The Sony RX100 VII is the company's latest pocketable 1" sensor compact. It uses the same 24-200mm equivalent F2.8-4.5 lens as its predecessor but features a more capable, easier-to-use autofocus system.
This comes in addition to the already impressive capabilities we saw in the Mark VI, including very fast continuous shooting and high-quality 4K video capture. And, for the first time in the series, the Mark VII has a mic socket for improved audio recording.
The Mark VII can shoot at up to 20 frames per second with no viewfinder blackout: specs that are a match for the company's flagship a9 sports camera. And it's this capability, along with the enhanced AF, that prompts Sony to talk about 'the power of an a9 in your pocket.' To be clear, though, it does not share its hardware with that model.
Key Specifications
20MP 1"-type stacked-CMOS sensor with phase detection and built-in DRAM
24-200mm equivalent F2.8-4.5 zoom
20 fps continuous shooting with full autofocus and auto-exposure, and no blackout
Seven frame, 90 fps 'single burst' mode
Retractable 2.36M-dot EVF with 0.59x equiv. magnification
3" touchscreen LCD (flips up 180° or down by 90°)
Oversampled UHD 4K video (up to 5 min clips in standard temperature mode)
Combined lens and digital 'Active' stabilization mode in video
High speed video at up to 1000 fps
Intervalometer
Wi-Fi with Bluetooth and NFC
The RX100 VII will be available in August 2019 at a recommended price of $1200. It'll sell for around €1300 in Europe and £1200 in the UK, with both figures including tax. These are around the same prices as its predecessor was launched at, so we expect to see the Mark VI get re-positioned, to make room.
What's new and how it compares
The RX100 VII looks like its predecessor but borrows know-how (though not hardware) from the pro-sports a9 model.
Magnar W, nah.. I guess it depends what are you main photography interests. If it's sport and action, maybe, it's better, but still not $600 better and I'm not sure that's the camera you would choose for action shots anyway. If $1200 isn't an issue, why not.. but objectively looking at what you get with the TZ200 vs the RX.. it's hard to justify the price diff. The Sony is better out of the box with the default settings, no doubt. In the Panny you'll have to change 3 values in the settings first. Also, I guess Sony has better quality control and it cost more. And yet, as a consumer, I'm not sure I care. I pay and get a product..not my concern how it is made.
I've never seen one of the newer $1000+ RX100mk XX in the wild or even in my local B&M non-camera store that sells electronics and cameras (they top out at the RX100mk3). They've priced themself into the botique market; it's hard to imagine them selling "well".
@HowAboutRaw - Thanks. So, $800 in 2001 is the equivalent of $1,155 today, adjusted for inflation at a rate of 2.06%. Not so different from the RX100 VII after all.
Well, do remember that at the end of 2001, a Sandisk 128MB CompactFlash card retailed for about $40, and after market batteries weren't exactly real common yet.
In a lot of ways the lens on that G2 (used on at least 2 other cameras) is better than the one on the Sony RX100 VII.
Now of course the Sony is a much more capable video camera, is much better above ISO 200, and has vastly better AF.
Magnar W LoL that proves nothing. Without seeing the original source and with the header blocked out that slide can mean anything, and sony and sony fans are famous for making up a context where they come out on top.
For example the header that's hidden on that chart could be all compact cameras that shoot 4K video and more than 7fps and have a sensor bigger than .9 inches released in 2018.
You have anything else that shows the Mark 6 is a #1 seller by units sold (not by $$).
Just looking at the amazons for the RX100 VI: #136 selling point and shoot in the USA, #54 "all in one" amazon UK #39 point and shoot amazon Germany #94 Compact and bridge cameras amazon France And in their hometown #81 Compact camera amazon japan
Looking outside the amazons according to BCN canon and nikon dominate fixed lens camera sales in japan with 60% of the market between them and sony only has 11%
@ keeponkeepingon: Well, talking about 1" compacts, and then comparing one new model with all types of cameras, with "statistics" from carefully selected sources doesn't seem more informative than the link I posted ... lol!
Akpinxit - The solution? Stop blowing up the image to 200% in Lightroom, set is as the desktop background on your 27" 4K monitor, and print out a crisp beautiful 8x10" for the office.
well , I haven't pay enough to Adobe , so my slyders reach only to 100% , nore to Dell - no 4K for me , but I"ll take your word that 8×10 print won't show grain noise on skies
It's quite easy to focus a smaller sensor with so much DoF. Not exactly a ground breaking achievement considering, the old Nikon J series focused like lightening.
I would love to see an RX100 with a fixed lens with an f/1 maximum aperture and some computational photography techniques such as image stacking. Such a camera would enter in the FF image quality.
Let me make it clear: DPR awards "Gold" status to a camera which by its own admission has:
Complex user interface Autofocus menu options appear complicated Low-light performance limited by 'slow' lens Default out-of-box settings don't encourage use of best features Lack of ND filter (limiting for video) Buffer is slow to clear due to UHS-I slot Touchscreen cannot be used to navigate menu/function menu Nowhere to mount a microphone No in-camera Raw conversion No external charger included Slippery camera body Tiny control points Pricey
We gave this a Gold award because no one has ever made a compact camera so able to capture action. That's a huge leap forward for, say, family photographers.
That has nothing to do with brand, it has to do with the fact it's a hugely capable camera. Some of our previous concerns have been addressed and the improved autofocus means you don't need to use the menus or fiddly buttons so much. So, overall, it's a clear Gold.
However, it does still have a number of irritations and flaws so we detail those, to let you assess for yourself whether they're more important to you than the overall capability.
I'm not sure that us highlighting the things that are still wrong is conclusive proof of us being brand biased.
Baloney. Without a pre-shot it means most pictures that matter are 1/2 second too late or you shoot a bunch of garbage you don't need hoping to catch that special moment.
Most of the major manufacturers (canon, panasonic, olympus, fuji) have some sort of pre-shot/pre-buffer, you call sony out nicely on the fact that it's missing in the video review but don't even mention it (unless I missed it) as a con in this review.
As a parent with a bunch of kids (and cameras), and having used some form of pre-shot since 2005 with casios "past movie" mode I'm not living without it again, especially at this price point and given what's available from the competition.
(edit: sony does have a pre-buffer for slow motion on this camera. Great but it's absent for stills and normal movies)
A good part of family action takes place indoors, especially in colder period of year. There the performance of such camera will be limited, especially in 5-digit ISO range.
"A good part of family action takes place indoors, especially in colder period of year. There the performance of such camera will be limited, especially in 5-digit ISO range."
Possibly, but inside family shots are typically going to be at shorter focal lengths so you would be shooting at faster f/ratio's. F2.8 is not too hateful.
It's already at F4 (equivalent to F11) starting from 40 eq. mm, which means that many indoor scenes (except for family gatherings) will be shot right there. On full frame I consider an F4 lens quite a bit slow for indoor shooting of people, often requiring 5-digit ISO values. On 1" sensor shooting like that will be simply meaningless...
Of course for outdoor shooting this camera looks much better, it's just about 1 stop slower than e.g. A6400 + 18-125 at roughly the same cost. It's quite a fair trade.
Using computational photography in this, would make it a big camera killer, whether DSLR or mirrorless. I guess they still want to sell their FF cameras. :)
So they're doing again the RX10 III trick: they released a camera with a super sharp lens, great IQ, unique in its market, therefore very expensive. Then they release a newer version, that fixes all the flaws from the previous one. It's like releasing a software with bugs that would be very slow and a year later you tell your customer to buy the new one if they're not happy.
I had the RX100 VI and still own the Panasonic TZ200. There are situations where the stabilization was really bad on the Sony, and I would get lots of misfocuses during concerts. True, the TZ200 is not as sharp, but considering the range and the difference in price, I'd rather do a little sharpening in PP.
So you're telling me the RX100 vii has a super sharp lens, great IQ, is unique in its market and is practically bug free? Those evil bastards. I know it's frustrating but a camera is hardware with lots of dedicated circuitry that can't be fixed simply by firmware, it often takes a hardware revision.
Though I got to agree Sony is tweaking the formula more often than most, maybe not every revision should have made it out the door. On the other hand you can see what happens when they have a gap like with the a7s III, the market goes nuts asking where is it can't you please get it out the door. You can't win.
I agree that the RX10II/IV do indeed have great lenses , the lenses in other Sony 1" cameras are not at all what I would call "super sharp". But as ever it is always a compromise of absolute best possible results vs size, weight and convenience . Though the fiddly controls do not suit my hands I must say that I have been quite impressed with the results from our RX100 V. The feature set packed into these tiny cameras is amazing
@larkhon I don't think any compact camera would really be that great for shooting concerts. You'd be much better off with a full frame mirrorless or DSLR.
I've never used a TZ200 but any camera boasting a 24-360mm lens would immediately put up some red flags. According to the DPR review on that camera it also has some issues with low light image quality.
@KjellRS: well, Sony has also a history of not fixing what was possible to fix via FW update and selling a new camera instead. I think I'd would have been ok if the new camera hadn't been released so soon after the first one, and if the price tag was $500.
@James Stirling: sure, I'd say it's very sharp compared to alternatives. For instance I had the Canon G3x and later RX10 III, there was a gap in IQ. Even to ILCs with superzoom lenses it's a step up.
@JPatrick: I'd use something bigger if I could but I'm not allowed (though I'll have to ask one day if they'd let me shoot as an amateur). From the crowd, you learn how to use those compact cameras to their full potential. The TZ200 is the best I've used so far. I started with a Panasonic LF1 with 1/1.7" sensor, and it's amazing what you can pull from those RAW files. With the TZ200 it's even easier and strangely it's a little bit sharper than TZ100 despite bigger range.
many? I don't see where you get those many delusions from (or is it because I dare to criticize Sony that I'm suddenly a troll?) but let's start with one then. Tell me why Sony didn't give the possibility to force PDAF on A7 mark I to get better performance from adapted lenses. The hardware wasn't the limit there, as the original A7 also had both PDAF and CDAF, so is it a delusion to say that they wanted people to buy the A7 II instead of improving A7?
I would say that is a generous interpretation looking at Dpreviews RAW lowe light samples even at very high ISO it is not even a stop behind . Though they are all just degrees of woeful to a low ISO guy like myself :-)
Those images are basically worthless, no one would want them. To me "high ISO" with sensors of these sizes is 1600-3200. Though I have seen properly-exposed 5000 ISO images from m4/3rds that used the full-frame (no cropping) and printed 8x10 which were perfectly acceptable.
@DeathArrow - for what it's worth, you can't use accurately crop factor for equivalence comparisons when noise or DR are concerned between different aspect ratios - you need to use area.
1" sensors are 116 mm^2. 4/3" sensors are 225 mm^2.
It's a compact camera and 99% of accessories would turn it into a non-compact camera. If you take away the pocket size and weight the camera doesn't make much sense, having the flexibility would be a nice extra but nothing more.
"But the RX100 VII struggles a bit in low light due to its limited maximum aperture."
That, plus an ISO range that essentially taps out at ISO 3200 and certainly ISO 6400. Shots taken at those ISO are pretty much worthless at full resolution. Sony should implement some computational photography technology for their Mark VIII to catch up to the Pixel 3 and Huwaei P30 Pro for low light capabilities.
I recently tried out the P30 and the IQ was not in the same ballpark as the 1" sensor, as expected. The P30 is still very impressive for what it is, but it can' compete with a real lens that goes from 24mm to 200mm and is tack sharp at the long end. I own a D850 and several other DSLRs and I work hard to keep ISO capped at 1600, just like the RX100 VI I shoot with. For hiking, travel, street, family and even sports, there is no cameraphone or sub-compact camera that can touch the RX100 VI for now. If I'm after low-light shooting, I prefer the Nikon Z6, well worth carrying.
@MrHollywood, excellent point re: IQ, because mobile sensors are so puny. But imagine if you applied the P30 technology for night shots, for example to the RX100's sensor as a menu option. I think it would be a category game changer.
on the front page of the review, there are several images of the camera, but none of the camera's back. On the body and handling page there is only one image that shows part of the camera's back. What happened to the days where you could easily find a clear image (front back, side, etc all together) of the camera being reviewed? On the operation and control page there is a picture of the camera's back. I know you want to jazz up the review with stylistic images of the camera, but how about some consistency to the review format. It would make comparing cameras across reviews easier.
Great review. Thanks for taking the time to put it together.
Just one request... could the sample/example shots in the reviews be a little longer?
It takes a second or so to know what you are looking at, then the edit immediately goes back to the talking head shot. There does seem to be time to show more/longer samples without extending the review.
Don't worry, we won't forget what Chris and Jordan look like :D I would just like time to focus on the excellent sample videos and photos when they are shown. (Of course I could rewind, pause, etc., but...). Thanks.
The colors of the new VII seems a regression vs the VI, the jpeg engine seems very similar to the canon, colors are quite similar, canon on the other hand seems to add less sharpening and less visible noise consequently, acctually i think canon's balance in terms of sharpening is the best of them. I prefer the colors of the VI and the panasonic, Dpreview could update the reference shot, since looking at the phase one IQ 180 the colors look more similar to the VI, skin colors at least. Which one is the correct?
The camera is amazing don't get me wrong but I think the "Value score" is too high. Sony has done a good job not overhaulings designs for each model to keep cost down as well as doing incremental software and computing improvements which keeps costs down and some of these improvements are incredible. However the camera's keep getting more expensive.
Maybe I am missing something but I think reviewers need to be more critical of these price increases. Just imagine if this camera was $700
Yeah, no matter how often we explain that the (faster to make) video reviews are in addition to the full, written reviews, we still see those comments.
The add-on grip adds almost nothing to the bulkiness but makes all the difference. But agree that a better grip and textured surface should be a no-brainer.
I'm pretty sure the choice for the surface is a design decision, not an affront to the few vocal guys on DPR that demand the opposite. As for adding grips, half cases and what not ... then better step up to a 6x00.
@pro photo, yes, sorry, i guess i didn't phrase it exactly as i had it in my mind, i mainly wanted to say that if the complaint is about size and grip mainly, you can choose a larger camera any day (as my "step up" - i just wanted to say about size). And as it will not be that pocket-able anymore, it can be even something as large (or small, as you see it) as a a6500 or something.
My answer was pointed at the general discussion, that is somewhat occurring, about the evil sony not wanting to add a textured body "against all reason" :)
The thing about this camera: It is capable of incredibly good photos, with excellent telephoto reach, superior to a smartphone; yet few will notice or take it serious enough to harass or call security on the user. Unlike those of us toting DSLRs or MILCs.
I was going to clarify AF since I figured it'd get mistaken for auto focus, due to this being a camera site. I meant the other AF (take a peek in Urban Dictionary) ;)
Ehh, there's some inconspicuous ILCs, my GX850 with a prime is not much larger (body is smaller really but lens adds some extra bulk) and it's got a pretty big speed advantage at mid-FLs... I love taking that thing to concerts because it looks like a P&S so it's never drawn security's attention...
I'd like to see Sony tackle an RX1000 or RX90, a slimmer and somewhat more pocketable RX100 for less money a la Canon's G9 X. That's just me tho, everyone has their sweet spot, we're spoiled for gear/camera choices despite a shrinking market, enjoy it while it lasts!
I fear if things take more of a downturn we'll end up reinventing the wheel down the line as high end cameras recede to the very high end and people start figuring out how to make phones even more versatile. 5+ years ago you couldn't even dream of this much sensor + reach in a compact TBH.
I too prefer the larger sensor in my a6000, especially in low light. I pull out the RX100 when I want to be inconspicuous (and absolutely silent). I can bring it places I could never get away with the a6000.
It makes me very happy that they continue to use the name "Cybershot." It's a callback to the time when anything labeled "cyber" was the coolest of the cool. Remember how the visionaries promised us that we'd be living in cyberspace via virtual reality and we'd be liberated from the boring day-to-day? The future, they said, was ours to command as we lived unimaginably glamorous lives on the internet.
Sadly, all that's left of that dream is a name painted on a compact camera that doesn't even shoot 3D, let alone virtual reality. But still, the name is cool so there's that.
@HowaboutRAW Is he aware of this? Probably so. Does he care? Probably not. Is it of any really importance? Probably not. Is it worth the extra? Probably not.
A large part of that is the fact that I'm following an erratic child. Also panning while walking is extremely tough to stabilize.
A more conventional video, say just walking forward, would fare much better. For example the first 10 seconds of the video where I'm walking sideways is pretty impressive, in my experience.
The jerkiness with the panning, the sudden shifts, isn't great, I agree. We'll try to do a 2-3 camera shootout vs the Canon and vs just optical stabilization. I'd also be curious how the stabilization performs vs a Google Pixel 3.
“We'll try to do a 2-3 camera shootout vs the Canon and vs just optical stabilization. I'd also be curious how the stabilization performs vs a Google Pixel 3.”
Would love to see this!
Maybe throw in the two new gimbals that are relevant for phones and small cameras as well - the DJI Osmo Mobile 3 and the Zhiyun Crane M2 (Though the Osmo Mobile 3 only supports phones).
I saw the Cameralabs video and it is quite jerky in it too- but maybe we are just getting used to a crazy nice level by other models- like AF, which has improved so much that what we used to call "great" is "mediocre" now.
P.S. One blunder, IMO, is not having any sort of rubber grip as a standard feature. I got the small AGR2 grip for $14, and it's a big improvement. Easy fix, but really should come with the body.
This is simply the best pocket camera available. The AF is on par with pro DSLRs, and it has 200mm of reach in a tiny package. The nearest competitor is the ZS200, which is known to have a less-than-sharp lens that's also much slower.
Sony has been killing it lately, while Canon and Nikon are still trying to compete with gen 3 cameras.
Most people have Gen 3 incomes so I think Canon and Panasonic will carry on whatever. Not sharp on DPR is probably sharp enough for most people. Where Nikon with their exclusively 1/2.3" sensor cameras come in to this is not clear but presumably they are making money as are probably Sony with HX although essentially driven off the cybershot forum. Chat volumes and sales volumes are not the same thing. Looking at average price of compact shipments on CIPA it is difficult to imagine that many of these extreme luxury end products are being shifted such that Sony are killing it. Of course the response to this is they are profitable high margin goods but then that means you are not getting much for your money.
very good rating system - this tiny sensor camera rating is higher then Fujifilm GFX 50S Review (!!!), Canon 5Dm3, Nikon Z6 and Z7, Nikon D7500 and many other aps-c and FF cameras... Bravo!
It's written directly above every scoring widget. The alternative is a system where, say, a Nikon D5 gets 95 and no compact ever scores higher than 30, even if it's the most capable compact camera ever made.
I'd break out the exclamation marks to ridicule that system, too.
Richard, this may not be the place to ask, but have you ever considered dropping the % rating and gold/silver awards. I just don't see that it adds anything other than stimulating arguments and inane comments trying to use that summary to compare cameras in completely different categories. And frankly, I'm much more concerned about how well or poorly a camera meets my needs than some numerical rating that would seem to be of limited interpretation. My camera got an 89 and yours only got an 87; mine's better. What does an 89% vs 87% mean? As a statistician, I'd say nothing.
"I'd break out the exclamation marks to ridicule that system, too."
Yes, definitely agree. It would make no sense to compare all cameras, regardless of type, with the same set of expectations. That wouldn't be helpful for consumers, who are usually looking for a specific type of camera, not just any camera that happens to get a high score.
Looks to me like the g5x II wins the image quality contest hands down. Much lower high ISO noise, a bit better in the ISO invariance test and when you throw in the considerably faster lens, it will be the IQ leader. Also note the lower right corner of the lens on the tested RX100 VII is pretty bad.
...So, I may not be alone when thinking that regarding IQ&Noise the score goes Canon > Sony RX-100 VII > Sony RX-100 VI, at least regarding these studio shots...
For people only interested in stills, the AF advantage for the Sony is negligible. And I would not want to sacrifice 4/3 stop of light for the 120-200mm range
Don't get me wrong: I think the new Sony RX-100 VII is the best all-around camera in this class, but that doesn't mean it also offers the best IQ&Noise performance among its peers - Unfortunately t seems you can't have it all...
I really think that "UHS-1 slot creates long buffer clears" belongs in the Cons list.
Sony purposefully segments its consumer lines with outdated SD interfaces, and 20 shots per second is only useful until your buffer has to write to SD.
You can keep shooting as the buffer is clearing. It didn't get in our way much when shooting stills only, but it does become a nuisance if you're trying to quickly switch to shooting video.
But you are just biased towards Sony. For stills, and if you don't mind a slightly larger compact camera, you can get the Canon G1X III for less money than this over-priced Sony, which will give you better image quality in daylight conditions as it uses the APS-C sensor from the EOS 80D - and it's waterproof
Well as someone who has owned a G1X II for the last 2 years and have left my camera out on a tripod on torrential rain for an hour shooting timelapse with the lens fully extended, I can safely say that it is rain proof, unlike this expensive toy
Well, keeping "common sense" in mind, it should be noted that no one review should be considered as an absolute. The one common denominator that should always be considered is the "human subjective" factor - that is, no two folks will see the same issues in the same light. I too was surprised at the gold rating, but hey...it is what it is.
What would be interesting in the long run, however, is to check other reviews of this camera by other sites and if they all agree that it's a high recommended camera, then perhaps, there may be something to this logic.
In the end, I personally (subjective, I know...) cannot see dishing out this amount of money for such a small (and limited?) camera. Others will differ of course, and that is why we have a wealth of choices when it comes to cameras on the market.
Now watch, some one-brand die-hards will take offense at my previous paragraph and feel they must respond. Again, that's life on DPReview... Who loves ya....I do!!!!!
"common sense" is in short supply these days. Great comment. I think one thing worth noting here about the price. Indeed, how high it is will likely exclude many people from considering it, certainly because you could get an extremely good quality mirrorless system for the same price. The question is: do you consider a mirrorless system as an alternative to the RX100 series? I suspect the answer is yes, for some, but not everyone.
Not everyone wants to deal with multiple lenses, or they want a smaller form factor that can 'do it all' -- and they're willing to sacrifice some IQ, DR, and pay more to get it.
The way I look at it, this camera is for those in that 'not everyone' bucket.
I think there is no absolute limit for the price as long as choice is a possibility. If i big amounts of money i would buy it, i just don't think it needs to be bashed by it's price alone, it's like bashing ferrari or any other super car brand.
Actually, I've long been an "enthusiast" camera admirer. It's just that now there are so many choices, in particular, among mirrorless options, that all of a sudden these very small, expensive all-in-one cameras seem less attractive. I know there will be many folks who disagree and who will purchase this (and other similar) model(s). There's certainly nothing wrong with that - after all, as I indicated, we have choices. I was speaking for myself in my post above.
Sony's ever higher RX price hikes made me lose interest in the line but there's a ton of people that simply don't wanna deal with an ILC under any circumstances... My RX100 sized ILC + a small 70-200 equivalent + a prime might be my personal preference (possibly yours too) but in the grand scheme it's not much cheaper and Sony has been advancing the state of the art on these things as fast or faster than any ILC model line.
Just playing devil's advocate, if we had 1" compacts with UWA lenses (RIP Nikon DL) I'd be very interested in them still, and in the concept of owning several of them rather than an ILC and a stable of primes. This breadth of choices is unprecedented and I don't think it's gonna last, just enjoy it IMO.
Impressively fast review after the launch. Is DPR a Sony ambassador already? This should be stated. It looks like this. So a 'gold' was awarded despite admitting:
Complex user interface Autofocus menu options appear complicated Low-light performance limited by 'slow' lens Default out-of-box settings don't encourage use of best features No ND filter for video Touchscreen cannot be used to navigate menu/function menu Nowhere to mount a microphone No in-camera Raw conversion No external charger included Slippery camera body Tiny control points Pricey
These look too many and too serious to me to deserve a 'gold'.
to be honest, the only 2 significant ones, from the list, are the absence of the ND filter and the lack of place to mount a microphone (after finally including the jack). The rest is more about preferences and/or limitations of the form factor.
Super-compact cameras are all about compromises in features and handling. The form factor means that the best in class could have handling issues or omitted features.
Sadly, no one has stepped up with a sharp 2XXmm-equivalent compact to dethrone Sony. I would welcome the competition.
I don't really see the lack of a place to mount the mic being an issue, anyway. If you're mounting a shotgun mic on your camera, you aren't really that concerned about a tiny form factor, so you can easily just attach a little auxiliary flash bracket (that mounts to the tripod thread) to hold it.
And that way you can even avoid the issue of having the mic blocking your flip-around display.
Huh? Many others got a review out faster. Heck Gordon did a review, a video review, a shoot out with the two new canons, and a clogging shootout with the two new canons all before preview got this out. Imagine how slow they’d be if they weren’t being from some mysterious backdoor deal :)
IIRC, most of the video's nits were around UI… lack of grip, over-sensitive shutter button, limited touchscreen functionality… but many other areas are super-impressive and class-leading, especially the AF and shooting speeds, which have a huge impact on the number of potential "keepers" in a shoot. This is a really impressive camera for its size.
„Default out-of-box settings don't encourage use of best features“
Didn’t you occasionally print articles like „Recommended Settings for Camera X“? For instance for an Olympus camera (certainly sorely needed)? Maybe publish this advice more often, as you do have a lot findings from your test, for instance for the Sony cam at hand?
And if you do, and if i have another wish (or 2), post a regular article, no slideshow or video.
Great idea! Especially - i think - that it doesn't require much extra time for the cameras you have fully reviewed at least. And maybe the manufacturers will change some defaults in the next models or through firmware updates or at least consider your input, as i doubt that they chose a defaults without any thought.
I recall reviews in the past where only "default settings" were used, which resulted in poorer performance than the camera was capable of. When comments said to change to the proper settings, DPR's response was it was impossible to use other than default settings for reviews. So was this camera reviewed at default settings or not?
I sold my Sony RX100iii around 5 months ago, my time carrying P&S cameras is over. For my personal needs my Mate 20 Pro phone is all I need for a take everywhere camera, I found the Sony just sat at home, and when I needed a 'real' camera I would take my full size rig. The incremental increase in quality and inconvenience of having to carry the Sony did not justify the cost.
I sold my rx100iii as well but not because I decided my phone was adequate (or even close). Instead I carry an a7iii with 35/2.8 ZA everywhere.
But now that the autofocus and video capabilities of the rx100 have come so far, the usefulness of this small camera becomes much greater (sports, children, etc.)
You say the Mate 20 Pro is all you need and I respect that and realize many others feel as you do. For me though, if I didn’t have an a7iii I would have held onto the mark iii or upgraded already because phone IQ is just not special enough.
You concluded: „... easier to operate, more reliable and perhaps most importantly, more enjoyable to use... Buttons are small and the camera's menus can be both dense and confusing to navigate“
The automation minimize need for button pushing. This is real usability. You can push buttons on most old cameras, but you cannot rely this much on the AF system with any competing camera. Snappy real time AF and point to select tracking at 20 fps with no blackout down to eye level focus. If you havent tried real time AF then I suggest you do it
Impressive detail with video, very close to a GH5. The price would have been worth it with 4k@60fps considering it for video vs a GH5, even if it would mean a significant crop. Most audience wouldn't be able to appreciate the faster frame rate but I do.
If video quality (and not controls and other features) is the main criteria, then it would make much more sense to compare this camera to something like Panasonic GX85, which is at least somehow comparable in size (still quite a bit larger, but much better controls, and half the price with two very decent kit lenses).
This year, plenty of amazing cameras, lenses, accessories and other products came through our doors. As 2019 winds down, we're highlighting some of our standout products of the year. Check out the winners of the 2019 DPReview Awards!
Comparing these three compact camera lenses head-to-head-to-head reveals the Sony to be more consistently sharp – at the cost of a lot of aperture offered by the Canons.
We've added the Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark III to our studio test scene comparison tool, so it's now possible to compare image quality between four of the top 1"-type sensor compact cameras.
Sony's flagship APS-C camera, the a6600, is a refinement of its predecessor and now includes industry-leading autofocus and battery life. But is that enough to earn it top marks? We think Sony could have pushed the boundaries a little further - find out how in our full review.
With the EOS M6 Mark II, Canon has taken its midrange mirrorless game up a notch. Offering the highest-res APS-C sensor on the market, 4K video, super-fast burst shooting and comfortable ergonomics, the M6 II is compact and a real pleasure to shoot with. Get all the details in our full review.
The Fujifilm X-Pro3's new viewfinder, new screen and titanium construction all make for an appealing camera, but perhaps only for a certain type of photographer.
Weighing in at just 249g, the Mavic Mini fits in the palm of your hand. You give up a few features in exchange for that tiny size, but we still found it to be a solid performer.
The Epson V600 is a reasonably priced scanner aimed at analog film shooters. It's fairly easy to operate and capable of decent image quality, but still easily bested by scans from our local photo lab.
Looking to get in on the instant camera fun? We tried every model and think the Fujifilm Instax Mini 70 strikes the right balance between price and feature - the Instax Wide 300 is our choice if you crave a larger format.
Long-zoom compacts fill the gap between pocketable cameras and interchangeable lens models with expensive lenses, offering a great combination of lens reach and portability. Read on to learn about our favorite enthusiast long zoom cameras.
Whether you're looking for a toddler-proof rugged camera or something for an older child learning about photography, we've identified several options that won't break the bank.
The holiday season is upon us. If you're looking for the perfect drone for yourself, or to gift someone special, we've selected a handful of models at every price point.
Looking to get in on the instant camera fun? We tried every model and think the Fujifilm Instax Mini 70 strikes the right balance between price and feature - the Instax Wide 300 is our choice if you crave a larger format.
The new Motorola One Hyper has a 64MP sensor in its main camera, and even the pop-up selfie camera produces 32MP pictures that can be display across the full area of the 6.5in screen.
The Thanksgiving break gave us a chance to take the Nikon Z50 on a tour of New Orleans. See how it did with both the kit zoom and the new Nikkor Z 24mm F1.8 S.
What better way to promote a phone than to shoot a commercial for it directly on the device. It's not the first of its kind, nor will it be the last, but as has often been the case, it's a fun watch from a blockbuster director.
The new Snapdragon 865 is more power-efficient than ever but continues to push the boundaries of mobile computing, especially in the imaging department.
Since launching in 2014, over 18 million aerial photographers and content creators have uploaded their work to SkyPixel. They are celebrating by giving away big prizes for their 5th anniversary.
Senior Editor Barney Britton's first choice for Gear of the Year is a camera that he has carried with him more than any other in 2019 (not including his phone) – the Ricoh GR III.
Chris and Jordan test the Canon EOS R with new v1.4 firmware to see how much it improves autofocus. TL;DR – if you use eye-AF, you'll want this update.
Google's latest update for Google Photos makes it possible to have conversations and share images with others directly from the service's mobile apps and Web.
Google has announced it's rolling out new features for its Google Photos mobile app that makes it possible to manually tag faces that aren't recognized (or mistakenly identified) by its AI system.
ZY Optics says the lens was specifically designed ‘to have one of the longest working distance for any super macro lens.’ It's available in eight mount options and retails for $499.
The fourth lens to debut in Panasonic's full-frame lineup is the 24-70mm F2.8. It's a popular and versatile focal range, and the company makes big claims of its image quality.
Facebook gets the Data Transfer Project moving by announcing the ongoing roll-out of an open-source tool that lets you move all your Facebook photos to Google Photos
A number of anti-virus programs have been flagging Nikon's software as a virus due to mistakenly identifying a specific installation file. Nikon has updated its suite of Windows software to correct this issue.
Comments