-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Sure ! The lens on the RX10 is a something to 72/2.8. So if you put a 24-70/2.8 on a FF camera and then crop to match what you get with the RX10, you're effectively shooting with an RX10-sized crop of the sensor, resulting in the same DOF and very similar noise. However, even cropping 36MP down that small leaves you with a much lower res crop than 20MP on the RX10.
- Dennis
Not at all. Set the f-stops as I mentioned. Set the shutter speeds identically. Set the ISO as needed. The DOF will be the same in all cases, and the noise in all cases will be similar because the larger sensors allow shooting at high ISO. (But you knew that !)
In other words, f/2.8 on a small sensor doesn't give you the same results as f/2.8 on a large sensor, because at identical exposure settings, it produces noisier images.
- Dennis
falconeyes
Senior Member
It is probably fair to compare the RX10 with an APSC SLR sporting a 18-270/3.5-6.3 superzoom. I guess (and hope for the RX10) the optical quality will be similiar.
The RX10 has a 24-200 F/7.6 equivalent zoom.
The APSC SLR has a 27-400 F/6.3-9.5 equivalent zoom. That's not as wide and probably about as fast around 200mm. But the RX10 slightly beats it if it doesn't need to be stopped down.
A D800 with a 24-120 F/4 can be cropped (using 13MP) to 24-200 F/4-6.7 equivalent zoom. So, it actually just beats the RX10, in a much larger and more expensive packet. Again, assuming the RX10 doesn't need to be stopped down. A side by side test of both options would be interesting. One may argue the D800 doesn't resolve the RX10's 20MP. But I din't hesitate to assume the RX10's lens doesn't either.
So yes, the RX10 is a unique proposition not easily matched by any alternative, if at all.
--
Falk Lumo
The RX10 has a 24-200 F/7.6 equivalent zoom.
The APSC SLR has a 27-400 F/6.3-9.5 equivalent zoom. That's not as wide and probably about as fast around 200mm. But the RX10 slightly beats it if it doesn't need to be stopped down.
A D800 with a 24-120 F/4 can be cropped (using 13MP) to 24-200 F/4-6.7 equivalent zoom. So, it actually just beats the RX10, in a much larger and more expensive packet. Again, assuming the RX10 doesn't need to be stopped down. A side by side test of both options would be interesting. One may argue the D800 doesn't resolve the RX10's 20MP. But I din't hesitate to assume the RX10's lens doesn't either.
So yes, the RX10 is a unique proposition not easily matched by any alternative, if at all.
--
Falk Lumo
Last edited:
falconeyes
Senior Member
There is no such thing as DOF equivalency, just equivalency.
Equivalency means that focal length, aperture f-stop AND iso are converted into their 35mm-equivalent values. All three! Equivalency also implies that the resulting images are then indistinguishable from the image taken with a 35mm sensor, for an ideal camera. Not converting the iso value breaks equivalency.
Read more about it here: http://www.falklumo.com/lumolabs/articles/equivalence/index.html
In more practical terms ... I regularly shoot hockey scrimmages with an f/2.8 zoom on an APS-C camera at 1/500s and get ISOs between 1250 and 3200.
The RX10 would not be a good substitute (ignoring handling issues & AF tracking performance) because I would not be happy with the high ISO results.
I am happy with ISO 1600 from the RX100 for the types of things I'm willing to shoot with it. And I'll go above 1600 in a pinch, knowing that I just won't be printing big. (I actually think it's better than my old Konica Minolta 7D at or above ISO 1600 - I avoided anything over ISO 1600 like the plague on the 7D).
- Dennis
The RX10 would not be a good substitute (ignoring handling issues & AF tracking performance) because I would not be happy with the high ISO results.
I am happy with ISO 1600 from the RX100 for the types of things I'm willing to shoot with it. And I'll go above 1600 in a pinch, knowing that I just won't be printing big. (I actually think it's better than my old Konica Minolta 7D at or above ISO 1600 - I avoided anything over ISO 1600 like the plague on the 7D).
- Dennis
How about an 18-135 or thereabouts. You're at f/8.6 equivalent at 200mm, so you've got a small edge to the RX10 at tele and a small edge to the APS-C lens at the wide end.
Otherwise, the rest holds true - the RX10 goes critically wider. I think this gives you roughly similar capabilities in terms of zoom range, DOF and low light capabilities. Then you get into cost, size, weight, handling, other features, EVF v. pentamirror (unless you go with a bigger, more expensive enthusiast class DSLR), optional extra lenses and so on. (Edit: I'm sure there's more to the RX10 than meets the eye, too ... silent shutter, supposedly excellent video capabilities and probably more).
The RX10 has some things going for it in that comparison, but I can't help feel that it's at least $300 too high.
- Dennis
--
Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com
Last edited:
C
cgarrard
Guest
Yep, I didn't like the focusing or the max magnification for macro at all. Two of its biggest weaknesses in my opinion.
C
cgarrard
Guest
C
cgarrard
Guest
I can't predict the future but I'm pretty sure that's going to happen
. May get a price drop before xmas by 150 bucks too. After xmas they will need to be sure and get them out fast, no more xmas shopping peeps!C
C
cgarrard
Guest
Lens is good, just watch the test results roll out. Some barrel at 24, but expected.
Heck yeah man, I think Cyber hit a home run on specs with this camera. Go Cybershot!
It will be just right for mine. I stick DSLRs in my camelbak all the time, but if you do road, yeah that could be too much to carry. At least its more compact than it looks in pics
.
H
Henry Richardson
Guest
My Minolta D7i (grandfather of the A2, A1 is the father of the A2) cost $1000 when I bought it in May 2002. That is $1300 in 2013 dollars. I don't recall the A2 price when it was new, but probably about the same.
C
cgarrard
Guest
C
cgarrard
Guest
SpiralTower
Senior Member
For me it is travel with the family. I want something versatile, responsive with reasonably good, or even great image quality (and now we get great video as a bonus!). Seems Sony delivered. RX100 was close, but lacking 24 mm, the longer end, and 2.8 permanent is great. Now we have just wait to see if the lens is top notch (from the size I would guess), and the weather-sealing is halfway useful.
Yep, thinking about that.
Regards
Funnily enough you mention this.
RX10 - FF equivalent 24-200/7.6
D5300 + 18-140 - FF equivalent 27-210/5.3-8.4
Pretty even, dont you think?
But of course, the D5300 kit has an OVF, 39 pt PDAF, VR, etc...
But if you could settle for D3200 + 18-55 + 55-200, you can have it all for 659 .
Nick Hiotis
New member
I am a long time f828 user. I am very excited to see that Sony finally decided to present a proper replacement for two of their legendary bridge cameras (f828, R1).
My experience so far says that there is no such thing as perfect camera. Even the most expensive DSLR's have their weaknesses, so what matters to me when buying a new camera is to get the most from the amount of money I am willing to spend. The lens of the Rx10 alone easily covers the camera list price, especially if we consider the large sensor included.
The only thing missing from this camera in my opinion is a GPS...
The two things I want to check before buying are the autofocus speed & accuracy and the high ISO performance. If no severe problems are found there, RX10 is definitely going to be my next camera.
My experience so far says that there is no such thing as perfect camera. Even the most expensive DSLR's have their weaknesses, so what matters to me when buying a new camera is to get the most from the amount of money I am willing to spend. The lens of the Rx10 alone easily covers the camera list price, especially if we consider the large sensor included.
The only thing missing from this camera in my opinion is a GPS...
The two things I want to check before buying are the autofocus speed & accuracy and the high ISO performance. If no severe problems are found there, RX10 is definitely going to be my next camera.
Last edited:
My biggest concern with big and/or quick price drops is it is indicative consumers do not find the expected value in the the performance. I'm a big believer in "you get what you pay for". I personally hope this camera is everything people hope for and more.
Manufacturers can always drop prices, suggesting initial buyers overpaid vs. expectations, but manufactures have a near impossible time to raise prices.... so if initial launch price holds for a very long time, it typically means initial buyers really got a deal.
Manufacturers can always drop prices, suggesting initial buyers overpaid vs. expectations, but manufactures have a near impossible time to raise prices.... so if initial launch price holds for a very long time, it typically means initial buyers really got a deal.
cgarrard wrote:
I can't predict the future but I'm pretty sure that's going to happen
C
--
http://www.photographic-central.blogspot.com (Gear reviews)
http://www.carlgarrard.blogspot.com/ (Best work compilation)
Also formerly AlphaMountWorld.com (Now off the web)
C
cgarrard
Guest
Take a look at the ISO test I did with the RX100II, same sensor. The RX10 has an improved processor so Jpegs should be a bit better- but we'll see. If you shoot raw, it's a gem of a sensor
.Loading…
photographic-central.blogspot.com
Carl
http://www.photographic-central.blogspot.com (Gear reviews)
http://www.carlgarrard.blogspot.com/ (Best work compilation)
Also formerly AlphaMountWorld.com (Now off the web)
Similar threads
- For sale
