Sony RX10 - What am I missing?
Discussion
Happy New Year friends 
Just idly browsing and came across these - 24-200mm effective at a constant f2.8 which is sharp across the range, decent sized high quality sensor with (allegedly) better DR in the RAW file than most Canons!
So... is this the photographic holy grail or what am I missing?
Cheers, DD.
Just idly browsing and came across these - 24-200mm effective at a constant f2.8 which is sharp across the range, decent sized high quality sensor with (allegedly) better DR in the RAW file than most Canons!
So... is this the photographic holy grail or what am I missing?
Cheers, DD.
Mr Will said:
DibblyDobbler said:
what am I missing?
An RX100 is cheaper, has the same sensor, a faster lens and fits in a pocket. Unless you need the long zoom - and most people don't - it's a better option.
I'm going for an RX100 mk4, downsizing again from mirrorless. Won't go into the reasons as they are manifold. But I have done a lot of searching for example images and I like what I see. Comparable quality to my older nex6 but without needing to cart a bag and lenses around. Just giving up some flexibility in the DoF, and possibly ISO, but I've concluded there are ways to help those along in PS if it's really needed.
I figure being so pocketable I'll have it with me nearly all the time and all those imagined photo opportunities will become real ones instead! If that doesn't get my photography lust going again then I shall have to conclude the game isn't for me any more.
Look up the specific camera groups on flickr. These little cameras are extremely capable.
I figure being so pocketable I'll have it with me nearly all the time and all those imagined photo opportunities will become real ones instead! If that doesn't get my photography lust going again then I shall have to conclude the game isn't for me any more.
Look up the specific camera groups on flickr. These little cameras are extremely capable.
Otis - yes I can quite see the appeal of the RX100 and it is no doubt the more sensible choice! I just had my fancy tickled by the 24-200 f2.8 lens on the RX10 - it would be mighty expensive and heavy to get that on a DSLR! There are one or two on eBay nearly new for £350-£400ish so quite tempting. Probably not mind you but quite tempting...
DibblyDobbler said:
Otis - yes I can quite see the appeal of the RX100 and it is no doubt the more sensible choice! I just had my fancy tickled by the 24-200 f2.8 lens on the RX10 - it would be mighty expensive and heavy to get that on a DSLR! There are one or two on eBay nearly new for £350-£400ish so quite tempting. Probably not mind you but quite tempting...
If you're after more zoom then perhaps take a look at the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 with its 25-400 zoom. Review between the two is at http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dm...Having recently purchased a 700D to compliment the RX100 I still find myself using the RX100 more simply because I can put it in my jacket pocket when out and about. The 700D with the 50mm prime is fantastic and I'm having great fun with the bokeh (blurred background) effect, but it's still not something I would choose to lug round whilst shopping with the wife and kids, what I really need is an RX100 MK4 and it's currently priced up at a very competitive £599 for the next few days at digitalrev.
I can see you going round and round with the untra-complex decision making process like I did, then some more
DibblyDobbler said:
Otis - yes I can quite see the appeal of the RX100 and it is no doubt the more sensible choice! I just had my fancy tickled by the 24-200 f2.8 lens on the RX10 - it would be mighty expensive and heavy to get that on a DSLR! There are one or two on eBay nearly new for £350-£400ish so quite tempting. Probably not mind you but quite tempting...
It's not a 24-200mm f2.8 35mm equivalent lens on the RX10 though.You need to take the sensor size into account when working out the aperture DOF effect.
It's a 24-200mm 'f7.6' so an equivalent lens would only be about £130 on a DSLR.
It's a big bug bear of mine when manufacturers and reviewers are happy to quote the 35mm equivalent zoom rating on the lens and then forget to even mention what the equivalent aperture effect at 35mm would be.
Weirdly one of the only times I seen it mentioned is in the Dpreview of the RX10.
It's still a good camera but you need to compare apples with apples, it's not the same as a 24-200mm f2.8 lens on a 35mm format camera.
Mroad said:
It's not a 24-200mm f2.8 35mm equivalent lens on the RX10 though.
You need to take the sensor size into account when working out the aperture DOF effect.
It's a 24-200mm 'f7.6' so an equivalent lens would only be about £130 on a DSLR.
It's a big bug bear of mine when manufacturers and reviewers are happy to quote the 35mm equivalent zoom rating on the lens and then forget to even mention what the equivalent aperture effect at 35mm would be.
Weirdly one of the only times I seen it mentioned is in the Dpreview of the RX10.
It's still a good camera but you need to compare apples with apples, it's not the same as a 24-200mm f2.8 lens on a 35mm format camera.
Thanks for the reply Colin. I think my issue is that I don't understand effective aperture!You need to take the sensor size into account when working out the aperture DOF effect.
It's a 24-200mm 'f7.6' so an equivalent lens would only be about £130 on a DSLR.
It's a big bug bear of mine when manufacturers and reviewers are happy to quote the 35mm equivalent zoom rating on the lens and then forget to even mention what the equivalent aperture effect at 35mm would be.
Weirdly one of the only times I seen it mentioned is in the Dpreview of the RX10.
It's still a good camera but you need to compare apples with apples, it's not the same as a 24-200mm f2.8 lens on a 35mm format camera.
Eg - if I am on my RX10 on aperture priority and you are standing next to me with your FF DSLR also on aperture priority - all other things being equal would we get the same shutter speed, just a different dof (i.e. I would get more) ?
Cheers
Mroad said:
It's not a 24-200mm f2.8 35mm equivalent lens on the RX10 though.
You need to take the sensor size into account when working out the aperture DOF effect.
It's a 24-200mm 'f7.6' so an equivalent lens would only be about £130 on a DSLR.
But when stating that the RX10's 24-200mm f2.8 is the equivalent of a 24-200mm f7.6 on a DSLR for effective DOF, it also needs to be clearly stated that this only applies to a FULL FRAME DSLR.You need to take the sensor size into account when working out the aperture DOF effect.
It's a 24-200mm 'f7.6' so an equivalent lens would only be about £130 on a DSLR.
From an exposure perspective, to match the Sony's 24-200mm f2.8 you would need the same lens on the DSLR (irrespective of whether it's full frame or not) - can't remember ever seeing one.
The only practical option would be to carry a 24-70mm f2.8 and a 70-200mm f2.8 at a significant cost and weight disadvantage.
DibblyDobbler said:
Mroad said:
It's not a 24-200mm f2.8 35mm equivalent lens on the RX10 though.
You need to take the sensor size into account when working out the aperture DOF effect.
It's a 24-200mm 'f7.6' so an equivalent lens would only be about £130 on a DSLR.
It's a big bug bear of mine when manufacturers and reviewers are happy to quote the 35mm equivalent zoom rating on the lens and then forget to even mention what the equivalent aperture effect at 35mm would be.
Weirdly one of the only times I seen it mentioned is in the Dpreview of the RX10.
It's still a good camera but you need to compare apples with apples, it's not the same as a 24-200mm f2.8 lens on a 35mm format camera.
Thanks for the reply Colin. I think my issue is that I don't understand effective aperture!You need to take the sensor size into account when working out the aperture DOF effect.
It's a 24-200mm 'f7.6' so an equivalent lens would only be about £130 on a DSLR.
It's a big bug bear of mine when manufacturers and reviewers are happy to quote the 35mm equivalent zoom rating on the lens and then forget to even mention what the equivalent aperture effect at 35mm would be.
Weirdly one of the only times I seen it mentioned is in the Dpreview of the RX10.
It's still a good camera but you need to compare apples with apples, it's not the same as a 24-200mm f2.8 lens on a 35mm format camera.
Eg - if I am on my RX10 on aperture priority and you are standing next to me with your FF DSLR also on aperture priority - all other things being equal would we get the same shutter speed, just a different dof (i.e. I would get more) ?
Cheers
http://dofsimulator.net/en/
found this useful for trying to gauge just what the aperture means for pictures when comparing 1 inch, APSC, FF etc.
found this useful for trying to gauge just what the aperture means for pictures when comparing 1 inch, APSC, FF etc.
Message Board | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff