Reading mode: Light Dark

M43 Body with 14-140mm II or Sony RX10?

Go to last post
phazelag

phazelag

Senior Member
Messages
3,568
Reaction score
1,178
Location
Hesperia, CA, US
I am in serious shopping mode and I am trying to take advantage newer technologies to carry less stuff. I am yet sure the quality of the Sony Lens, but I am giving them the benefit of the doubt that it will be good and allow more versatility as I could shoot low light sports, portraits with some decent Bokeh, and Macros.

All of this with 10FPS in a weather resistant, dust resistant body. I live in a windy desert so changing lenses is dangerous sometimes.

I currently have a GX-1 and the lab test and photos show the RX100 sensor (same as RX10) as being pretty dang impressive and coming very close to the GX-1 in noise at high ISO.

The RX10 doesnt have the reach of the 14-140mm, but there is room to crop at 20MP. Yes I know I will get lectured about cropping to zoom, but yes I do it.

I know the RX10 would be an investment where the lens would not go with me, but it is spec wise very far out front, and its cheaper than buying a body, a pany 12-35 and pany 35-100 for sure as it cost about the same as one of those lenses.

Let me know what you guys think.

Z
 
phazelag said:
I am in serious shopping mode and I am trying to take advantage newer technologies to carry less stuff. I am yet sure the quality of the Sony Lens, but I am giving them the benefit of the doubt that it will be good and allow more versatility as I could shoot low light sports, portraits with some decent Bokeh, and Macros.

All of this with 10FPS in a weather resistant, dust resistant body. I live in a windy desert so changing lenses is dangerous sometimes.

I currently have a GX-1 and the lab test and photos show the RX100 sensor (same as RX10) as being pretty dang impressive and coming very close to the GX-1 in noise at high ISO.

The RX10 doesnt have the reach of the 14-140mm, but there is room to crop at 20MP. Yes I know I will get lectured about cropping to zoom, but yes I do it.

I know the RX10 would be an investment where the lens would not go with me, but it is spec wise very far out front, and its cheaper than buying a body, a pany 12-35 and pany 35-100 for sure as it cost about the same as one of those lenses.

Let me know what you guys think.

Z
Click to expand...
GX7 with 14-140 is lighter and much more flexible, also has silent shutter and 40fps! The video will be much much better on GX7 and in addition you can also go light with GX7 and a prime, 20/17/25/45 what ever takes your fancy and the 100-300 if required or go wide, unlimited options, RX10 is an expensive heavy bridge camera, iq does look decent though and 2.8 at 200mm is impressive for sure, but about the same dof, iq as the 100-300 @its 100mm setting? ie F4. Personally I think this is a mistake for Sony, but we'll see.
 
Advent1sam,

I see what your saying, but you kind of made my point by listing off all of those lenses. The 100-300 is a very limited lens. All of those options are great if you want a complete system, but I am thinking about a single camera that I can grab and go with and make some nice images.

Thats why I mentioned the 14-140mm Mrk 2 as one fellow poster just did a great review of that multipurpose lens. I am comparing the Sony against the that lens and a body. I have considered what you said, because I do have a bunch of nice primes for my GX-1 and I could throw one in a pocket, but I really am getting old and lazy, and I am currently in the mood I should say for a camera I can grab and go and get most things done with.

Z
 
Last edited:
I've had similar thoughts, along with a local friend who uses a NEX system for travel. I did some calculations and the weight of the RX10 and my (relatively heavy) m4/3 GH3 with my 14-140 lens are identical at 1.79 lbs. Some pros and cons:
  • RX10 goes wider (24mm), GH3 with 14-140 goes longer (280mm)
  • GH3 accommodates other lenses
  • RX10 has more megapixels, I believe
  • RX10 lens is faster (though the GH3 will accommodate my two f/2.8 lenses)
  • GH3 has a larger sensor so in theory should behave better at high ISOs -- making f/2.8 less necessary (it's likely not needed for my daytime shooting anyway).
My conclusion is that if I'm really entranced with the RX10 I'll sell my two Panasonic f/2.8 lenses to pay for it (I don't use them often anyway, given the quality and convenience of my, new model, 14-140).

I have two upcoming vacations -- cruise to Hawaii and week in Arizona -- before the RX10 will become available and reviewed. I plan to fully wring out my GH3 system and reconsider after that. I've had the GH3 and lenses since early this year, but some unexpected open-heart surgery and recover limited my use of it until recently -- so it's like a new toy :-)

--
Phil
 
Last edited:
phazelag said:
Advent1sam,

I see what your saying, but you kind of made my point by listing off all of those lenses. The 100-300 is a very limited lens.
Click to expand...
While we need a better replacement for the 100-300, don't discount it. I got some very nice whale shots of Maui in 2011 using it on a GH2 which I could not have achieved at 200 mm with the RX10.
 
phazelag said:
I currently have a GX-1 and the lab test and photos show the RX100 sensor (same as RX10) as being pretty dang impressive and coming very close to the GX-1 in noise at high ISO.
Click to expand...
I have the RX100 II (which should have the same sensor as the RX10) and the GX7 which has an improved GX-1 sensor (I think). I'd say at high ISO / low light situations the GX7 will have a 1- to 1.5-stop advantage. As far as dynamic range goes, I think they're close enough to be considered equal. I'm very impressed with the RX100 II's dynamic range (I shoot raw btw).
phazelag said:
The RX10 doesnt have the reach of the 14-140mm, but there is room to crop at 20MP. Yes I know I will get lectured about cropping to zoom, but yes I do it.
Click to expand...
Sony did a great job with that 1" sensor and the lens. I've done some rather serious crops from my RX100 II which have held up very well. So I definitely think you will have some cropping latitude with the RX10.




This is a heavy crop. I took off 40-50% of the original image's height and width.

phazelag said:
I know the RX10 would be an investment where the lens would not go with me, but it is spec wise very far out front, and its cheaper than buying a body, a pany 12-35 and pany 35-100 for sure as it cost about the same as one of those lenses.
Click to expand...
Investing in cameras is a losing proposition unless they're going to be collector's items. Think of it, instead, as investing in enjoyment and memories. Buy whichever camera will make you happiest.

As micro four-thirds shooters, we're already headed down that path. We've given up absolute image quality in exchange for convenience and the practical advantage of having the camera with us more often.

IMO the RX10's maximum usable ISO will be 1600 (based on using my RX100 II and its raw files). ISO1600 with an f/2.8 lens can cover a lot of low light situations. If you need to shoot in a scenario with less light than that, then consider the GX1 and a fast prime.

Oh, another thing: my GX7 focuses much faster and more accurately than the RX100 II. This difference _might_ also apply to the GX1 and RX10. It's something you might want to try if you manage to get to a store where you can handle both cameras.

Also, the RX100 II has a very annoying habit of using 1/30 sec a lot, and there is no way to adjust that min. shutter speed. So I've lost more than a few photos because I wasn't paying attention to the chosen shutter speed. In contrast, my GX7 (and my other Panasonics) were better at utilizing the 1/focal length rule for picking shutter speeds. Hopefully the RX10 uses a similar algorithm or lets the user specify the min. shutter speed. It's another thing worth checking out in-store.
 
You really have me thinking. Thanks
 
There is no M43 lens that remotely comes close to what the RX10 lens can do, and there never will be. If that's what you want and need, a one body + lens solution that can handle everything well, and has very good IS, pretty good stills and excellent video as well, just get the RX10 and forget about it.
 
I've always been a fan of superzoom cameras and lenses. I have a Panasonic FZ200, a small sensor camera with 25 to 600 mm (equiv) f/2.8 lens. It's done quite well for me in good light. In fact, the biggest problem is that I tend to zoom out so far that atmospheric effects come into play (I live near the Pacific Ocean and often shoot while walking along the shore or above the shore).

So the RX10 is an attractive package, though a bit lacking in reach :-)
 
I own an Olympus XZ1 and Panasonic LF1 already and I really want a larger sensor as my main camera and the RX10 looks great. We have so many options it's easy to get caught up and currently I am having fun getting caught up!
 
I have the Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm f3.5-5.6 on my OMD-E-M1 and have been quite impressed with its versatility, sharpness, smoothness, AF acquisition speed and accuracy. I think we may be talking about the same lens, if not forgive me in advance. It's the ideal "one lens band" for your application. I looked at the RX10 also, before I bought this combination and wasn't quite as impressed and ended up walking out the door with my combo. If you can, take both your back and lens with the RX10 outdoors and spend a couple minutes comparing the two. I suspect you'll agree that the 14-140mm is the better choice.
 
I am guessing the quality of the 14-140 version 2 is higher quality than the RX10 lens by some degree, but like to take portraits outdoors at 200 and F2.8 for bokeh, what it the maximum aperture of the 14-140 at 100mm or 200mm equivalent? If it's still f4 that could be good enough.

Thanks
 
TJer said:
I have the Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm f3.5-5.6 on my OMD-E-M1 and have been quite impressed with its versatility, sharpness, smoothness, AF acquisition speed and accuracy. I think we may be talking about the same lens, if not forgive me in advance. It's the ideal "one lens band" for your application. I looked at the RX10 also, before I bought this combination and wasn't quite as impressed and ended up walking out the door with my combo.
Click to expand...
Where did you find an RX10? Adorama says " AVAILABLE FOR PRE ORDER NOW! Estimated Ship Date; December 1, 2013" and B&H something similar.
 
phazelag said:
I am guessing the quality of the 14-140 version 2 is higher quality than the RX10 lens by some degree, but like to take portraits outdoors at 200 and F2.8 for bokeh, what it the maximum aperture of the 14-140 at 100mm or 200mm equivalent?
Click to expand...
Appears to be about f/5.4
 
PC Wheeler said:
TJer said:
I have the Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm f3.5-5.6 on my OMD-E-M1 and have been quite impressed with its versatility, sharpness, smoothness, AF acquisition speed and accuracy. I think we may be talking about the same lens, if not forgive me in advance. It's the ideal "one lens band" for your application. I looked at the RX10 also, before I bought this combination and wasn't quite as impressed and ended up walking out the door with my combo.
Click to expand...
Where did you find an RX10? Adorama says " AVAILABLE FOR PRE ORDER NOW! Estimated Ship Date; December 1, 2013" and B&H something similar.
Click to expand...
 
I too have been a fan of superzoom cameras, my first was the Sony H1 I was very impressed even then with sony optics, I think the RX10 will appeals many people given the flexibility of the lens and aperture. I must admit I have a bit of camera purchase disorder, I love trying out new cameras and new technologies. (Which I have been slated for I know)

i have had my rx100 now for almost a year now the longest I have owned a camera and it still amazes me that's why I am interested in the rx10 hopefully the overall performance of lens, sensor and processor will make it a winner ?? I think it is overpriced for what it is hopefully will drop in price slightly in the first 6 months or so !

i probably will buy one but not at launch price, but for now I have Panasonic G6 with 20mm f1.7, good sharp copy of the 14-45mm and the 45-150 mm lens, so far I am very impressed with image quality of all 3 lenses and for now with the rx100 as a portable back up I am happy. Hooraaa. I look forward the match between the rx10 and the olympus stylus 1 another interesting camera.

sorry for the rambling but it's an interesting thread.

leew
 
PC Wheeler said:
TJer said:
I have the Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm f3.5-5.6 on my OMD-E-M1 and have been quite impressed with its versatility, sharpness, smoothness, AF acquisition speed and accuracy. I think we may be talking about the same lens, if not forgive me in advance. It's the ideal "one lens band" for your application. I looked at the RX10 also, before I bought this combination and wasn't quite as impressed and ended up walking out the door with my combo.
Click to expand...
Where did you find an RX10? Adorama says " AVAILABLE FOR PRE ORDER NOW! Estimated Ship Date; December 1, 2013" and B&H something similar.
Click to expand...
 
Not sure about the size, weight and cost, but my GH3 testing in the last week has given me new love for the quality of the RX100 sensor, lens and image processing engine, so I'd suggest seriously considering the RX10... (Plus I was using lenses much sharper than the 14-140.)
 
Last edited:
honeyiscool said:
There is no M43 lens that remotely comes close to what the RX10 lens can do, and there never will be. If that's what you want and need, a one body + lens solution that can handle everything well, and has very good IS, pretty good stills and excellent video as well, just get the RX10 and forget about it.
Click to expand...
Has anyone actually tried the RX10 yet? I ask because the stabilization on my RX100 II is pretty under-whelming. Other RX owners have said the same thing. So at this point, I wouldn't feel confident about saying the RX10 has very good IS. At least not unless some reviewers have been coming to that conclusion.
 
phazelag said:
Yes I know I will get lectured about cropping to zoom, but yes I do it.
Click to expand...
I see nothing wrong with cropping to zoom .. in fact, I always keep just the center 25% of the (full) frame with m4/3 ;-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top