camera comparison roundups

[wayno]

DPreviews latest buying guides to help you choose a camera.

http://www.dpreview.com/buying-guides

[RonK]

And the RX100 remains at the top of its class.

[GPSGuided]

And the RX100 remains at the top of its class.

The pricing of RX100 series is also getting way out there.

[wayno]

And the RX100 remains at the top of its class.

The pricing of RX100 series is also getting way out there.

pick up one of the earlier models, theres usually a good deal around.

[GPSGuided]

Still at a premium for the level of spec.

[wayno]

all those rave reviews and demand for the cameras wouldnt have helped, someone has to come up with something to rival it to make the price more competitive... they prices are extortionate in NZ.

[GPSGuided]

For over A$1000, one can just about pick up a full frame A7 body. Sure, quite different in size and weight and need for additional lenses, but it's full frame mirrorless. Obviously Sony is getting enough sales to want to maintain that price point for the Mk IV model.

[wayno]

different markets, some people want compactness over top quality, others want top quality over compactness.
the rx100 has turned into a winning formula for the quality and the size. i often prefer a micro four thirds, performs a lot better in low light, better macro. sharper images. still smaller than SLR kit's. only a full frame can beat it for quality.

[RonK]

different markets, some people want compactness over top quality, others want top quality over compactness.
the rx100 has turned into a winning formula for the quality and the size. i often prefer a micro four thirds, performs a lot better in low light, better macro. sharper images. still smaller than SLR kit's. only a full frame can beat it for quality.

Spot on - I don't want more bulk and weight. I don't want multiple lenses. What I do want is a compact camera which is capable of producing quality images. I am quite happy to embrace the challenges presented by a short focal range, in fact I eschew telephoto.
My LX3 did a fair job of providing this functionality until it was blown away by the RX100.

The RX100 has been extraordinarily successful because it satisfies the need of many buyers. When demand remains high there is no need to discount.

[Clusterpod]

only a full frame can beat it for quality.

Yeah, nah. Open to opinion, of course, and interpretation of what "quality" is.

I'll put my D7000 and Nikkor lenses up to the Pepsi challenge any day. Say, sport/fast-motion, macro, bird in a tree 100meters away, shooting into shadows with bright back-light.

Just about any challenging shooting situation, and every simple point-and-shoot landscape, an experienced photographer will win out just about every time, despite the equipment. Not saying I'm Ansell Adams or anything, but the best equipment can still produce utter poo.... You see it every day on the 'net

Less pixel-peeping, more shooting

[wayno]

actually, that reminds me, a friend was looking at a natgeo photo exhibition,
most of the photos were shot with cameras using APS-C sensors,

[wayno]

also if you want to see what a specific camera is capable of, go to flickr.com and look up photos for the model of camera you want. bear in mind some of it has been processed after shooting. but it tells you what can be done.

[GPSGuided]

The RX100 has been extraordinarily successful because it satisfies the need of many buyers. When demand remains high there is no need to discount.

Or it's a deliberate move to add prestige to the brand and model. Of course, it has to be excellent and there are enough buyers to keep it viable for their market strategy. No denying that the RX100 series is very good and satisfies those who wants compactness. But it's still a fallacy to equate with Sony home branded full frame sensors. At over A$1000, it'll be competing for A7 full frame buyers.

[wayno]

its a sweet spot, the rx100 is a high quality camera you can easily put in your pocket. i know a few people who've used slrs who've switched to more compact cameras because they cant be bothered taking the slr with them, and these are non bush walking scenarios as well. the smaller the camera, the more likely you're to have it with you, and if you can get some reasonable quality into the camera then it actually competes with the bigger cameras for ease of transport.
smart phone cameras are killing off the rest of the compact camera market. and the slr market is being eaten into as people find what they want from smaller designs...
not sure how well the full frame rx1 has sold, given its a fixed lens and its price, that limits who will buy it, but its size is amazing.

[GPSGuided]

its a sweet spot, the rx100 is a high quality camera you can easily put in your pocket. i know a few people who've used slrs who've switched to more compact cameras because they cant be bothered taking the slr with them...

Yes, also a few who considered RX100 series but ended up going to A7. It's a very dynamic market and clearly Sony has priced the RX100 to be disruptive.

[photohiker]

its a sweet spot, the rx100 is a high quality camera you can easily put in your pocket. i know a few people who've used slrs who've switched to more compact cameras because they cant be bothered taking the slr with them...

Yes, also a few who considered RX100 series but ended up going to A7. It's a very dynamic market and clearly Sony has priced the RX100 to be disruptive.

Probably a very, very few. They are completely different segments of the market. A portable compact with integrated zoom and good image quality because it has a good and larger sensor than most compacts; or a full frame interchangeable lens camera with really good resolution and dynamic range. One fits in your pocket, the other won't and it weighs heaps more even with a small lens on it.

Compact < RX100 < M43 < APS-C < FF < MF < LF

Wayno, the M43 is not too bad, but it doesn't stand up next to APS-C or above. Flickr is not the oracle, but I agree that people should go out and use what they have.

[wayno]

i've had three APs-c cameras. i'm well aware of the differences, but i'd rate the image quality of my four thirds as better than any of those, as its my camera, my opinion counts, i'd have to spend a lot ore money to do better
i made a conscious choice to go with four thirds that i'm extremely happy with, it was what i was after for size and weight versus quality and function and price. which is what this discussion is about, not just image output alone, i'm not the only person i know who opted for olympus over larger format cameras for various reasons

[GPSGuided]

In my experience through the years, for the same sensor size, there can still be significant quality differentials from brand to brand and model to model. Then obviously there's the lens when it comes to interchangeable lens models, huge difference. Within a brand at a particular spec level, the relationship Photohiker listed is certain correct.

PS. I was one who couldn't pull the trigger on a RX100 and went for an A7 instead. Yet again, I already have a Nikon P7000 that's still doing a decent job when I want to lighten up even more.

[photohiker]

Understood, wayno. I have a fair range. Compact, RX100, u43, APSC, FF.

You can do a lot with u43, but same applies to the other formats. Bottom line is given equivalent technology, size matters, but the downside is it adds weight especially lens size and heft. Also depends on what you are doing with the results. Tempted to upgrade my FF to A7RII, maybe wait for A7RIII

I find the APSC is the sweet spot between size/weight and quality. I also carry the u43 or these days more likely the RX as the snappy camera while walking and as a backup for when you drop your primary camera in the drink! lol.

[wayno]

there is one trend around to focus on the photos you are taking, focusing on the composition, and not on what you are taking it with.
i needed something that was good enough to cope with low light conditions well that wasnt too bulky to the point it hosed me off on my walks.
the point is having a camera that you are more likely to be carrying and you have it to take the photos. i was at the point of, i don't want to carry that heavy thing around, i'm sick of it, its detracting from my walking experience.
even if you've just got a smart phone and thats what you're happy carrying and using, then its what works for you. dont let anyone tell you, you could get much better photos if you just upgraded to something bigger and better. I used to think that was the way to go, but i'm not fussed about perfect photo quality. as long as i can capture the essense of what i see to a reasonable level and not be annoyed by the gear i'm' lugging, im perfectly happy. you can think of it as another challenge to do the best with what you have. a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
for me at least, larger format cameras is a law of diminishing returns, but to each their own. it depends how much your focus is on walking and how much its on photography, i'm primarily out there to walk, not photograph. unless by some miracle i could make a decent living out of photography

[GPSGuided]

there is one trend around to focus on the photos you are taking, focusing on the composition, and not on what you are taking it with...

Photography has always been about the photo and the camera/lenses are but tools to achieve the image. The recent two decades of transition to digital has brought a dip in image quality compared to film, thereby a need to chase on the equipment end. For me, outdoor bush photography has been a challenge with its wide contrast range. Until recent years, sensors just can't cope with that range with easily blown highlights and poor low light colour rendition. A most unsatisfying outcome. Guess everyone all have different expectations and needs.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[wayno]

can you easily tell the difference between different camera formats that much in the photos if you're not printing posters? often I can't. its not my livelihood so i don't dwell on it. i'm still amazed small cameras can put out relatively high quality images..
sony have patented a curved sensor, convex or concave which would allow for smaller lenses but i havent heard anything about actual hardware being developed

[GPSGuided]

I can't tell randomly off the net but can certainly tell the difference b/n photos taken from my cameras, ones with different formats. As said, there's a significant difference in the colour rendition and contrast handling. My Nikon APS-C and Sony FX cameras are clearly better in these departments. The P7000 has great colour rendition but can have blown out highlights easier than the others. At the end of the day, it's more than just sensor size but larger sensors tend to go with better quality HW/SW generally.

[wayno]

yes, but i find it hard to tell between similar sensor format cameras...

[GPSGuided]

When an iPhone can handle a wide scene contrast range with pleasant colour rendition, it's no surprise that with a bit of extra work by the manufacturer, the gap is narrowing for average amateur photo needs. Good sensor and lens with dedicated firmware tweaking are key.

[photohiker]

yes, but i find it hard to tell between similar sensor format cameras...

Sure. Same sensor size, tech is incremental. Takes a good eye and photos taken at the edge of capabilities. Most sensors these days come from Sony anyway.

Sounds like you won't need an upgrade for quite a few years. Concentrate on composition and tune your photo opportunities to the camera capabilities, Should give a great result.

[GPSGuided]

So the question is, do people agree that we have largely reached a plateau with sensor quality for serious amateur needs?

[wayno]

no similar, not the same. i often cant tell the difference between four thirds and APS, or APS and full frame

[photohiker]

Without even looking at the image quality 4/3 is obvious because the image ratio is 4:3 while APS-C and FF is 2:3.

In general I prefer 2:3

I agree that for web resolution it can be hard to identify the format. Even picking the RX100 can be a challenge. When photos are taken with wide apertures it is a little easier to pick the format.

[wayno]

i can change the image ratios on all my cameras on the camera itself...