Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Sony RX100 Forum' started by drd1135, Jun 23, 2014.
Quick synopsis: best camera in this class; gold award; just wish it was more fun/engaging to shoot.
Seems like the door is open for the LX8 to nose past it.
That's a fairly optimistic reading from Panasonic's point of view. :smile: Still, you have a point. The LX series are lovely cameras to use. If the LX8 can match the IQ of the RX100, then they could steal significant market from Sony. It's hard to imagine the LX8 no being a good seller unless they really mess something up.
That was really the way they wrote it though. They liked much about it but mostly because they're still comparing it to smaller sensor compacts. They even basically said they gave it the gold review because the peers aren't there yet. I hope this isn't uncool, but I'll quote the short last paragraph in their conclusion:
"Our concerns about the handling leave us concluding that, if it had a credible rival, there's every chance the RX100 M3 wouldn't get a Gold award - we'd like a more enjoyable shooting experience from an $800 camera. Ultimately, though, the additions to what were already the strongest cameras in their class leave the RX100 III literally peerless. At which point it has to go one better than its predecessors, and receive our highest award."
That sounds like damning it with the faintest of high praises... One senses that once there are rivals in the 1" sensor compact market, they'll probably like them more. Which is pretty much consistent with their attitude, and mine, about the RX100 since the beginning. It's an incredible step forward, but it's true value won't be known other than that until it has rivals. Which is seems like it finally will within a few more months...
Here's another take from a new owner of the RX100 Mark III:
With the EVF and Sony handgrip added, my "shooting experience" with the RX100M3 could not be any better. The most engaging shirt pocket size camera I have ever used. It has very fast and accurate AF, surprisingly effective IS, it`s highly configurable and aperture, shutter speed, sensitivity, exp.comp., metering mode, can be controlled and changed on the fly.
"Shooting experience" and "our concerns about the handling" what subjective criteria and how unprofessionally used by DPR in the context of an "unbiased" product review.
You can discuss and rate "subjective criteria" and still be "unbiased" as long as you approach each camera with an open mind and don't pre-judge it based on stuff like brand ID or previous experience with similar cameras. I think they're pretty open about including subjective criteria in their reviews and I don't think that's unprofessional at all - reviews that are all based on totally objective criteria are just boring lists of numbers and quantifiable comparisons that are too dry to be useful. I recognize I may not always agree with their findings and that I may subjectively love something that they strongly dislike and vice versa. As long as they spell out why they like or dislike something, subjective criteria are precisely what make reviews interesting to me.
Their experience may not be yours - I like seeing both theirs and yours. I happened to feel the same way they did about the original RX100 so I give their opinion some more credence than I would otherwise on the subsequent versions, which I haven't tried. If I'd disagreed with their initial findings, I'd assume I might on this one as well.
I agree and disagree with all sorts of stuff written by professionals online, and by amateurs, but I often find what they have to say useful and interesting anyway.
I am scoring one of these pocket rockets!
Ming Thein's just written his review as well
I recall reading somewhere that Panasonic is the first outside company that Sony has allowed to buy their 1" sensors.
They may very well agree that the LX8 is a sizable potential threat -- and are happy to profit from their competitor using their sensor.
I admit that i'm partial to L.'s style of analysis.
What do you think of the idea DPReview has on page 10, with underexposing the image to preserve highlights and then using DRO to balance the exposure?
Basicly it corresponds to Fuji's DR200 option on my X100 where they underexpose by -1EV (by shooting at a higher ISO) and then bring up the rest to balance.
I tried it out on the previous models and it works pretty well I think, the RX100 is pretty fast to clip the highlights with the multi metering and this is an easy way to improve on that.
Love the specs on the Mk 3, but I had a hard time negotiating my hand/fingers around the MK 2. Loved the image quality, but use-ability for me was a downer.
They're really slippery as-is, but with the extra bits and bops I added to mine it handles great.
Yup, what they're basically saying is that the DRO modes don't work as well as they could, and they counter that by manually underexposing a bit.
[rant alert, nothing to be overly concerned about so don't read unless you feel like joining (or disagreeing with) me in some nitpickery]
I should note that the X100 (and any other camera using this kind of dynamic range optimization) does NOT use a higher ISO during exposure (since that would lead to overexposure rather than underexposure). I don't know why, but for some reason that's how it's commonly explained, but it's wrong. They just use the normal ISO for a desired exposure (say 400) with a quicker shutter speed (or a lower ISO than normal, say 200) and then boost the shadows using software. This boosting results in more noise, which is why they label the final image as if its ISO was the actual ISO multiplied by the boost factor; otherwise people might think that the actual ISO used for the exposure is noisier than it actually is. [/rant]
I experimented using the Fuji DRO options with the X100 and XP1....but ended up usually not using them.
Ming Thein uses the spot meter with compact cameras.....I did purchase this and got some good info out of it, especially once he started using the compact camera in different situations.....a bit pricey, but I'm glad I bought it.