Sony RX10. Pixel size and noise are holding me back from buying

Started Apr 6, 2014 | Discussions thread
OP MoreGooderPhotos Contributing Member • Posts: 873
Re: Your second thread? Time to give up.

Corkcampbell wrote:

You second thread? "Sensor thead dictated by the marketing department"? Hardly.

Clearly you don't understand what this camera is all about; as some at Sony have even said, it's designed for people who have needs such as journalists, with decent stills and much better-than-average video coupled to a fast zoom lens. I just spend a day using mine (and a DP2M) at a zoo/farm and think that the video capabilities are excellent - and I have a GH3 with some nice lenses with whitch to compare. The RAW stills are fine, as mentioned in various reviews. I've also used it at numerous indoor events with similar results; in fact, if it weren't for the 29 minute limit on recording, and a couple of my lenses, I'd sell my considerable stake in that format and be happy with the RX10, and DPX, to carry around.

Serious study of the information available on this camera indicate that the engineering department had much, much to do with this, leaving the marketing department with trying to push a camera that many would not understand. Tweaking the sensor and engine so that it could output non-line-skipping video, as well as making the lens focusing silent, creating a lens for that sensor that would add reach that would be sufficient for journalist-types in a portable, weather-sealed body, equiping it with wireless flash, adding audio capabilities almost unmatched in its range, at a price that is very affordable to those who understand what they're getting, etc., is quite an engineering challenge.

I paid $1150 for mine and consider it incredibly cheap for what it offers, and represents a bold move by Sony. Looking at it as some sort of stills-only bridge camera means missing the whole point. Many people require more than that now.


"Knowledge is good." Emil Faber

Good points.

Please don't think I'm trolling. I truly like the RX10, and have held it in my hands at a camera store and nearly bought it. My concern is that it could be so much better with larger, less dense pixels. I thought the pixel war had been replaced by the zoom war, but apparently not. I really do understand what Sony is trying to accomplish. I just wish they had abandoned the pixel war and made it even better.

I agree with the video capability. Videos I've seen online are stellar.

I'm sure the engineering department had their work cut out for them. The lens alone is a monumental achievement.  And that's the problem.  The sensor is holding the lens back.  Did they simply fit the sensor from the RX100ii just because it was available?  Or did they actually consider a different sensor?  We'll probably never know.  But just think of what it could have been.  It could have been less of a compromise than it already is if not for the silly megapixel war.

-- hide signature --

Sometimes I feel like 2/3'rds Rice Krispies. Past "Snap" and "Crackle" but just shy of "Pop".

 MoreGooderPhotos's gear list:MoreGooderPhotos's gear list
Sony RX10 IV Sony Alpha a7 II Sony FE 24-70mm F4 OSS Zeiss Batis 25mm F2
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow