RX10 lens quality?

Started Oct 18, 2013 | Discussions thread
YiannisPP Senior Member • Posts: 1,641
Re: RX10 lens quality?

supeyugin1 wrote:

Rehabdoc wrote:

supeyugin1 wrote:

tbcass wrote:

supeyugin1 wrote:

Pentax Q 06 lens is not a superzoom, it's a 69-207/2.8 equivalent. Q7 has 1/1.7" sensor which is 50% bigger than typical superzoom's 1/2.3". I'll try to post the results later, when I'll have time to do the test shots.

That's different because it doesn't cover the 24-200 range of the RX10. People are interested in the RX10 like the wide to tele range all in one solution. A 1/1.7 sensor, while better than a 1/2.3, still can't compare to the 1" sensor in the RX10. A quick look at DXO shows the Pentax isn't in the same league with the Sony 1".


This one doesn't, but if you add 02 standard zoom, then it does with 23-69/2.8-4.5, and you can't go beyond 200mm on Sony RX10, while I can attach inexpensive 105/2.8 and have 480/2.8 equivalent. Also RX10 costs more than twice than Q7 with two lenses (currently $560), and is much lighter and more compact. RX10 is nice camera for sure, but not at $1300. I have R1 which I bought for $250 used few years ago, and I won't pay more than $500 for RX10.

It is one thing to dismiss a camera because it is priced well above your budget, another to dismiss why it might cost so much. This Imaging Resource Hands On Preview provides a good insight into that.

It sounds like a superb camera.

Yep, arguing something categorically costs "too much" only applies if nobody is going to buy at that price.

If this is the camera and size and feature set a person really, really wants to have, then he'll gladly fork over $1300 for the camera. Doesn't mean he's confused or misled. Just means that he can afford to part with $1300 a lot more easily than you can.

Personally I think the video features alone justify pricing it a lot higher than you might initially think is warranted.

Eventually other makers will enter this area to bring the price down with competition, but for now, there are plenty of people who will want to buy it even at $1300.

Will those "plenty of people" buy it at $10000? How about $50000? I have no problem buying in at $1300, but there are other options out there. It's not worth $1300.

To a third observer, it does seem like you are not listening to what other people are saying, i.e. that it's too much "for you" only. You've made up your mind already. No, nobody would buy it at 10K, but yes many people will buy it at 1300 (probably myself included and guess what, I'll probably have to buy it at 1500-1600$, as it's always more in Europe). Now while I realise that this is still too much money for a 1' sensor camera, I will still pay it. Scrap that, we don't know yet if it's too much money, as it depends on the lens. If it comes with a stellar lens then it might even be cheap. If the lens turns out to have serious flaws then you'd be right that it's too expensive. But you saying you wouldn't pay more than $500 for it (without even waiting to see the reviews) shows that you clearly don't know what you're talking about. This is just my opinion, just as your opinion clearly is that we are all fools for even thinking of paying this money, right?

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow