In regards to the Amazon list, is that really the last word in camera sales figures? It seems like there would be a stronger correlation between the list ranking, and the number of user reviews for each model.
Panasonic knows as well as anyone how to build a camera for the masses, but that is not what they were doing with the LX100.
Amazon does whatever serves Amazon. Witness the way they continue to insist on lumping reviews of different products together, creating mass confusion and misleading product ratings.
I would not trust any kind of best-seller list from Amazon without having a full understanding of how the list is formulated. Again, the lack of correlation between position on the "best sellers" list and the number of user reviews is highly suspect.
Edgar_in_Indy: 'Amazon' does not have any input into reviews (not what we review, when we review it, how we review it or what conclusions we draw). DPReview is an autonomous subsidiary of Amazon: DPReview editorial staff are the only people who make any decisions to do with DPReview editorial.
I think you must have misunderstood my comments. I was not suggesting any improper collaboration between Amazon and the staff at DPR. The corporate connection did not even cross my mind until you brought it up.
I was specifically referring to how Amazon lumps reviews of different products all together.
For example, for a Samsung TV, they may combine the reviews of the 37", 42", 50", 55", 65", 70", and 75" models, even though the TV's have completely different panels, feature lists, and reliability may vary. So that when a shopper is viewing the overall rating or reading individual reviews, they are often getting inaccurate information.
This is a problem I encounter constantly on Amazon. Most recently when I was shopping for a chandelier, and the various sizes and colors from the same company were all mixed together. Ditto when I was shopping for an outdoor antenna, and reviews of various antennas, amplifiers, and splitters were all lumped together as if it were a single product.
with stiff competition I simply referred to my personal choice and likings. I chose the gf7 as a compact for now as I have quite some m43 primes floating around. I was not comparing marketing chances and the liike, simply comparing theses amazing machines and see what they have to offer. the lx100
With the exception of Richard's shirt, I found this to be an excellent short summary of features and feel of the camera. The examples given, such as for focusing, were well-chosen. Nice job.
Is there a remote way to start/stop the video w/o having to touch the camera? This would be very cool to grab 1,000 frames in 1 second without jittering the camera to start and stop the video.
The video is so choppy when panning or zooming (the Seattle tower, for example around 2:09 or around 1:21), makes me dizzy. Perhaps native but higher quality 1080p would have been better?
The bulk of the video was shot with the a7 II, some of the cut-aways were shot with the Panasonic G7 (in 4K). The only shots taken with the RX100 IV are the panning of the plane coming in to land, the detail on the building and the slow-mo bees.
Part of this could be because we shot in 24p but I wonder whether part of it is down to YouTube's re-encoding.
@Richard Butler: Depending on the shutter speed you choose for the video capture, without sticking to the (1/double-frame rate)s 'rule of thumb' this might explain some of the choppiness. Or it could indeed be youtube's fault. Can you post some videos in vimeo to check if the re-encoding is better there?
I usually do not utilize the movie capabilities in my cameras but the Slo-Mo 960 frame rate vids! Wow! That would be my excuse for getting this cam! Wonder if the Slo-Mo 960 frame rate videos are part of the 4K video function and limited to only 5min(?).
That being said, I do not see me when utilizing this Slo-Mo vid feature to go beyond a min or two (arbitrarily saying.. exact may be in secs!) What do you think? Is the Slo-Mo vid feature something that excites everyone here? Especially if you can obtain focused still frames from them... the size of these frames will be dependent on the previous question above too.... Wonder what size Still Capture Frames from Slo-Mo vids???
Erm, where to start? 960fps is only for 2-4 seconds. It's less than 360p resolution. So if you are after that, then you should wait longer (MUCH longer I surmise) for another camera...
A very cool little camera. I wonder if those with both still and video needs will instead buy cameras like the NX500. Some large discounts for the NX500 are out there meaing it will cost a lot less and while it has video limitations (or benefits depending on what you like) such as the video crop, the potential for better stills is tremendous. If one shops around today, for the same price one can get an NX500 and one or two wide aperture lenses. They get 4K video, a small camera, and infinitely better stills (due to being about to change lenses). They lose the higher speed video mode though, but for gosh sake, this is a photography site.
NX500 has a flaw with soft pics. Until it's solved camera is unusable at shutter speeds under 1/160. it's a known issue. Check CameraStore youtube video review - they talk about this issue. So far Samsung has not been able to solve this issue even after FW update.
With NX500 all mine down to 1/10 shutter speed at tele are very sharp and good resolution...think it could be some variation in OIS qc of the kit lens mixed with some people not being good at being steady with a lightweight camera. Even peach fuzz and eyelashes on my young kids who never stay still are extremely sharp at 1/80 and 1/100 shutter speeds. I would bet most time it's user error if they can't match or beat anything less than full frame or larger sensors with more resolution.
DPReview has dedicated more space to this camera than any other in my recent memory. Do they own Sony stock or are they owned by Sony? There are a lot of other cameras out there that deserve some very close attention rather than a casual passing acknowledgement with some pictures.
Seriously, guys, it's a nice little camera and all that, but please give it a rest.
It's not about conspiracy, I totally agree with Jim Evidon. Multiple news, expedited full review, now a video review to explain ad nauseam that it is the best compact camera ever (until mark V) ... What else? I don't say that the camera is bad, but if Sony does not sell a lot, we won't blame DPReview/Amazon :-))) Almost as sickening as an iPhone launch.
It's an interesting camera that we've built coverage of as we've had access. Note that the X-T10, despite being reviewed later, was the first to get a review summary video.
@Richard Butler, @ Barney Britton: Don't worry, I also saw your Olympus Tough Cam review, and of course read the Fuji X-T10 review with interest. Once you review THEIR favourite camera make they'll be a happy bunch (and then other camera make fantards will complain)... Oh wait, unless you don't give it a gold award, then be prepared for fire, brimstones and the like... ;)
@Barney Britton - It still feels weird being criticized for doing 'too much' camera review content.
Well, other than the reviews, forums, DP Review Connect, video's, sample images, camera database, galleries, news updates and studio scene comparison tool, what have <strike>the Romans</strike> has DP Review done for us lately?
"By Barney Britton (13 hours ago) It still feels weird being criticized for doing 'too much' camera review content." Now come on, thats unfair straw man. Your camera reviews are great and the more the better, its just in recent weeks there have been so so many Sony related articles. I don't know what % of your readership own a sony, lets pretend a very vocal 20%, but they are getting so much coverage it feels (probably incorrectly) like you are advertising for them
Barney, please ignore the "you're a Sony fanboy/on the Sony payroll" grumblers - although it's clear the moaning and groaning is painful to listen to. Trolls gonna troll.
Please continue to use your own data and sound editorial judgment to guide your calendar.
There is a big mass of RX100 (and RX10 and A7) owners who were pleased with their initial purchase and thinking about upgrading. There are also lots of enthusiasts (like myself) who have considered (and continue to consider) the past RX100 models but didn't bite for various reasons. I think a lot of us are excited to see the continued rapid innovation in the high end compact area, and follow this model family -- as well as other smaller mirrorless and high end compacts like the LX100, G7X, GM1/GM5, Nikon 1, etc. -- with great interest. Similar story for FF mirrorless, and "larger sensor superzoom/all-in-one" like Pany FZ1000, RX10, etc.
Having no mic input and having 4K is as useless as having a A7RII body with cap on it instead of lens. It's crippled and useless for outside video due to wind noise. And of course no hot-shoe either to add external mic. Check and mate Sony. Nicely done. protecting your own high-end video cameras?
Don't tell me there is no space for tiny mic in. I'm not buying it. I know Sony did it on purpose. So instead of enjoying a small compact rx100m4 - now I have to look at monstrous bulky rx10II or look elsewhere. You know what? I'll look elsewhere, because this is no way to treat folks nowadays. Nicely done Sony. What a bunch of idiots loosing customers for something stupid like that. Unbelievable.
Oh come on! just be honest to yourself...I know you can't afford it so now you act like an idiot and stupid. Bec. real photographer and videographer knows that there is always a dedicated recorder that can be use. Go back to your idiotic life and find another cam that has the same size and with mic + 4K + stupid user.
I don't understand your logic. This camera is a completely different ergonomic concept to a high end video camera. I can't imagine the market has many people swithering between this camera and a high end video camera. So I can't see what Sony would have to gain from behaving as you say.
To understand my logic you simply have to be logic yourself. Now where exactly I've said this camera is high-end video camera? Nowhere. All I said is that Sony could have easily placed mic in. And that would opened immense 4K video capabilities with good lav mics to chose from and to do a 4K descent video for 95% of usual users. I never said anything about Pro Videographers and Holywood producers. So please check your logic before replying to a post that contains facts, not some assumptions. It's a fact that mic in is missing. It's a fact that Sony could have put it in if they wanted.
@Silmarion: Easily? Really?! They even have difficulty centring the tripod screw thread at the bottom of that cam, presumably because of space constrains. It is a very SMALL (and increasingly heavy for its size) camera, and clearly this time they try to add some heat-sink in there somewhere and the 4K full sensor read-out overheating issues is only partially resolved, and you are so sure they could have easily add a mic and headphone input somewhere? Your logic is presumptuous, therefore it's illogical.
illogical bec. he is stupid. For a small camera like that then it is expected to use it as non-pro video work. It's for CONSUMERS but not stupid consumers. And what do you need mic for when doing slow motion? if you want to do 4k more than 5mins of recording then get yourself a video cam or iphone stupid!
@Lightcapture: have you ever open electronics and looked at mic in? Sony can put 4 mic in if they want to at space near hdmi port. That will however pull buyers from other Sony cameras, simply because for 99% 5min 4K clips is enough to do a youtube review or important shooting. A lot of people would buy rx100m4 for that feature only. Most of 4K videography today uploaded to net is under 5min. If you want more you can take several 5min clips. Sony knows it. Yes, IMHO they omitted mic in on purpose.
Here's a question for you: how many people who need 4K and mic in will buy rx10ii if rx100m4 had mic in? Not many, maybe like 20% from all buyers who bought rx10ii for that reason (so Sony would get 80% drop in sales of rx10ii). Not many videpographers need 200mm reach. Majority (vast majority) of video is done under 70mm reach AND peopel prefer to use compact cameras if they can, instead of bulky rx10ii.
@Silmarion: More presumptions/opinions said as if they are facts. Have you opened the RX100iv to verify there are space in there for not one, but four (!) mic inputs? Are you simply saying people are using the videos just for 4K selfie vlogging? If so, how many run-and-gun daily vloggers require professional mic-in sound recording (where did you get the 80/20% figures from)? I know that Louis Cole (Fun for Louis) didn't care about wearing mics, he uses the RX100iv since its release and had been posting daily vlogs with it since. If you are Philip Bloom or doing studio recording, then I can understand how a mic input is more convenient. But even so, there is a workaround. You can use a cheap external recorder (even your mobile phone!) and then sync during post. Do I want mic in? Why not? Is it a deal breaker, not really... And lastly, do tell me which compact (up to 1-inch sensor size) cameras out there has mic in?
@Lightcapture: easy - Fuji x30 has mic in - look how small space is required for that - 2.5mm - hope you realize it was possible to put it in rx100m4 too. Stop that nonsense about not enough space and how do I know it. Gee. Take your smartphone - even smallest and thinnest smartphones have mic out ports (same 2.5 or 3.5 mm jacks). What's wrong with you people? Suddenly laws of physics became false and you will die defending Sony "not been able to put tiny hole jack in rx100m4"? Come on - you can do better than that. I can accept the fact that they didn't wanted to do it, but please don't tell me again about not enough space. Ugh. And self vlogging is not what I was talking about. You can use indoors rx100m4 just fine. I was talking about outside video. It gets unusable instantly due to wind noise. At least Sony could have come up with wind protector add-on. Or you will be arguing now that this is also impossible blah, blah, blah?
Go check cyber-shot forum and read why most of people bought rx10ii instead of rx100m4 - it was due to mic input - I may surprise you, but sound is as important for videographers as video is. Yes, many wanted to buy more compact camera, but they were forced to go with more bulkier rx10ii. And for users saying go buy a videocamera - you guys are stuck in 90's - welcome to reality - rx10ii is actually more videocamera, than photocamera. Even Sony admits and presents it as videographer tool. Watch reviews for rx10ii - why people buy it? At least half (if not more) are videographers. Most of them will gladly buy rx100m4 if it had mic in - as it would have served them well enough for their goals. And again, no I'm not talking about Pro videographers or Phillip Bloom, how many times I have to say it. People only notice what they want to see and omit what they don't. That's enough for me. I can't argue with people blindly saying what they think they know, not what they see and the facts.
Hey Sil, I think folks just don't realize how important sound is for us video dudes. I agree it wasn't hard making it microphone input. Could have worked, but what can you do now? Still shooters will not get it, no matter what you say to them. Fortunately there are some other cameras coming out with 4K and simple mic in jack. Cheers, small
@Silmaron: Fuji x30 is hardly a compact sized camera. And did you see the size difference between the x30 and RX100?! With those extra space, you can have all sorts inputs on the sides of x30 according to your logic. Further more, x30 doesn't shoot 4K, it doesn't even do full hd that well. Wind noise? The most I see pros using this is their b cam. Where they probably are just happy for scratch audio for syncing post. Are you doing documentary shooting with this camera? Right now I can't see any vloggers seriously getting their knickers in the twist because of the lack of mic in.
Obviously Sony excluded mic-in on purpose, because it didn't happen by accident. But they didn't do it to upset videographers, or to protect sales of other models.
Every camera is a mishmash of features, and compromises are made during product development, sometimes for technical reasons, but often just to reach a predetermined manufacturing cost and/or to suit the intended target market. Sony likely didn't expect the typical RX100 buyer to care about a mic-in jack.
I think that's 960fps footage, so it's taken from a very low-res grab from the sensor. But yes, the high shutter speeds required for 960fps mean the ISO probably gets pushed up quite a lot.
Thanks Richard Butler. Just did a quick search on YouTube, I realised that the footage in this video is pretty much how 960fps looks like with the RX100 Mk4! Sony's demonstration videos and Philip Bloom's video "call the cleaner" have misled me to believe that the 960fps would look much cleaner than it really is. Personally I find it unusable and rather gimmicky.
Well, I think this pretty sums up my quest. on getting decent still frame captures from Slo-Mo 960 fps grabs. Apparently it's a gimmick good only for fb postings and the likes. Anyone can expand on the 4K still grabs? This would be handy in getting a descent still frame capture in difficult conditions....
I thought my YouTube went mad and selected a lower resolution when the video hits 1:44. The 1:44-48 960fps video is just not good enough in today's standard. Making still captures from that is just unimaginable!
SamTrekker - it's not our job to make it look cool: it's our job to demonstrate it. If that helps you conclude that it's not suitable for your needs, then it's done its job.
Given that the 960fps footage comes from either 1136 x 384 or 800 x 270 capture, it shouldn't come as much of a surprise to find that it's not ideal for stills captures.
Having to use a frame rate of around 1/1000th of a second is likely to mean lots of shot noise in most instances, too.
If you are considering Canon G7X, then you shouldn't be bothered with RX100iv, because it's so much more expensive. Canon G7X is comparable to Sony RX100iii instead...
I bit the bullet and got one on order in the end, I got it imported from Hong Kong for £580 (be here soon) which considering it would cost me £850 if I went into the shop in the UK, I am happy about.
The RX100 3's are still going for the best part of £400 on ebay (second hand), so for less than £200 more, knowing its brand new, un-touched was worth it.
Yes its a lot of money still, but I needed a small camera which was capable.
On top of which, I always obsesses if I don't have good equipment, so knowing I have which many consider to be the best compact camera in the world stops my mind from wandering. I get on with using it now instead of wishing I had a better one!
Really looking forward to the Slow Motion. I am still enjoying my P900, what can I say, I like to see the worlld in news ways, Huge Zoom and Super Slow Mo is two fundamental ways to do this, and the stuff I have does them fairly well for less than £1100.
Add this to my Hero 4 BE on the drone and I'm a happy bunny!
There will always be something better down the line, don't buy camera just to stop your mind 'wishing' for better equipment, because very soon (like twelve months or so) you'll suffer from G.A.S. (Gear Acquisition Syndrome) again when something 'better' comes along...
If it's directly from import, then you'll have to pay VAT for sure. But if you order it through some HK based UK distributor, like I did with my RX100 a couple of years ago, then you avoid the VAT completely...
I think win39 is too coy to say he can't quite catch your accent. I can because I am a Brit. ;) The volume has to be pushed to the maximum true, but it's clear as a whistle for me (just normalise the sound in your video editor next time)...
Ok, so long as I've not done something really stupid and mixed it out-of-phase (meaning it's almost inaudible on devices that then mix down to mono).
The mic and recorder setup we used wasn't perfect, so there's a lot of background noise. Between the children running around and shrieking excitedly, the float planes taking off and landing, the man playing the municipally-provided piano and the woman in the wedding dress rowing past with a tuba, it was quite noisy.
The problem is that as good as the video is the hot shoe is missing so no external mic. Audio is just as if not more important so access is important.
Same for the Panasonic LX-100, nice camera with a hot shoe but no mic input.
At this point these $900 p&s cameras are expected to have some basic features. However, if the RX-100 iv is designed as a still camera first even then a hot shoe for external flash is needed on occasion.
I think the RX-100 V will need to be LX-100 size with the few extra features and even a like 4/3's sensor and that will be a killer p&s.
If you really need an addon mic / respectively better audio recording than provided by the internal mic... then what's wrong with any of the small external high definition audio recorders available... Some feature excellent omnidirectional mics built in, and yet allow you to use a broad range of external mic. Syncing the audio afterwards is dead simple with any modern video editor.
I'm not saying it wouldn't have been nice to include the ability to mount a mic - but ON-Camera microphones are limited in their use anyhow ...
Sure you can sync later say with Plural Eyes, but software costs. One solution could be using a Beachtek product, but even then the RX-100 form is just too small for advanced needs. As far a limited use for on camera mic's not at all limited. You have to use the correct mic for the correct situation at hand. The shotgun mic's I use can be switched to a wider pattern, I also have stereo mic's and some even use Lav's. The mic is all about proximity so even a $1,000 shotgun mic is Unless if not used correctly. Choosing a mic is like choosing a lens.
The RX-100 like any camera has limits, depends what your deal breakers are.
Regardless no one that wants to do video that matter should be forced to use the internal mic's of any camera. More so when you are paying $900 whatever it is for a p&s camera
Cheapest way to sync? Directly in FinalCut, Premiere or whatever... remember the clap-boards ?? that is what they were mostly used for... You can do this by just clapping at the beginning... or get a dog-clicker ;)... Both will create a fast, visible spike in the audio-wave easy enough to sync that way manually. Sure an automated Software makes things easier... but in a pinch ... works quite well.
all that aside - I don't think the RX100 was aimed at pro-grade video works ;)
Sony includes 4K in their cameras, because they want to promote the sale of their 4K televisions. Camera companies that don't make televisions don't have that financial incentive.
Canon wants to protect the large margins they get from their Cinema line of cameras. The lowest priced Canon with 4K is the XC10 with slow fixed zoom and 1" sensor for $2,500. Panasonic, Samsung and Sony are the only companies making 4K cameras under $1K.
Forgetting price for the moment, how will its performance compare to the Leica Q compact or the Panasonic Lumix GX8? When will DPReview publish in-depth evaluations of the Leica Q and the GX8 compacts?
Wow, those are rather different cameras: a full frame camera with a fixed 28mm lens, a 1"-type compact with a 24-70mm equiv zoom and a mirrorless ILC with a Four Thirds sensor.
Well the image quality and size are essentially dictated by the sensor size, the most flexibility is offered by the camera that accepts other lenses, followed by the zoom, followed by the fixed prime.
Much as I hate automotive analogies, you are essentially asking me to compare a small sports car, a capable station wagon and a small pickup truck. Without knowing more about your intentions, it's very hard to say anything more.
Both other cameras will be reviewed in due course.
Sony are superb at miniaturisation, but need to work on their ergonomics, the one reason I would not choose an RX-100 series and sadly got rid of my NEX. (A-6000 better, but not perfect.) On the RX-100 series, the controls are too small, there is no top right multi-use dial and the case is too slippery. Sony could learn from the Panasonic LX-100, which would be perfect it it had an articulating display.
Oh...Mr Takitso... When you buy the RX100, you also have to buy the leather case (made of authentic Italian cow) to help keep a solid grip on that camera. Remember that when you're buying a RX100, you are not buying a compact camera...You are buying a very pricey piece of conversation at the sushi bar. Yes, it also takes nice pictures.
They are in different classes imho, one is a pocket size and the other is a compact, and for a pocket camera I will take a pop-up flash and a articulating screen over extra dials and buttons any day...
You can always make the same adjustments in the RX100, just slower..
Great camera ...way over priced. 600$ would be a stretch for the compact camera market and This could sit at that place... Sony things for ever version from mark 1 to mark 4 I will keep increasing the price and the people wont notice ....hey I added features... Guess what Sony ...thank you but no thanks.
Any adults here? Any video resolution has its uses, the RX100 slo-mo is not at 4khd, as diff slo-mo rates rize, the rez goes down - 101 thinking adults no?
That point has nothing to do with Canon's incapability to have 4khd in their non-pro cams!
And quit apologizing for Canon. A recent interview told why Canon has no recent non-pro 4khd cams - thermal issues !!
Either the sensor or DSP or both put out too much heat.
The 1D C has a heat sink, and it is too large for normal DSLRs let alone smaller cams.
Canon has multiple problems needing to be solved, mostly their sensors and their TI DSPs - rumor of a quad-core for the 5D IV and 2 for the 1D XII but rumors.
They will eventually solve the issues, or just let all the other makes rule 4khd, as it is coming, ludite ones it is coming, and it is glorious. well if head is out of sand hole !!
4K capabilities push for better 1080P output too. Just look at the RX100 IV native 1080P output or even better, 4k scaled to 1080P. More usable resolution, more color information, far less artifacts.
So it's a cool theory about Canon cameras, or rather a convenient excuse instead.
More likely is that their dependency on a 3rd party manufacturer for 4K capabilities in their compact cameras, forms a bottleneck.
Joseph, you may be right (ok, you are right from a point of view) ...
BUT from a user, or a potential buyer, point of view ... it's all about features, specs, usability, build quality ... if I have to choose between two cameras, and everything is equal ... i like both designs, controls, IQ, etc ... same price.. i have to make a decision, right? And the only difference is that one have some abysmal feature that i will never use as a plus.... do you guess what 99% of the buyers in this exact position will buy?
Troj, it's not really an excuse, it is just an explanation of their lack of involvement in 4K ... it is probably true, they will gain little money, but that doesn't mean that it is better for me, as a user, not to have the feature. Especially one that is as least very interesting, if not very useful.
Agreed badi. In the US alone, one out of 3 large TV's sold today is 4K capable. It is expected that within 5 years, more than half the households have a 4K TV. In other words, the adoption rate of 4K is faster than that of 1080P, which means that dragging your feet in supporting it in your dedicated cameras, could actually be harmful. Especially with more and more people owing phones that already support it.
I didn't miss the point at all. You claimed cost savings for not supporting 4K, defended by the argument that there's hardly a market for it.
I pointed out that there is a good market for it and one that is growing rapidly. And I also pointed out that the majority of the market would still see benefits from pushing for higher resolution video, even if their TV's don't run that higher resolution natively. Canon isn't exactly the brand to push for the lower end of the market either. Again I point out that 4k video is already becoming mainstream for phones. Consumers are getting aware of that. A rapidly shrinking market such as the one for compacts, needs to provide good arguments to justify the purchase. If customers discover than their dedicated $650 compact is lacking video resolution compared to their $400 phone (even at 1080P...), the cost argument suddenly loses a lot of value.
Of course allowing for better 1080P isn't besides the point for a dedicated camera. Denying the importance of video capabilities is living in a bubble. Thinking that 50% market penetration in 5 years isn't rapid growth, is another weird statement. It's about as fast as it gets in the tech industry. Smartphones saw a similar adoption rate (4 years instead of 5) for example. If you don't want to play ball in the mid and higher end of the compact camera market, it's best to give up today, because the bleeding numbers should tell you that skimping on features to save cost, isn't going to help you. The tech war in smartphone land, isn't one to ignore for dedicated cameras either.
Why wrong? Just like people bleating digital will never gain traction because film will rule for-eva, how mirrorless will never compete with DSLR (not in a million years!), that sort of thing. So myopic. Technology will continuously move and improve, and those who wishes to remain stagnant will find themselves left behind sooner or later...
The majority argument is a fallacy to begin with, since the majority will not be looking at dedicated cameras, especially with phones becoming more capable. So dedicated cameras are de facto the niche that has to set itself apart from those phones and at least offer similar features where possible. If you're looking for a dedicated camera, you're less and less likely looking at one that covers basic features alone.
@Lightcapture: I am old enough :=) to remember that transition. The concern was that there were not enough HD sources then but I do not remember complaints that HD was not needed.
I that is not the point anyway because I did not see here anybody saying that 4K is too much quality (when it is).
Your mentioning of dSLR and mirrorless is just more trolling.
@JACS: I am not trolling. I find excuses and justifications for companies (who are still arguably major players) sitting on their posterior refusing to offer better video spec when it's already doable (even in a smartphone sensor) plain lazy and arrogant. That's all. They'll lose out when they lost market share (they are already losing market share as we speak). Inertia and greed (thinking only about maximising profits ALL THE TIME at the expense of innovation) in a competitive digital imaging industry is just asking for it. When they fade into obscurity because of this then they deserve to be there...
@joseph black: it's not Canon's feeble mindedness, I bet they don't have the technological know hows and/or thinking it's cutting into their profits, so they don't care.
@Joseph Black: Nice opinion, but no can do. No matter how small, technological companies must always strive to innovate and be seen to push products to create the 'manufactured need'. Who needed an expensive ipod (when mp3s players were available already)? Who needed an expensive and swanky ipad (when there were other tablets in the market already)? Apple became the behemoth now because they dared to push the boat out with something that lots of people thought to be merely 'niche' product. Sony had the same philosophy, though they were historically less successful and profitable with some innovations failing to take off, like mini-disc players. But they kept pushing the envelope. Canon seemed to have lost steam after 5dMkII...
I think in many ppls minds, 4kHD is very much like using Raw for stills, it does add a bit of future proofing. I for one keep cams a long time, as I do not chase 'just because it is new'.
If buying today, I would insist on 4khd, it looks great on 2khd sets or 4khd, stills of the 4khd are 8mp, very usable in size and the ones I have seen are nice, better than cell phone pics!!
Some have no use for video at all.
But why are netflix, amazon and many others ALL using 4khd NOW, for current and future use.
How many older shows do you wish were filmed/recorded in 2khd or even 720p ? I know many !! They look very old now, but subject matter is as current as today.
A lot of apps offer native 4K shooting and video playback on iphone6 I believe (but I am not an iphone user, so I can't be sure). Check out this link: http://www.redmondpie.com/how-to-record-4k-video-on-iphone-6-and-iphone-6-plus/. So it's not costing them any thing, my friend, only need to get the apps, and they are software-driven. The hardware in iphone 6/6+ are already more than capable (they have their 8MP sensor for years, and it's all that's need for 4K) Meanwhile, Canon has this misguided notion that no 4K should be in their compacts 'because there is no need for it'...
The Apple story is a different one to begin with. It's to a large part cult/status and vendor lock in too. At wich point, technical abilities directly compared to the rest of the market are much less important. That cannot be said when people are interested in buying a dedicated compact camera. You can pick any brand and you're more likely to compare to others and even your smartphone capabilities. Different target markets, not so fitting comparison. Canon cannot rely on the first 2 factors mentioned, thinking the profits will keep coming.
@Lightcapture: Why do you even care which company produces what? Is that some kind of game that I am missing? Hassy does not make compact 4k cameras (expect for the wooden grip), does that make it a bad brand?
@Joseph: I know that 4K in a one-inch sensor will have heating issue (as evidenced by the RX100iv), but there is a workaround. One is to crop the sensor when doing 4K (effectively using a 'smaller sensor' concept by literally utilizing a smaller surface area) video shooting. There are workarounds. Like I said, even the iphone 6 is internally capable of 4K output (albeit it's a tiny sensor compared to the so-called '1-inch' sensor) and so I still think Canon's partly trying to deal with heating issues (for the 1-inch sensor) but partly misguided regarding pushing 4K capabilities on some of their compact line or even their FF DSLRs with this bizarre fear that it would somehow cannibalise their more expensive 'pro' lines such as the 1D or the C-line series.
@JACS: Now you are deliberately trolling. :) Of course Hassy is a bad brand in that they don't exist any more. That's the whole point. It will come a day perhaps we'll see Canon making phallic-like wooden grips to their out-sourced digital cams as well if they remain so stubbornly and arrogantly insular.
Worthwhile upgrade even though the price is over $900? I think once the price comes down to around $600 it will sell much better.
Personally i wont buy an RX series camera again for fear of getting dust on the sensor. This has been a long time issue for Sony not only for their RX series but other compacts.
Since the RX100 first came out, Sony has introduced a total of four updated models to market and hasn't discontinued any of them. Should you save a few bucks and go with less than the latest-and-greatest? Find out which one is the right fit. Read more
Late last year we asked you to vote on the outstanding products of 2015. We created four polls, covering lenses and cameras, including more than 50 products in total. With thousands of votes cast, and plenty of 'discussion' in the comments, we're ready to announce the winners! But the fun isn't over yet - now is your chance to vote on the winners and runners-up from each of the four categories, to determine the readers' choice award for best overall product of 2015 - click through to vote
Whether you're traveling the world or the next town over, having the right camera at your side makes all the difference. We've picked out our best bets for the photographer who wants to keep things simple by carrying a compact camera rather than one with interchangeable lenses. Read more
Apple's latest Digital Camera Raw update for its Mac OS X extends support to a handful of new and notable cameras, including the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 IV, a7R II and Leica Q. Read more
Photographer Trey Ratcliff is known for imagery that couples saturated colors with dramatic flair and cinematic subjects. Shooting HDR for nearly a decade now, his work has been featured on major networks and is even displayed at the Smithsonian Institute. Read our Q&A and take a look at more of his colorful work. Read more
Canon's EOS R, the company's first full-frame mirrorless camera, impresses us with its image quality and color rendition. But it also comes with quirky ergonomics, uninspiring video features and a number of other shortcomings. Read our full review to see how the EOS R stacks up in today's full-frame mirrorless market.
No Nikon camera we've tested to date balances stills and video capture as well as the Nikon Z7. Though autofocus is less reliable than the D850, Nikon's first full-frame mirrorless gets enough right to earn our recommendation.
Nikon's Coolpix P1000 has moved the zoom needle from 'absurd' to 'ludicrous,' with an equivalent focal length of 24-3000mm. While it's great for lunar and still wildlife photography, we found that it's not suited for much else.
As a stills camera the Fujifilm X-T3 is a pleasant update to one of our favorite APS-C cameras, significantly improving the autofocus. If you're interested in stills and video, though, it's knockout.
The Nikon Z7 is slated as a mirrorless equivalent to the D850, but it can't subject track with the same reliability as its DSLR counterpart. AF performance is otherwise good, except in low light where hunting can lead to missed shots.
What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.
Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.
Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.
Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Nikon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.
What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.
Keith Ladzinski is a wildlife and adventure photographer and filmmaker based in Colorado. In this interview he explains the background to his most recent project, and looks back at what's changed since he bought his first digital camera in 2004.
As a D750 owner and someone primarily concerned with still photography, DPR staffer Dan Bracaglia does not see a compelling enough reason to go Nikon mirrorless - yet. But that may not be the case for you.
Canon's EOS R, the company's first full-frame mirrorless camera, impresses us with its image quality and color rendition. But it also comes with quirky ergonomics, uninspiring video features and a number of other shortcomings. Read our full review to see how the EOS R stacks up in today's full-frame mirrorless market.
We spoke to wildfire photographer Stuart Palley about his experiences shooting the recent Woolsey fire, why the Nikon Z7 isn't quite ready to take a permanent spot in his gear bag, and 'that' Tweet from Donald Trump.
The Z7 presented Nikon with a stiff challenge: how to build a mirrorless camera that measures up to its own DSLRs and can deliver a familiar experience to Nikon users. Chris and Jordan tell us whether they think Nikon succeeded.
Nikon's D3500 may be an inexpensive DSLR, but the company didn't cut corners when it comes to image quality. See how it handled fall colors and tropical seas in our sample gallery.
Nikon has released firmware version 1.02 that resolves a flickering issue when scrolling through images, an ISO limitation problem, and an occasional crash that could occur when displaying certain Raw files.
DxO announces the latest update to Nik Collection (version 1.1) that brings better compatibility, fewer bugs to the plugin suite it acquired from Google a year ago
Nikon USA has announced that its Z6 full-frame mirrorless camera will be shipping Friday, November 16th at a price of $1999 body-only and $2599 with the Nikkor Z 24-70 F4 S lens.
The Insta360 One X is the company's latest consumer 360-degree camera, supporting 5.7K video, including excellent image stabilization, as well as 18MP photos. And, in our experience, it's a really fun camera to use.
Comments