Sony RX10 with 24-200mm f2.8 zoom and 1" sensor ! - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 455 Old 10-12-2013, 06:22 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,835
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked: 69
The RX10 is coming out next week.
Quote:
The new RX10 camera will get the same 1 inch sensor of the RX100 series! Multiple trusted sources confirmed the RX10 will have a one inch sensor and a fixed 24-200mm lens! UPDATE: I re-asked my source about the aperture and I will get an answer soon. They said it’s f/2.8 but I am not sure if it means that this is the constant aperture through the full focal range. Don’t misunderstand me, this sounds like an amazing camera! A 24-200mm f/2.8 zoom on such a large sensor is nice.
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-surprise-rx10-has-1-inch-sensor-no-aps-c-and-24-200mm-f2-8-zoom/


Quote:
Sony HongKong sent an invitation for an event which they write is “stunning”. The event starts at 6:30pm (HKT) on 16th October.

We already know what’s coming:
Sony A7 24MP E-mount FF camera
Sony A7R 36MP E-mount FF camera
Sony RX10 camera with fixed ultrazoom
Zeiss FE 24-70mm f/4.0 OSS
Sony G 28-70mm f/3.5-5.6
Zeiss FE 35mm f/2.8
Zeiss FE 55mm f/1.8
Zeiss FE 70-200mm f/4.0 OSS
and obviously many many many accessories…
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-sony-send-an-invitiation-for-a-stunning-event-ocotber-16/
jogiba is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 455 Old 10-13-2013, 07:07 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,922
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 94
For me, the RX10 will be of interest!

One rumor source says it will be $1299.
bsprague is offline  
post #3 of 455 Old 10-13-2013, 07:56 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,835
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked: 69
I guess we will see the video modes in the next few days .
Quote:
UPDATE: I got some answer to your questions:
- Size is about same as the Sony HX300 for example.
- Lens does not collapse.
- there is an aperture ring that can be selected to be “smooth” or with “clicking steps”.
- The lens has a f/2.8 aperture through the full focal range!!!
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-surprise-rx10-has-1-inch-sensor-no-aps-c-and-24-200mm-f2-8-zoom/
jogiba is online now  
post #4 of 455 Old 10-14-2013, 07:51 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,922
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 94
So maybe it will be like a Panasonic FZ200 with a bigger sensor instead of lots of zoom.
bsprague is offline  
post #5 of 455 Old 10-15-2013, 07:15 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,835
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked: 69
The RX10 looks interesting.













jogiba is online now  
post #6 of 455 Old 10-16-2013, 04:40 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,980
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1005 Post(s)
Liked: 1086
Well the info is in on the new Sony A7s in an extensive write up on B&H.

There is essentially nothing new on the video end relative to other Sony cams. Same bit rate, same codecs, no 4K. These seem to be designed as still cameras first and video cameras second as opposed to the GH3 which is designed as a video camera first and still camera second.

A bit disappointing, but I can't say I'm surprised.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #7 of 455 Old 10-16-2013, 07:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,922
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 94
"Full HD 1920 x 1080 video recording is supported in both 60i/p and 24p frame rates using the high-quality AVCHD Progressive format with bit rates as high as 28Mbps. Recording in the Internet-friendly MP4 format is also supported for a more streamlined workflow if recording simply for web playback. For even higher-quality video recording, an optional external recorder can be used to record clear, uncompressed full HD video via an HDMI connection. Full manual control over exposure settings is possible during movie recording, as well as use of the optical zoom lens, and advanced audio control options are also available. External microphones can be utilized for higher-quality sound and a dedicated headphone jack is integrated into the design for real-time audio monitoring over controllable sound levels."

What does " For even higher-quality video recording, an optional external recorder can be used to record clear, uncompressed full HD video via an HDMI connection." mean? What would you record to?

Reference is at B&H: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10
bsprague is offline  
post #8 of 455 Old 10-16-2013, 07:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,922
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Read at dpreview:

"The more powerful processor......allows the camera to use every pixel to create its video, rather than having to sub-sample the sensor as most DSLRs do (the line-skipping method is a major source of moiré)."

"And Sony appears to have been thinking about more than just stills when it made this cameras - the RX10 offers one of the most extensive lists of features for videographers we've seen on any camera. This includes stepless aperture control, headphone and mic sockets, focus peaking, zebra exposure warning and uncompressed video output."

Moire and uncompressed video output are two things I don't understand very well!
bsprague is offline  
post #9 of 455 Old 10-16-2013, 08:28 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,922
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsprague View Post


What does " For even higher-quality video recording, an optional external recorder can be used to record clear, uncompressed full HD video via an HDMI connection." mean? What would you record to?

Apparently you can record 10 bit 4.2.2 to something like one of these: Atomos Ninja 2 Video Recorder
bsprague is offline  
post #10 of 455 Old 10-16-2013, 08:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,167
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsprague View Post

Apparently you can record 10 bit 4.2.2 to something like one of these: Atomos Ninja 2 Video Recorder

Usually, unfortunately, all the 8-bit cameras and camcorders that have "clean" HDMI out export uncompressed 4:2:0 video through the HDMI port. Do you see anything that suggests it is 4:2:2 and 10-bit is exported? The Ninja2 records 4:2:2, 10-bit no matter what is coming out of the HDMI port.
markr041 is offline  
post #11 of 455 Old 10-16-2013, 09:55 AM
Advanced Member
 
hatchback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 548
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsprague View Post

Read at dpreview:

"The more powerful processor......allows the camera to use every pixel to create its video, rather than having to sub-sample the sensor as most DSLRs do (the line-skipping method is a major source of moiré)."

This is the most important line in the entire preview. If Sony has finally implemented correct video de-Bayering on the RX10, then it might be one of the best low-light video cameras that money can buy. Very promising!
hatchback is offline  
post #12 of 455 Old 10-16-2013, 10:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,167
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 129
Real additional evidence that Sony is serious about video for the RX10 - built-in ND filter! Plus manual audio control, mic in and headphone out, with audio meters visible as you shoot.

This, along with the new way of processing video from the big sensor - so you get high resolution and no artifacts - is a breakthrough.
markr041 is offline  
post #13 of 455 Old 10-16-2013, 11:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,922
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

Usually, unfortunately, all the 8-bit cameras and camcorders that have "clean" HDMI out export uncompressed 4:2:0 video through the HDMI port. Do you see anything that suggests it is 4:2:2 and 10-bit is exported? The Ninja2 records 4:2:2, 10-bit no matter what is coming out of the HDMI port.

dpreview has a "preview". They say they had a pre-production unit for a few days. They write, "In addition, the camera's footage can be output over HDMI, either with settings overlays for monitoring or without, for recording (and, we're told, with the option for uncompressed 4:2:2 video output). When you look at these specs and the switch that enables stepless aperture changes while recording movies, it looks like the RX10 could be a handy documentary camera."

The quoted reference is about half way down on page 3 of the preview. http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx10/4

It won't be firmly established until an instruction manual is found.
bsprague is offline  
post #14 of 455 Old 10-16-2013, 12:44 PM
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Its another AVCHD 24Mbps camera. More of the same.

About the uncompressed 4:2:2...
Quote:
I am not a user of uncompressed HDMI and external recorders. It offers no real gain in image quality because compression is not the enemy of video quality on DSLRs – the sensor output and low quality processing is. Sensors currently throw away too much data so you lose the colour, dynamic range and detail (...)
Quote:
(...) the debayer of that raw sensor output is terrible, really drastically hobbling the image before it reaches the uncompressed HDMI output. If Sony have got the output right internally only then will you see a benefit from the HDMI port.

Im afraid it wont be usefull.

One important thing about this camera is that it has full 5k pixel readout. That means it will read a 5k RAW video entirely and then downscale and compress it into a 1080p video. That will reduce the amount of artifacts. They will be there, but less often. But I dont think thats the most important part. The most important thing is that now we have a processor/sensor capable of doing a 5k RAW video on a cheap camera. It means that we need only 2 things now. A good way to store that amount of data and/or a better codec.

Some say that Sony is waiting for h265 to start releasing 4k consumer cameras.

And thats a nice bridge camera. Dont want to buy it. Dont have great video. But looks good, nice build quality and with a similar performance to the RX100, its a nice move.
thedest is offline  
post #15 of 455 Old 10-16-2013, 12:53 PM
Advanced Member
 
hatchback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 548
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 55
If Sony does the downscale correctly, as they claim to, there will be no artifacts and we will get footage whose measured resolution matches the resolution of the format. So the 1080p footage will have 1080 lines of resolution. And that is without doubt the most promising thing about the RX10.
hatchback is offline  
post #16 of 455 Old 10-16-2013, 01:09 PM
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
The camera has already been tested by Dave Etchels, who I quote:
Quote:
While our sample camera was only a prototype, we did take it outside and challenge it with some subjects that typically produce bad moiré or false-color patterns with cameras we test. The results were very encouraging. It didn’t completely eliminate moiré patterns, but they were greatly reduced

Its definitely a step foward, not an ultimate solution.
Quote:
This includes stepless aperture control, headphone and mic sockets, focus peaking, zebra exposure warning and uncompressed video output.

Those are nice features. I wish we had that in every single camera capable of video recording. The uncompressed output promises to be useless.

The low bit-rate of the camera is something to worry about. Its a nice processor, it seems to be downscaling the image well, but with that amount of data the resolution can be crushed into something as low as 600 lw/ph, wich is pretty much like every other camera in the market. Bad move from Sony. Im just hating AVCHD 24-28 more and more everyday.

Anyway, I like those bridge cameras from Sony. They look good. The HX300 has a 1900mm zoom. Thats simply nonsense! And now we have an RX100 with a 200mm f2.8, viewfinder and lots of nice gadgets and controls. Thats really nice.

We just need better colors and less compression Sony. Hurry up!
thedest is offline  
post #17 of 455 Old 10-16-2013, 01:34 PM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,167
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 129
Compression is NOT a problem with this camera. The RX10 offers totally uncompressed video from its HDMI port, Mr. Dest, so I do no get why you quote someone as saying HDMI uncompressed output is irrelevant, and also you say:

"The low bit-rate of the camera is something to worry about."

"We just need better colors and less compression Sony. Hurry up!"

If you do not like AVCHD compression, you are free to record the uncompressed video using any compression/codec you want. But,

First, 108060p is at 28Mbps (not 24Mbps), using a very efficient codec.

Second, I have compared AVCHD video at 28Mbps with Pro Res 422 taken from uncompressed HDMI output from the same camera (using the Ninja2 on the GW77). I have posted the videos to download. No one can tell the difference (or at least of the hundreds who looked, no one claimed to see any difference).

The compression used by Sony is fine; what is the problem is editing AVCHD video: the 4:2:0 sampling and tight compression makes it very hard to obtain good quality recompressed, color-altered video. So the issue is whether the HDMI output is 8-bit 4:2:0 or 10-bit 4:2:2. If the latter, that would be a big breakthrough (but I doubt t is true, ut as Bill says, we need to see the official specs, perhaps in the manual).
markr041 is offline  
post #18 of 455 Old 10-16-2013, 02:07 PM
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

Compression is NOT a problem with this camera. The RX10 offers totally uncompressed video from its HDMI port, Mr. Dest, so I do no get why you quote someone as saying HDMI uncompressed output is irrelevant, and also you say:

It is. If we had a RAW output it would be great, although I dont like external recorders. The major problem is the sensor output and the image processing. The camera will output (via HDMI) the image after the sensor has thrown away color, dynamic range and detail. Thats why when you did the test with the GW77 the results were the same (I remember that. A video from a fence. I downloaded both videos). There are only 2 benefits from that kind of HDMI output.

1. If you want to record A LOT, nonstop, you can hoook it up with an external recorder.

2. You can record the video in ProRes. You wont have a higher bit depth, you wont have a better dynamic range and you wont have better colors, but you will have a better format to work in post.

Im saying it is useless because you wont have a better image quality. The camera plays with the image a lot before outputting it via HDMI. So the video IS compressed and then its outputted via uncompressed HDMI. Its a little bit confusing, but I hope you understand my point.

Considering that this camera processor reads out the full 5k sensor, a completely uncompressed video should be 5k, 4:4:4 and with a 14 bit depth, but its actually a 1080p compressed 8-bit video. Its an uncompressed output of a compressed video wink.gif

That means that you can use an external recorder/monitor and have the same image quality that you will have in your SD card, but never a better one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

If you do not like AVCHD compression, you are free to record the uncompressed video using any compression/codec you want. But,

Yes, as I said. The image quality will be the same - in DR, color info and bit-depth. Recording in ProRes will give you ONLY an easier format to work in post, but thats far from great.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

First, 108060p is at 28Mbps (not 24Mbps), using a very efficient codec.

Yes, but you are missing something important here. 1080/60p is recorded @ 28Mbps, but that results in a image with higher compression. 1080/24p @ 24Mbps has a less compressed look, since the available data rate is spread more thinly across individual frames.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

Second, I have compared AVCHD video at 28Mbps with Pro Res 422 taken from uncompressed HDMI output from the same camera (using the Ninja2 on the GW77). I have posted the videos to download. No one can tell the difference (or at least of the hundreds who looked, no one claimed to see any difference).

I was one of them, and that only confirms what I just said. What you did is almost like recording at AVCHD and then going to your PC and converting your AVCHD into a ProRes 422. It will give you a better format to work with, but NO real gain in image quality. The "uncompressed" tends to fool us.

Its uncompressed relatively to the already compressed video by the processor. It means you can have different codecs, but image quality will be the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

The compression used by Sony is fine; what is the problem is editing AVCHD video: the 4:2:0 sampling and tight compression makes it very hard to obtain good quality recompressed, color-altered video. So the issue is whether the HDMI output is 8-bit 4:2:0 or 10-bit 4:2:2. If the latter, that would be a big breakthrough (but I doubt t is true, ut as Bill says, we need to see the official specs, perhaps in the manual).

The output will be 8-bit 4:2:0. You can use an external recorder and save the video in 4:2:2, but you wont have 4:2:2 colors. You will have 4:2:2 work space, but the output will lack color info, so its useless. I hope im being clear, thats very confusing LOL
thedest is offline  
post #19 of 455 Old 10-16-2013, 02:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
markr041's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,167
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 135 Post(s)
Liked: 129
You did not say anything I did not say. The issue is not compression or bitrate (as you originally and very explicitly said it was) as long as we are talking about 1080p, it is bit depth and dynamic range, etc. I think we now agree.
markr041 is offline  
post #20 of 455 Old 10-16-2013, 07:10 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
jogiba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,835
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked: 69
RX10 sample videos.

jogiba is online now  
post #21 of 455 Old 10-16-2013, 07:46 PM
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
LOL... the only nice thing about those videos is the pretty bokeh.

Those are really bad videos to promote that camera. They should handle it to mark; he could do a better job than that. biggrin.gif

Sony made a great job showing banding, how bad the Dynamic Range is, how bad the colors look, and it looks like their compression to youtube was really bad.

We have some amateurs posting better videos with 8-bit cameras. They should have tried to fool us, shooting scenes with less stops of DR to create the impression that the camera has a good DR, but NOOOO, they shoot some low light scenes of people dancing against the sun. Way to go Sony.
thedest is offline  
post #22 of 455 Old 10-16-2013, 08:46 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Ken Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: N.Y.
Posts: 23,980
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1005 Post(s)
Liked: 1086
Quote:
Originally Posted by markr041 View Post

You did not say anything I did not say. The issue is not compression or bitrate (as you originally and very explicite, y said it was) as long as we are talking about 1080p, it is bit depth and dynamic range, etc. I think we now agree.

Mark, don't you get it yet? If it ain't Black Magic, then it's just garbage. Frankly I've now given up on these posts. After reading that all our cams (excuse me, non-Black Magic cams) do no better than 500-600 lw/pH, I just gave up.

It's almost become humorous.
Ken Ross is offline  
post #23 of 455 Old 10-17-2013, 05:02 AM
Advanced Member
 
hatchback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 548
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 55
Thanks for posting the sample videos, jogiba. I think the second video shows promise. They bravely included some very high detail scenes (wide angle shot of island, shot of palm tree in the wind) that could not possibly survive youtube compression but (to my eye) had no other apparent artifacts. It's a shame they didn't provide the original footage. But as of now, I'd say the early RX10 footage looks more promising than the early GF30 footage, in terms of resolution and dynamic range.
hatchback is offline  
post #24 of 455 Old 10-17-2013, 06:22 AM
AVS Special Member
 
brunerww's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,006
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Really excited by the RX10's potential for video. I especially like the "de-clicked" 8.3x constant f2.8 power zoom combined with the proven RX100 sensor, the built-in ND filter, focus peaking, 31 step manual audio level control, audio meters and headphone jack.

The dust and moisture resistant magnesium alloy body is nice too.

If they've really dealt with the line-skipping/moire problem, I guess I'll have to buy this camera. I had been saving up for the FZ200 to replace the wife's FZ150 - now I'll need to figure out a way to scrape together another $800 wink.gif

Pricey, yes. But the 1" sensor means the competition for this camera isn't really the FZ200 - it is the G6 and the GH3.

You'd have to buy a $699 Panasonic G6 plus $1100 12-35mm and $1350 35-100mm constant f2.8 lenses to match this camera in micro 4/3 world.

And you'd still be missing the weather-sealed metal body, the built-in ND filter and the headphone jack.

If you wanted weather-sealing, you'd have to pay $300-$400 more for the GH3, and you'd lose focus peaking.

If I were Panasonic, I would be very very worried about the RX10.
brunerww is offline  
post #25 of 455 Old 10-17-2013, 06:28 AM
Member
 
bobk77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
I would wait for Mark's review first smile.gif
bobk77 is offline  
post #26 of 455 Old 10-17-2013, 08:02 AM
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross View Post

Mark, don't you get it yet? If it ain't Black Magic, then it's just garbage. Frankly I've now given up on these posts. After reading that all our cams (excuse me, non-Black Magic cams) do no better than 500-600 lw/pH, I just gave up.

It's almost become humorous.

Humorous?

Can you point out what Im saying that is wrong?

There are lots of cameras that can do more than 600 lw/pH. Are you inventing things now? rolleyes.gif

You are trying too hard to start a fight Ken. Just express your opinion like im doing.

And im not saying its garbage. This camera is mainly made for stills, and for that its a pretty nice camera. But if you are serious about video/image quality, then yes, its pretty bad. Great features and gadgets, but it misses something really important: IMAGE QUALITY.

And another thing: that camera is too damn expensive.

200mm is not a big zoom and having f2.8 @ 200mm is nice, but I would rather have the f1.8 at the wide end in the RX100.

I would rather buy an RX100 + HX300. The RX100 is smaller, faster (yes it lacks a VF) and the HX300 has a zoom of 1900mm (yes, it has no RAW). Its not fast, but anyway.

The difference in video quality wont be THAT big.
thedest is offline  
post #27 of 455 Old 10-17-2013, 08:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
brunerww's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,006
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobk77 View Post

I would wait for Mark's review first smile.gif

I don't think I can wait. This is what my wife is getting for Christmas - whether she wants one or not smile.gif
brunerww is offline  
post #28 of 455 Old 10-17-2013, 08:29 AM
Member
 
bobk77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by brunerww View Post

I don't think I can wait. This is what my wife is getting for Christmas - whether she wants one or not smile.gif

When I'll wait for your review smile.gif

I did have RX100 and was not impress with the video quality at all. It is not bad, but nothing to write home about.
Sony NEX-5N is not much better either - and I not trying to compare with high end cams.
I am playing now with Nikon V1. This also have 1" sensor and video looks good on paper. I do have a few Nikon AF-S and Sigma HSM lenses, and Idea was to use them on V1 body.
Once again picture small body with 1" sensor and stabilized F2.8-4 Sigma 17-70 (with 2,7 crop factor) ! Sounds good isn’t it?
In real life I am getting slightly better DR, but not much better or sometimes worse details than Panasonic LX7/FZ200. Doesn’t worth the trouble and $$.
I guess bigger does not guaranty better performance:)
bobk77 is offline  
post #29 of 455 Old 10-17-2013, 08:36 AM
Advanced Member
 
thedest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by brunerww View Post

I don't think I can wait. This is what my wife is getting for Christmas - whether she wants one or not smile.gif

Yeah yeah... a present to your wife biggrin.gif

Im sure you are not going to play with it biggrin.gif

Unless shes like Bill's wife. He cant play with her toys LOL
thedest is offline  
post #30 of 455 Old 10-17-2013, 09:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bsprague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,922
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Liked: 94
IMO, the success of any camera now depends on how it is positioned against smartphones. In other words, if you are in one of those families that spend $1,000 or so a year on your data plans, what camera would you buy to go with the smartphone? Also, IMO, Sony and Panasonic "get it" better than the old school camera makers.

@Bobk77: Mark trashed the RX100 when it was new and the RX10 has almost the same sensor.

@thedest, who wrote, "And another thing: that camera is too damn expensive.": If one buys into the RX10 concept, Sony has already provided some severly tempting accessories. It is going to cost a lot more than the initial $1300. They include the usual chargers and cases. But, for the RX10 there is a remote, a couple of cool mics, a choice of flashes and some video lights.

@brunerww:
(1) That's a bad plan. Years ago I built a fabulous darkroom to share with my wife. I tried to equip it with a few important accessories. The dry mount press she got for Christmas was not a good idea.
(2) Following your website and posts, it is clear that the accessories will be appealing to you. Besides the $1300 for the camera, you'll need another $800 plus for the extras. In addition to the above mentioned accessories, there is an "XLR Adapter Kit."

( Check the accessories tab here: RX10 at the Sony Store )

@markr41: Are you going to try one of these? Perhaps you need a 2014 project! (grin)

@jogiba: Thanks for the thread and posting the videos.

I clearly don't need another camera, but if my off budget spring bonus materializes, I will probably buy an RX10 to go with my beloved RX100. I am less concerned by moire or color depth tests and more concerned with shooting ability and control, including depth of field, ND filters, etc. I've not yet seen Sony shot footage look bad on my big screen TVs, unless I shot them poorly.

In short, I have to have a camera that holds one of these: http://store.sony.com/stereo-microphone-zid27-ECMXYST1M/cat-27-catid-All-Cyber-shot-Cameras?_t=pfm%3Dproduct_cross_sell%26pfmvalue%3D27-ECMXYST1M
bsprague is offline  
Reply Camcorders

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off