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.
Shame Sony... I thought for my vacation about V, VA or VI. Than VII....and you not change most important things! Wow, how can you make this stupid decisions? People want better quality, longer time and what? Battery is worst, no longer time for video (5 minutes really? Even my old phone Lumia can record full live concert) still 30 frames, not 1.8 like in V, no ND filter and price is higher. For what? Af? Is really hard to make 24-120 or 135 mm with 1.8? 4k 60? Bigger battery? No overheating? 200 we had. 70 we had... 30fps we had... And so big overpriced. As i like Sony i'm really, really dissapointed. What to do now? Buy mark 5 or 6400 for vacation when the prices goes down? I will give you a tip. Mark 7A as fast as possible.
I take note of what several people have already mentioned: How does IQ (and low-light IQ) at the normal and zoom focal length regions compare with the IQ flagship smartphones of today? Because the chances are your smartphone will always be in your pocket or somewhere close. After all, it makes calls, connects to the internet, navigates you, etc. and is more likely to have frequent feature updates. Does the IQ justify spending the extra EUR 1300 AND having to carry an extra thing around? Or should the EUR 1300 be invested in and APC or FF product (possibly with a crappy kit lens, though)? Don't get me wrong, Sony is admirable for its push of innovative products. But how far is this product from the top-tier of smartphones?
I still have my IV version and I hope it never breaks. The 24-70 lens is an f/1.8 to f/2.8 which makes it good in low light situations. Excellent optical quality, but I don't know how it compares to the 'best' smartphones. Overall the camera is more versatile for taking pictures.
I'm disappointed in the direction Sony have taken the RX100 series with the Vi/VII
The increased focal has been at the cost of lens speed - this lens is f/4 from about 40mm, so not really usable indoors. And we've lost the ND filter.
Sony never even updated the viewfinder in the RX100VA, which came out after the RX100VI.
One positive thing about this camera is that Sony have at least decided that they can't keep increasing the price of new releases - it's the same price as the RX100VI. And the mic jack - but I really want the mic jack and improved viewfinder on an RX100 camera with a fast lens.
I see a lot of sniping on here, mocking the AF spec and price... but I'll throw a little shade on that in one small aspect. I have witnessed a plethora of soccer mom's & dads with the typical off the shelf DSLR combo with long tele slow Fstop kit lens (which probably has never been off the body) on the sidelines (yeah, Rebel's and D5xxx's) that would probably go home with equal or better shots from this camera with the accurate and fast AF. A bigger sensor doesn't matter a hill of beans if the shot is out of focus. This might accomplish that mission for them, all while being pocket'able and not have to lug the DSLR and they'll be happier for it. Sony is crazy like a fox.
I think people are blowing the AF out of proportion. I used an A55 with an old Minolta 80-200 F/2.8 lens almost a decade ago, and NEVER had the AF problems you mention. I remember using my friends T2i also and again NEVER had the AF problems you mention, and in those cases the DoF was shallower and the lenses were longer.
The other thing you need to consider these days is smartphones with wider DoF, the new ToF focusing, and 5x optical zooms (10 on the way). No soccer mom is going to want tp spend $1200 on something her smartphone does. And you need realize, many think their smartphones take better pictures because they only view them on 5 inch screens and they have all the latest AI and filters to improve them.
A Nikon D5500 with AF-P 70-300mm VR is less expensive, has excellent AF and has way better image quality and waaaaay better ergonomy. I has RX100 VI and have used 1" sensors since Nikon 1. Now I have Panasonic LX15. 1" sensors are good but are no match for even m43 sensors, let alone APSC. I was expecting Sony to introduce at least slightly bigger body for handling ergonomy but no, same tiny buttons and slippery and small grip.
Have you ever tried to shoot a soccer game with a phone that has a 10x optical zoom? No evf? Shutter lag? I love my camera phone and its use had extended into many areas of my photography. Yet not birds in flight and other types of photography requiring a long zoom and speedy, accurate AF at distance.
Horse waste talk, people have been getting focused picture long before the a9 af. Modern tech makes life easier, but to say people can't take in focus shot before Sony a9 is a joke. I shot d40 with 18 200 in full auto mode in 2008 or 2010 for my soccer team I was playing on, and I wasn't into photography. Sure there are some out of focus, but most were in focus. Yeah try to zoom in and out fast with a p&s camera, too many influencers on here.
Of course, but then it will cloud or the afternoon will fall and you will need at least 1/200 speed to freeze the children's action, and that with an f4.5 is an ISO minimum of ISO1600, which together with a sensor 1 "in a low light situation ... Better buy an A6300 + 18-105mm f4 for less money and get a better IQ, enjoyment of use and a perfectly reliable locking AF and AFC. More than f2.8 with a 1" sensor is an important limitation, that's why I returned RX-10 MkIII and I still have my Rx10 MKI, half of ISO is quite remarkable.
Guys, I answered OP's comments. Pocketability, 16mm etc... isn't important in that context. He said Rebels and D5XXX cannot rival RX100 VII for soccer mums and I gave an example which actually will yield better results. Canon also has similar kits with which you will have better results than RX100 VII. Please stick to the point.
From OP "on the sidelines (yeah, Rebel's and D5xxx's) that would probably go home with equal or better shots from this camera with the accurate and fast AF."
Nobody said they cannot get the shot. That's you speaking. And I know you know better.
That 70mm is also super restrictive when you want to take the shot of the whole field or you want to take the shot of your kid after the game. What's that? Stand 5m back to fit? Oh, with frineds, stand 8m back. It's a good thing it's not crowded and everyone is patient and full of understanding for you.
That's why people buy 18-135/200 and those lenses are hardly super IQ lenses. Just like RX10IV - there is nothing like it really. Closest thing is D500 and Tamron 18-400 with bleh quality.
otto k: There is actually a full stop difference between an 18-135/3.5-5.6 on APS-C and this F2.8-4.5 on 1" (in equivalent terms). The difference might be actually even bigger in middle of the range, as the RX100 VI/VII lens dims faster than a typical 18-135mm APS-C zoom. For example, the RX lens is at F4 at 50mm eq., while the Sony 18-135mm is at F4.5.
You still assume the lens on RX100 VII is quite perfect and 18-135mm of similar lenses on DSLRs suck. Well, they don't. Newer 18-135/140mm lenses are actually very good optically and they focus quite fast. Canon 18-135mm STM and USM, Sony 18-135mm and Nikon 18-140mm are really good performers. In fact I coul use Canon 18-135mm USM at the widest aperture quite happily. This RX100 VI camera has 1 big thing: Size. This is both good and bad. The rip on RX100 series is so bad that you will feel cramped after some time. And the grip is too slippery and smooth. These are all negatives for telephoto shooting (i.e. what soccer mums would need). For telephoto action shots, proper sized DSLR/mirrorless cameras are still better ergonomically. Plus, AF of D5500/800D are really good. Or Sony A6300 + 18-135mm. The OP talked about performance, not size.
@ozturert: After your post I got really excited. I got a Nikon D5500 with AF-P 70-300! Now it doesn't fit in my pocket, nor does it take wide angle shots. What should I do now? Please advice!
sure the sony AF is better but i always shot with central point so the difference is not so much. Soft images? sure you have never used some premium lens. I've the 32mm and the 70-300 and they are fantastic lens. The real problem of the V3 is the sensor, the J5 is better but sure this sony is another level
I'm not saying that nikon 1 is better, only that nikon 1 was one of the most underestimate system. With a new sensor and a native fast 24-70 I think that will be great. But nikon was The first one to not believe in it
The Nikon 1 AF was shockingly good - nobody can say if it's better or not than the RX 100 VII that hasn't been tested yet, but it was very good and had zero competition in that regard until the RX 100 V. When the original V1 came out, professional review sites were using the D3 as the closest comparison for AF performance. To be fair though, sharp focus is much easier to hit with the huge DOF from a 1" sensor.
The 1 system had many issues, primarily marketing and lens selection, but AF and speed were always unmatched. Nikon was using on-sensor PDAF years before it became commonplace, and their first go at it (the V1) was pretty amazing in 2011.
The G5X Mark II will have a low light advantage of 1 stop over the focal lengths that overlap. The built-in ND filter is also useful for outdoor video. Sony will have the long end and C-AF advantage.
It will come down between preferences, lens sharpness and video quality.
Unfortunately, both G7xiii and G5Xii have CDAF, so does LX100ii (despite being 2 stops brighter than RX100Vii). What a huge disappointment for compact 1" in 2019! No doubt these camera cartels are tacitly colluding on specs to make sure consumers want the next camera. It'll be a matter of time before smartphone takes over.
Interesting. My phone which has a nicer touchscreen, and does just about everything this camera does AND has an IPX rating. I've seen people drop theirs in the water with no issue. Another reason to get one of the latest phones instead.
Because your virtually same thing is for totally different purpose. Some of big differencec: * 200mm is a lot better than 125mm * 1" is better than 1/1.7" * tilting screen - shooting horizontally at ground level * VF (usable even at bright sun light also for reviewing pictures) * replacable depleted battery * SD card as a medium etc.
This is like saying APS-C and full frame are the same or like saying that a pancake lens is the same as a Zeiss lens. You can take pictures of the same scene but have very different results.
Reall - while I agree you can't compare, the P30 Pro has a very capable zoom for a mobile phone camera - 5x optical zoom is not "a joke" but actually useful.
Henrikw, I do not look at my photos on mobile phone. I always judge them on a monitor and I can see the differences even without zooming. If you look at them only on your phone than maybe you would be happy with the P30Pro.
The problem is that it is all or nothing - at 5x zoom it's decent, at 4x it's tiny crop from wide angle camera and it looks terrible. It needs another intermediate fl.
and that's fine - you use the P30 pro within it's limitations and get a great result for what it is. One of those is not to use the zoom within the increments that uses digital zoom. You have to treat it like 3 primes and know the limitations of each. It's a great package in a mobile phone regardless.
A skateboard and a motorcycle are virtually the same thing! An inner tube and a jetski are virtually the same thing. A kite and an airplane are virtually the same thing. Depending on how one defines: virtually.
@fireball51 - all right... that is the reason why I sell my RX100 iv and bought a P30 Pro. Last one is much more pocket-able and delivers excellent photos. The 0,66" sensor is nearly as good as the 1" from the RX100. And Sony's RX100 is unable to send raw-data to any smartphone. But Raw Date is the only advantage of every RX100. If I can't play with raw-data then a P30 Pro is better in some situations. The P30 Pro delivers great landscapes and panorama. The RX100 iv was unable to do this. The panorama-mode is crappy of any RX100. And now you get a f/2.8 lens in a RX100. The P30 Pro got a f/1.6 lens. Are you sure that 1,0" sensor is better??!! If you zoom in you got a f/4.0 lens. Have fun in dim light. The P30 Pro manage to shoot 10 images in a row an delivers 1 sharp image by combining the 10 ones. Any RX100 can't do that. Sony forgot to add this feature. Even any Sony smartphone can't do this. Sony forgot it. Simply like this.
A P30 Pro is waterproof. I can use it by doing sport. I can use it in the rain. I can use it in any situation. The RX100 are sitting down at home. And the battery is terrible. So don't tell me how good a RX100 is. And pocket-able??? How big are your pockets??? I own a Ricoh GR3, too. This one got an aps-c sensor and is more pocketable. The Ricoh got a better image stabilizer as the sony. Try to take pictures with 1/2 or 1/4 second! Completely unable with a RX100. But you can do it with a Ricoh GR3. The Ricoh GR3 are able to send raw data to my P30 Pro or to any smartphone! This is a killer-feature. You can edit it with Photoshop Express and / or Snapseed. It is fun to do so. Lots of possibilities.
Better then any 1" sensor. And what will I do, if I leave my Ricoh or Fuji E3 at home??? I use my P30 Pro. Very good pictures! But where is the place for a RX100? Small sensor, crippled by terms of any smartphone, bad battery, not waterproof, bad image stabilizer, now slow lens, no ND filter like a RX100 iv, massive costs, ..., ... but... ok... maybe a traveling camera. Hmmm... get a Fuji E3 with a 18-55mm f/2.8-4.0. Better IQ and nearly half the price if you get it 6 month old and used. I don't see the market for this overpriced 1" Sony
Interesting strategy. The real competition is smartphones cameras. The 200mm zoom is definitely harder for smartphones to incorporate, while the advantage of 1" sensors are diminishing when you have multiple sensors and algorithms on smartphones (especially with Google Pixel) that get better images computationally.
Oh well, maybe computational benefits in VIII? I know Sony only bought that company specializing in computational a couple of months ago, but I was hoping for speedier addition of such technology. (Great camera though.)
There may be one other market segment that you didn't think of: People (such as myself) who don't want to carry around bigger cameras anymore. Even tiny mirrorless cameras need 2 or 3 lenses to make good use of them. The RX IV in my case has such a terrific image quality that it's good enough for me to leave the large camera at home unless I go to a wedding or such. Now with the longer lens and hopefully better stabilization, there's even less to make me take my camera bag with me. The only thing I really miss is ultra WA, but for that I use my phone which is not a good quality but at least I have it alway on me. Kudos Sony and keep improving these little marvels!
It comes down to how much you want to spend and how big you want to carry. I always have my backpack on vacation so I don't care carrying my aps-c mirrorless with 2 or 3 small lenses.
For 1200$ you could get a nice x-E3, x-t30 or a6400 combo. Of course none of these options are pocketable.
@Tomasz Yes, that's quite true about the backpack. I use a small one a lot on vacation. Along with the usual important stuff it holds a Canon200D with Tamron 18-400 lens permanently on it. (People are forever asking what's that camera?) For quick shots (or for when no backpack), I have a compact on my belt.
As with most marketing it’s more important to check what isn’t mentioned vs what is shouted to draw attention. So no mention of 4K-60, recording time or battery life improvements simply means: just like or worse then a few years/Generations ago.
If Sony had an APS-C compact with this camera’s AF and a fast 24-70 mm equiv lens, plus the great controls of the Panny LX 100, I’d get one, even for more money. I’m not interested in the smallish all touch-screen controlled philosophy of this camera, for 1,200+; my iphone already is that camera.
My question is ... Why? I try to find the target audience of this camera, but I can't find it. It is evident that a sports shooter cannot work with this body or with this type of EVF, the AF of the RX100 VI was extraordinary and more than enough for any shooting situation except perhaps extreme sports, then .... I imagine a walkarround photographer walking and suddenly, look !, an F1 GP !, thankfully I carry my rx100VII in my pocket. Or that father shouting at the football game to his five-year-old son, come on! faster! I am not taking advantage of my toy, this could capture it with a contrast AF .... It seems absurdly unnecessary. If they had at least placed an f1.8 in the wide angle (even if it fell to f4 and 26mm), there would be more shooting options with light time.
I find the option of Canon with the 24-120mm f1.8-2.8 more interesting, although without a doubt the compact par excellence is LX100 for pleasure of use, IQ and real lens speed throughout the range. Do not fool ourselves, as owner and ex-owner of 4 cameras with 1 "sensor (Rx100, Rx100III, RX10 and FZ1000) I have to say that although the 1" "sensors are not bad", they do not give more , there is no better IQ, there are no improvements in high ISO performance, there is no better DR, there is no progress, the only way to improve the IQ would be with a faster lens.
True, one inch is no longer a large sensor for any type of camera, that was the case in 2012, but now we are in 2019 and 1 "is the standard, Sony RX1R, Leica Q, Fuji X100T, Fuji X70, Fuji XF10, Ricoh GR, Panny LX100 .... I think we have to change the chip of what is a large sensor for a "compact" camera now.
@nzmacro, no, it does not make sense and point, no objective shooter of this camera needs the improvement of AF between RX100VI and VII, or 90 fps without blackout (and with a lot of Rolling shutter I imagine). It is an unnecessary and disappointing update, and I say it by having 2 Sony, having had another 2 and knowing that my next camera will be Sony with a 90% chance.
Even if few people may need the improved AF, a lot of people will want it. I'm all for choosing camera gear based on user needs, but the reality is that most consumers are more driven by wants than needs.
@ullerellu You might find that the target audience becomes more apparent with use. It's in direct competition with phones, with some big advantages over them that gives people more tools to get creative with, so they can take more than just a mindless snap. It's less about the picture quality and more about getting a better shot you might never have if it wasn't on you. Plus using a phone as a dedicated camera gives me battery anxiety
You are not really looking hard. There are folks in the Sony Compact Cameras subforum here would could explain it to you. But the thing is you don't want to HEAR it; you're just content to say loudly that it is not for your style.
I just want the old stuff back: 24-70 f1.8-2.8 Internal ND Internal timelapse And some long overdue features: 4K60 Mic input Real time touch AF in video Ultra wide angle lens But when Sony starts getting Canon-savvy, it's just a matter of time before smartphone takes over compact 1".
Just buy an old one for hundreds of dollars less, then! They're out there. The overdue features, you can't have. But with the money you saved, you can buy something that does.
They're smart to keep the other ones available for awhile. They can see which version(s) sell well and at what price. These RX series cameras are aimed at the top-of-the-line. Canon will not compete, because they don't want to put a sharp lens on their G series cameras. Sony is trying hard not to compromise on anything, which is why the price is high. By going to a super zoom range, they're going to lose a lot of the IQ that made these popular with enthusiasts. But I guess they want to go beyond enthusiasts. Average Joes probably buy more cameras in all than we do.
Are average Joes going to pay $1200 when there are plenty of alternatives cheaper? Sony usually know what they're doing, but this seems like neither fish nor fowl to me.
Well, remember that this is the initial introduction price. It is for hobbyists (like us) who want the latest thing as quickly as possible. After several months, cost will come down a bit, probably to < $1k US. This is just the initial cash-grab.
True, one inch is no longer a large sensor for any type of camera, that was the case in 2012, but now we are in 2019 and 1 "is the standard, Sony RX1R, Leica Q, Fuji X100T, Fuji X70, Fuji XF10, Ricoh GR, Panny LX100 .... I think we have to change the chip of what is a large sensor for a "compact" camera now.
While DPR did well by exposing Sony's claimed15 -stop DR for the AR7 IV as being limited to 8 MP pics, something few if any other sites bother to do, you exaggerate (or are simply just plain wrong) by claiming that "virtually every compact camera made had a sensor a fraction of the size [of the RX100 VII]." How many compacts with equal or larger sensors, eg, (G1X's, LX100), are there? Plenty, as you yourself and Jeff Keller noted way back 5 years ago regarding the "rise of 1"-type sensors from the likes of Sony, Samsung, and now, Canon." Is there a new meaning to the term "compact?" If so, it would have nice for you to have expressed that opinion. People read DPR reviews expecting, or at least relying on, an objective, factually correct assessment of the subject camera, including any comments later offered by the author, and you have failed to provide one here. It is really unsurprising that, true or otherwise, lots of people think DPR is an advertising arm for Amazon.
Out of 1,996 fixed-lens cameras in the DPR database, 1,815 (about 9 out of 10) have a sensor significantly smaller than 1". So, historically it's true "that virtually every compact camera ever made had a sensor a fraction of the size."
Well, to me "virtually every" means something like "the vast majority", which I think 90% would qualify as. But it's pointless to argue about semantics here, since it's pretty clear what Richard Butler meant.
It definitely is very expensive. I'm happy with my Mk ii version with constant aperture and longer zoom. It's to bad they stopped making this version and improving it. Going up to 200mm is great but the fstop range sucks. I'll keep my rx100ii for now as it's a solid performer. I also use a canon g7xii I believe and it's just as good with same fstop constant range. Both are excellent cameras
"Menu system requires you to memorize locations but includes My Menu tab for collecting regularly used settings."
Richard, I would like to respectfully challenge this sentence. I read something similar in almost every Sony camera review on the web, but my personal experience is that you will never dive into the menus after customizing MyMenu/FnMenu/Custom Buttons. I can go for months at home or weeks abroad without returning to the traditional menu structure, so why would I need to memorize the menu locations of commands that I have saved out?
Can you elaborate on a usage scenario where a user has to exceed the customisable interface on this camera? This may be due to the difference between writing a review based on initial usage and molding settings to your preferences over months of shooting. It may also be a difference between stills and video-focused users.
I would say something like "While Sony's jumbled menu system can make initial setup frustrating, the customisable MyMenu, Fn Menu, and assignable buttons will allow most RX100VII users to avoid menu deep-dives."
That's a bullet-point summary. The full text says 'On the plus side, there is a customizable 'My Menu' tab that lets you assemble your most-used functions into a single place in the menu, for faster access and less demand on your ability to remember.'
Richard, thank you for a nuanced reply in the middle of a flurry of critique. I would still argue that there is almost no need to memorize menu positions give successively greater generations of menu customization but do concede that the default menu is a sense forest of options.
I recently sold my RX100vi because I hated using it. Great image quality, but it's just so "finicky" and cumbersome to use.
I also hated the moving diopter issue (that no reviewer ever seems to mention). To test, set the diopter to your preferred setting, then pop the EVF up and down a few times and watch the diopter move due to the over sprung pop up mechanism.
I bet Sony haven't bothered redesigning a fix and are still using the same system.
Too small for my use, my iphone is larger. Who is going to pay that much money for a totally dumbed-down camera in terms of controls, which would make it different from a smartphone?
The diopter issue with the VI was a huge design blunder. I would hope Sony has done something to change that. I would not pay over a thousand dollars for a new camera and have to put tape or glue on it. The diopter on my IV has never needed adjustment. I don't want to have to fiddle with the settings every time I use it.
No need for a VIa, since the lens didn't change between the VI and VII. The V was upgraded to Va, since the VI got a new lens and therefore became a very different camera. But maybe you meant a new version of the V with the latest internals, a Vb?
"The camera also offers an advanced Eye AF setting on par with the Mark VI, a continuous shooting buffer of 233 frames, up from 150, and reduced lag in the EVF. Those were the major changes and features introduced, but far from the only ones. Zone area AF is available, AF area registration..."
I'm in the market for a new compact, for both video and stills. The crop on the 4k video, is that enough to be an issue? People reviewing cameras seem to prefer one that does not crop the 4k video to utilize the widest setting on the lens, as well as accurate framing before you start shooting. Thanks
Is there a crop, my RX100V is basically the whole sensor width (less a couple of pixels to make the maths work out)? The big problem with the VI was they left out the ND filter, which you really need for video (or some way to attach an external ND). Same again here so it's unnatural high shutter speeds or some way to add a filter ring to the front of the lens. (The issue to note with the RX100V and 4k is poor stabilisation in the lens BTW, but it's not the same lens as here and they do claim improvements. I'd still suggesting checking that out pre any purchase though.)
Ah yes, you meant the electronic stabilisation crop, mea culpa. On 1080 the V has several options that do progressively better stabilisation for bigger crops.
"Sadly, like the hypothetical RX10 II Mark II we keep hoping Sony will introduce (that combines the original constant-F2.8 lens but adds all the subsequent updates), there's no sensible thing Sony could call it."
Realistically, the RX10 III with the 24-600mm lens should have been called the RX20.
The RX100 VI with its 24-200mm lens should have been called the RX200.
This is a marketing catastrophe of their own devising. A simple change to the base nomenclature would have made it trivially easy to keep up with all the generation numbers.
They could even leapfrog update numbers so that all cameras (even with different lenses) that have equivalent technology inside could share the same nomenclature to further minimize customer confusion.
It could be the RX100 VB. I don't care what it's called as long as it's the short fast lens with state of the art handling features (EVF, touch screen, latest autofocus). They could call it the Thunder Lizard Mistake Plus 5000B Mk Z and I would buy it.
Oyez, Oyez, Oyez!!!! To all prosumers. Those who salivate & those who pout & criticize about Sony's newborn.. This new camera does NOT meet and admit the wished shopping list of absent upgrades from past models. NO. We are going to buy this camera ONLY to make the others say: Oh, is that the new Sony? A fantastic conversation starter!
My RX100V does 24fps with AF and AE. I used it once, found I had a huge mass of basically identical images to sift through and turned it down to 10fps. Really only any use if you want a moment-of-impact sort of thing.
My impression is that Sony is trying to get the new autofocus system out on every camera they produce. I would expect updates to the a6500 next. For me, mostly a family candid guy, I can’t tell you how many times I had a “great” photo ruined by the focus being slightly off. When you get that perfect mischievous twinkle in a toddler’s eye captured, all the technical stuff goes away. Sony has hit the mark with this new AF system.
I'm pretty much the opposite use case -- tourist snaps of static subjects, often in low/evening light. So I'm leaning to that new Canon with the bright(er) 24-120 equiv. But I absolutely understand what you mean about this AF. It's wonderful for what you want from the camera.
Would you be so kind at DPR, to mention in review has it still destructive compression in RAW? Or with choice of uncompressed? And this another bug - star eater. Has it occurred in RX100m7 series?
@mick232, @entoman - thanks for your comments, I don't see how they helped me or my questions, but anyway, thanks for your estimations and suggestions:) And I don't know why you think star eater is about astro only? It's about long exposures, you know.
...but the $900 G5X II looks like it ticks far more boxes for me, overall. A 24-120mm/f1.8-2.8 is just so versatile. The RX100 V's 24-70mm lens is cartoonish short range, whereas the RX100 VI's lens is unusable in lower light conditions given its sensor size.
I think I'll wait and see how many of these features are placed in a future RX10 model. While the new RX100 VII is appealing, with its improved focus tracking/eye focus, I think about the number of times I grab the RX10 IV in place of my RX100 VI. My RX10 VI will continue to serve my needs for a tiny package.
I'll never spend $1200 for a 1" camera sensor. But I'd be very open to spending 2X as much for a full frame sensor and zoom range of about 24mm-70mm / 100mm.
Actually, no, that's not what I mean. What I mean is, a full frame version of the RX100. A full frame version of the RX100, even if slightly larger due to the sensor, would still be much smaller than an A7 with 28-70. And hopefully Sony would offer a nicer quality lens than the 28-70.
Now, if I was asking for an RX1R with a zoom lens attached, I could see buying an A7 with small zoom lens being a great alternative since there isn't a big size / price difference. However, the RX100 with a full frame sensor and retracting viewfinder could be drastically smaller than an A7 lens combo.
Such compact zoom point & shoot cameras were, of course, extremely common between 1990-2000.
Bulkier models could be had with 28-70mm or 28-100mm lenses that ranged from about f/3.5-8 while more compact models (akin to what you describe as an FF RX100), would settle for apertures in the f/5.6-10 (yes, that's f/10) range.
Alternatively, it was also common to go with a 38-115mm zoom range and an f/4-11 aperture range.
Obviously lens design has advanced somewhat, but on the other side, no one would accept the sort of resolution that these compact collapsible FF zooms provided.
While you could probably make a zoom lens that collapsed into the body somewhat and contained a leaf shutter so that it could nest directly next to the shutter, physics would suggest that no matter what you will end up with an extremely slow aperture, or a large lens (essentially akin to that 28-70mm/f3.5-5.6) but with its length reduced by the ~19mm flange distance of FE mount ro reflect its internal nesting.
Looks like a lot of good 'stuff' in such a tiny form factor. But for the price I'm not so sure it would knock out the a6XX's for what I've come to enjoy for IQ/sharpness. I feel like I can get comfortably compact with the a6400 already. But again, this is an interesting size and feature set.
Where there was far more available light it looked quite good, but when we got to crowds/zoomed dimly lit stages/ nights/ etc I wasn't seeing anything that jumped out at me to jump into the system for $1200, regardless of how compact a carry that is.
Thanks for the initial look, I'll keep following to see if other samples pique my interests.
There may be method to the aparrent madness of 7 RX-100 models on the shelf at the same time. You have to wonder how many people read an article about the "new" RX-100 and then go and buy one of the cheaper ones not even knowing the difference. I suspect that behavior is more prevalent that commenters here would like to think.
@ tbcass. I didn't say most. I said I wonder how many. I bought an SL2 from Amazon and they have me on their "answer user questions" list. You wouldn't believe how many stupid (or lazy) questions pop up. In many cases, folks seem to be interested in a product, but too lazy (or incapable) to do any research at all. The latest question was "what is the 4k crop on the SL2?" That is a basic "can you read?" issue. One vendor may not carry all the RX models, but many carry several and any salesman worth their salt will sell the product that the buyer can afford. All the manufacturers play this game to a degree, but Sony is by far the worst. Canon steers their older models to their refurb site. Panasonic continues to make runs of cameras that are supposedly obsolete to sell on the cheap at places like Costco. Sony keeps them all alive forever.
I think if we saw the buying logic of most camera purchasers we would cringe. Something like:
What fits in my budget? Ok, which ones are a brand I recognize? Ok, which ones look cool? Ok, which one has the longest zoom? Sold! Another 1/2.3" camera that costs $400 but is worse than my phone...
Meanwhile we're arguing over maximum aperture vs burst AF performance, or other details. ;)
I really, really hope you ding this camera for including USB 2.0, a slow UHS-1 slot, and a focus-select-only touchscreen on a $1,200 USD camera in 2019. And I write this as both a Sony camera and RX100 owner.
Agreed because, honestly, there's little reason not to at least include USB-C (regardless of whether its transfer speeds exceed USB 2.0 spec) and UHS-II SD card compatibility in 2019 on any camera. I'm also of the opinion that a touch screen should allow me to use touch anywhere in the camera's UI.
The absence of the above just seems even more of a letdown given the incredible technology available for photos and videos in this camera.
It's a sticking point on my A6400. Next-gen tracking and last-last-last-gen card write speeds. I'm also frustrater handling my friends' mirrorless cameras (and my Fuji) and then returning to ol' two-dial with limited touch.
UHS-II and USB 3.x both suck more power than their predecessors and that may be at least part of the reason for the choices made. The battery life is already pretty bad. In the end, you just can't cram 5 pounds of s--t into a 2 pound can. (Yes, I know a very old saying, but I am old).
Dragonrider: Your suggestion this is a power issue is a bit misleading.
First, I wouldn't necessarily ask for USB 3.x transport, which is not the same as USB-C. I'd want the connector -- USB-C -- if only to maintain forward compatibility as USB-C overtakes the clunky and annoying legacy USB-A/B/mini/micro connections. Canon's RF has USB-C on a USB 2.0 bus. Why can't the RX100 mk VII?
Secondly, you can send whatever power over the USB connection you want, in either direction, and there's no active power draw unless something is plugged in.
Third, the additional row of pins for UHS-II use low-voltage signaling, so the max power difference between the faster spec and the legacy UHS-I is negligible.
On the whole, there's no overwhelming rationale not to provide UHS-II facilities and USB-C. For it to be a power concern, the camera would have to be pegging the 1.8/3.3v and 5v connections for each the card slot and USB connection at max output for no go discernible reason.
Whyamihere: I was being nice and giving Sony a little bit of wiggle room. The new G5 actually has USB 3 connection speed (and a tiny bit less battery life).
Faster transfer does cost more energy but it's also done sooner so for the amount of data transfered it shouldn't be a big difference. See mobile phone technology going from Edge to LTE and 5G where you get more powerful transfers but in shorter time so you can idle rest of the time. But you get your data sooner and have more capacity for other users.
What do you mean "focus-select-only touchscreen"? Are you actually saying that other than focus select, it's not a touch screen? So for example, menus are not touch navigable? I've never used a Sony compact so maybe I'm just confused.
The touch screen can only be used for touch focus and nothing else. Personally I don't care because i don't like touch screens but for those that do it's pretty limiting.
Sony is clearly putting their software engineering resources on things like the AF and shooting speed. While they have improved the menu system and customizability of the latest generation of A series cameras, they haven't spent much time on the touch screen improvements. For some it's an inconvenience. For some it's a don't-care.
Since the RX100VII costs the same $1200 as the VI, a price that is sure to drop, it appears that Sony has determined that $1200 is the maximum price they can charge for a compact 1" sensor camera.
$1200 might seem like a lot of money but the RX100VI is a good seller so apparently there are plenty of people willing to pay. A lot depends on your disposable income. I have about $7000 invested in a Full Frame camera and lenses but I seldom use it due to the inconvenience. The RX100VI does interest me depending on how much the price drops but the VII is tempting.
Does "90 fps seven-frame bursts" mean the shooter has to precisely determine when to press the shutter button, down to the level of about 0.1 s, to initiate the burst, or to wait for the buffer to clear before the next burst? I hope not, or at least the buffer clears very quickly.
You don't have to wait for the buffer to clear, you can take another burst straight away, but yes, you need to determine when you're going to hit the shutter (as you would in single shot mode).
Think of this as a single shot mode with a tiny bit of a tiny bit of post-press leeway.
At 90fps, an entire 7 frame burst is accomplished in less than 1/10 sec (at fast shutter speeds).
This is basically a point & shoot camera, not something that will be used to capture a speeding bullet, a bird in flight, or even a critical moment of sports action.
All that will be achieved is that people will get very quickly fed up with sorting through sets of near-identical images, desperately searching for some miniscule difference between them, and will never use the feature again.
Apart, that is, from the occasions when they want to demonstrate to others that they have a super-fast but irrrational feature on their latest toy.
I can think of one use of such a feature, where the talent is relatively still overall but is making predicable micro movements. One example is a ball-tossing acrobat. The photographer can single out the image where the balls are best positioned.
They didn't miss the boat, they made an excellent, but very slow to operate camera, the P7800, all they had to do was update the processor and a few other things and they'd have nailed it. The lens is stellar and it also has excellent onboard VR. It's still an excellent camera if you can find one, and I'd still rather use it than this camera, for a number of reasons.
Right. 1/1.7" (7.44 x 5.58 mm) sensor. We are talking 1" sensors. But pretty much par for the course. I have a Nikon P60 compact with a corner EVF-something Nikon let drop.
A 1/1.7 sensor is not a problem, it had an excellent sensor, and there are advantages to the smaller sensor, it's easier to stabilise it for starters. However, they could have modified the design of the P7800 and incorporated a 1" inch sensor. The problem with Nikon is that they're not very good at making the right calls on these kinds of cameras.
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.
If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.
What’s the best camera for under $1500? These midrange cameras should have capable autofocus systems, lots of direct controls and the latest sensors offering great image quality. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $1500 and recommended the best.
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.
Repair website iFixit reports that Nikon has contacted more than a dozen independent repair shops that they will no longer be a part of its authorized repair program after their agreement is up in March 2020.
Kodak Alaris confirmed Ektachrome E100 will be available to purchase globally in 5-roll 120 'propacks' and 10-sheet boxes of 4x5 film 'within the next 10 days.'
Adobe has added direct photo importing and advanced photo exporting to Lightroom for iOS and iPadOS, as well as updated the shared album feature in its desktop apps.
MIT CSAIL's latest AI project uses a camera and algorithm to 'record' videos of hidden objects, including their color and motion, based only on their shadows.
Six months after first announcing the redesigned Mac Pro and Pro Display XDR monitor on stage at WWDC, Apple is opening up orders starting tomorrow, December 10.
Recently, we spoke to award-winning photographer and Olympus shooter Buddy Eleazer about his work, what inspires him, and what he needs from his camera gear when shooting wildlife on safari.
The 21mm F1.5 for Leica M-mount is a fully-manual prime lens with a clicked aperture and 10-blade aperture diaphragm that's currently available for $429.
After nearly a decade of using Apple phones, Managing Editor Allison Johnson jumped ship and became the happy owner of a Pixel device. But the iPhone 11 might just tempt her back.
This 60-second tutorial from Adobe shows how changing the 'Color Adaptation' setting within the Content Aware Fill tool can create better edits in different situations.
The new Tamron 35mm F2.8 Di III OSD M1:2 lens has an attractive price, but how does it stack up against Sony's own 35mm F2.8? According to Chris and Jordan, pretty darn well.
In this week's episode of DPReview TV, Chris and Jordan did a shootout between the new Tamron 35mm F2.8 lens for E-mount and Sony's own 35mm F2.8 ZA Carl Zeiss lens. Check out the galleries from both lenses and tell us what you think.
Three months after it confirmed Leica, Nikon and Olympus wouldn't be returning to Photokina, the event organizers have put out a press release confirming Canon, Panasonic and Sony will 'promise a fireworks display of new products at Photokina.'
A new photography podcast has kicked off with an episode that looks critically at the photo preset market, detailing the negative impact it has on photographers and the wider industry.
As promised earlier this year, Sigma will be releasing the L-mount versions of its 40mm F1.4 DG HSM and 105mm F1.4 DG HSM lenses by the end of the year.
Over months of using Sigma's 45mm F2.8 Contemporary lens, Reviews Editor Carey Rose rediscovers that there's so much more to a lens than speed and sharpness.
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.
Comments