Great review Steve! Thanks. I like you comments of the RX10 sensor in comparison to the APS-C and other sensors. Puts it in perspective. And enjoyed your photos as well. All the photos I have seen from this RX10 have surprising detail for a 1" sensor.
You CANNOT have an APS-C and still have this camera as it is ! If you used an APS-C sensor with an F2.8 constant 24-200 lens the camera/lens would weigh a ton and be a foot long. The 1 inch sensor is the biggest you could use and still have a camera of this size. Be happy that Sony has built this camera ! Nothing can touch it in this class, mainly because it is now in a class of it's own.
Did I hear a cannon noise go off when you were retracting the barrel?? hahaha that's awesome. You made no comment of that in your video and just continued as if nothing happened, love it.
Benjamin Wells actually, your comment made it seem as if the sound was a strange coincidence that the guy either ignored or didnt hear... "and just continued as if nothing happened".
Oh god... This is like the bastard child between a DSLR and a pocket camera. Also... If they made a lens covering a 24-200mm at f/2.8 (or even f/4) for their DSLR line... I'd be getting a Sony.
Love the review as always. Even though it's a built-in lens, does it take external filters? Living in Vegas, sun and reflection can be an issue and I like being able to use polarizing filters. Thanks for any feedback.
Great review as usual, thanks. Here's my current problem. I became interested in the RX100 line a few months ago and bought a M2 just before the M3 came out. Of course, now I would rather have the M3. Many say just bite the bullet and upgrade to the M3, but I think the M2 will work OK for me as a pocket camera as I bounce around here in Hawaii. My main older camera is the Nikon D90 with a couple of lenses, including 70-300mm which is fine for the far off shots. Soooo, rather than upgrade the M2 to M3, I'm thinking the RX10 would be a better choice, especially for shots here on the farm (Kona Coffee Plantation). All the reviews I have read rave about it for amateurs like me. Big question now is - is Sony in the process of upgrading RX10 so I don't get stuck with last years model, or should I buy now? Thanks for responding ...
Excellent review IMO. This looks like a home run from Sony. A bit pricey but probably well worth the price. I wish I had the $$$$ to afford it vs the Panasonic FZ-200. Look forward to seeing it sometime in person.
There is indeed a great demand for weather-sealed all-in-one cameras with larger sensors and better quality lens. I would buy RX10 in a second if it wasn't for the still very short zoom range. It is just not enough to shot birds which I would like to do (among other things). I would not even mind dropping the constant aperture if they included 2-3 times (400-600mm) more zoom.
Hi Steve, very informative video, thanks. I like the idea of this camera, perfect for backpacking, hiking, and outdoor adventures. I wouldn't be surprised to see this take off with small news outlets that need a relatively small video/stills camera with very good IQ. My only doubt is price. I think at $1000 it would be a hit, $1200 may be a touch high. Gotta say I like all the innovation coming out of Sony, they certainly are trying. Great video, and thanks for all the hard work.
Delicious F2.8 full range. Compared with a decent sized sensor. Now that is a good idea. Sure more expensive then a DSLR. but if you have to buy an DSLR + a F2.8 lens. Story changes.
What about the image quality?.... does it compare to a rebel with a kit lens at least?.... Even if the lens in this bridge camera is a great one... the sensor cannot compete against any dslr imho
So I don't need to buy a fairly good variable ND filter with this? Will the build in ND filter be as sufficient as a seperate ND filter from ie. Lightcraft?
hello, I like very much of this Sony rx10, but I did not see you mention about the external flash for this camera, so is there one external flash for Sony rx10 from Sony?
probably too late to answer this question but yes, there are external flashes for this camera. go on the Sony Store website and search for RX10 and then click on the accesories link.
Wouldn't go about calling this camera a "Superzoom", as the focal range is not really that high (as superzoom falls to likes of Pannys FZ200). THIS camera is a tip-of-hat to the past Bridge-Cameras (Large body digital cameras, built in nature to an SLR, but make use of a fixed quality lens). Glory day examples are Minolta A1/A2, Canon Pro1, Sony 828, Nikon 5700/8700. All those systems used a 2/3" sensor and most of them housed a 28-200 equiv. lens (Nikon had a 35-350). They all had tight aperture ranges, manual capacities, and constructed with extensive use of metal/magnesium alloy. I'm otherwise very happy, to see Sony produce, such a fine all-inclusive camera.
How is the JPG?. does shoow RAW? I had one sony long time ago (think was de HX1), great camera, but the jpg where so compressed, no way to adjust that. I had to sell it, horrible artifacts, hope this is not the same story.
It's nice BUT it's hard to focus on stuff sometimes.. Esp at smaller apertures, the lens can't blow out the out-of-focus stuff to make super pretty bokeh at the 35mm equiv 200mm. You kinda can, but it's not the same as a nice piece of glass on a DSLR.. No surprise though.. The clicky wheel will wear out and soon won't be able to lock.. Why design it to slide parallel to the aperture ring? There is sometimes a problem with color aberration.. That's just the negative. Everything else is wonderful and very nice! IMHO Being in 2016, as an amature enthusiast photographer, I give it 7/10 with 5 being okay.
great review steve, definitely a great little camera for 99% of people who want to travel, for parties or just anything to have good iq all around where most would get a t2i and with that crap lens never use the sensor to its potential at all, where as this at least you get that nice little zeiss. great cam
With 1 inch size sensor, what sides of the this RX10 can be better than those cheap 1.5x or 1.6x DSLR in terms of overall images? And with 1 inch sensor, how good that beautiful Zeiss lens can be done for this RX10 although it claims F2.8 all cross the board? Did anyone knows that if NOT a 35mm equivalent size sensor, F2.8 is nothing but just a selling badge for consumers not knowing much about photographing?! All I would say is, yes for this RX10 design is kind of more convinenence than those conventional DSLRs in the market but NEVER could say the image quality is going to be better off at points at all.
+DirectX3 It will be the same (depends on lens, which you will use on DSLR). But DSLR with 200mm lens can be much bigger and even more expensive. You just dont have "all in one" in it.
+DirectX3 Why does everyone keep mentioning the sensor size? It's the real world results that matter, not some stats on paper. Sold my A7s for RX10 mark 1 and I'm very pleased with the results. vimeo.com/136338082
One Inch sensor on this camera. 13.2² + 8.8² = 15.86² Why try to inflated the number? Only say the smallest number. Use the smallest number from this sensor, a 8.8mm sensor. And a fullframe as a 24.00 sensor.
what the hell are you talking about? some sensors are measured the same way tv screens are, on the diagonal. it's not about inflating the number because sensor sizes are still relative to each other.
angelisone well if you seriously want me to do the math... 36² + 24² = 43², which equates to approximately 1.7 inches. but it's just easier to call it a full frame or 35mm!!! (you have heard of a 35mm camera right?) not familiar with a Red6. clearly the diagonal is ONE standard way of measuring AND naming sensor size. Sony didnt just make it up! certainly I have never heard of nominally calling a sensor by it's smallest dimension. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format#Table_of_sensor_formats_and_sizes
RedroomStudios It's all marking hypes. If they started from the beginning with 1.7 inch sensor then people would be lost with the word "Full Frame". We can all agreed like the tire sizes. They start out with a Metric Number. Then throw in a Ratio Number. And ended up with a Standard Number. And in shoe sizes, those number are surely not in Inch nor Metric. We call them (sensors) at smallest number. And EFS, DX, 4/3 and m4/3 as reduction lenses.
angelisone whatever... your arguments dont even make sense. in fact they kind of support my point. in any case, I hope you lose lots of sleep over this. people who care enough to know the size of the sensor are also smart enough to understand the relative size compared to other sensor options. the names and sizes of sensors may not be consistent but you seem to be the only one who is bothered by it. please look up the meaning of the word "nominal". sensors are given names that reference some aspect of their size AND that will be easily memorable. NO, "WE" dont call sensors by their smallest dimension, we call them by their agreed on names as shown in this link I provided you before: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format#Table_of_sensor_formats_and_sizes I guess you will just have to go on bitching and moaning about the names of sensors while the rest of us are busy making use of our equipment. I can see by some of your other comments on here that you are nothing but a moaner and a bitcher. have a crappy day.
If you've got the cash, and if the I.Q. and premium performance features live up to the press this camera's been getting, it looks as though Sony just rewrote the book on the capabilities of a bridge camera, and kicked Canon's SX and Panasonic's (Lumix) FZ lines of cameras right in the teeth.
Excuse me, but isn't this really an f-7.56 24-200 lens? If you multiply the focal length by the 2.7 crop factor, you also have to multiply the aperture. The two are mathematically connected and cannot be separated. Sony marketing can't break math rules.
***** It's true what you say in terms of exposure if you assume certain ISO levels are meaningfully represented by each number across different sensor sizes - but this is wrong. ISO is a measure related to per surface area, so 640 iso across a 1" sensor is very different to the light sensitivity of 640 iso across a 35mm sensor. That's why larger sensors have less noise at "equal" ISO levels, because it isn't really equal at all. Hence on the RX10 at 400 ISO will have similar noise to 1000 ISO on a same generation full frame sensor. It's not just about bokeh, it's all about the total light. And 2.8 on a 1" sensor simply gives less light than 2.8 on a m4/3, aps-c or 35mm.
***** True enough that BSI and other features (which are probably harder on larger sensors) make a difference. My RX10 kicks my old GH2 in the noise department at the same ISO, even given the different generations I mentioned as a factor this is impressive. I have heard about the "smaller sensor size is more efficient" in and of itself, independent of things like BSI only present on one sensor in comparison, but have not heard compelling evidence or reasoning why such an advantage would exist physically. Perhaps you could point me to such info, I'm always keen to update my knowledge. Nevertheless, the counter point I raised remains: ISO cannot be used as a standard (as the term implies) across different sensor sizes, as it is a measure of scaling to the reading of light per sensor area, not per "proportion of total frame". Hence beware multiplying focal lengths and not f stop numbers by crop factors for smaller sensors when assessing cameras.
Sony ripped-off many owners at $1200. Now, they are going under $850.00 because the Panasonic DMC-FZ1000 is here. So don't buy the Sony FDR-AX100 for $2,000.00. Like they screwed with many owners using the SLT-A99. Then gave away a flash/grip. Now under $2,300.00. And a new model is coming in 2015.
JoeSzilagy Sony got a lot of upset customers owning the A77, A99, A7, A7r, AX100, RX100, RX100 Mark II, NEX-7/6/5/3. Many are cancelling the pre-order A7s. You buy a camera with your hard earned money and within one year they come out with a replacement. Remember the SLT-A99. They later throw in flash & grip because the camera eats battery, the flash overheat & with the dreaded flash delayed. Your camera lost value in big time.
JoeSzilagy B&H Photo has lower to $300 less. Many small camera stores are not happy with Sony. What will they (stores) do when they can't move cameras in stock while a newer and lower models are now available? Canon & Nikon are laughing at Sony for pumping out better cameras after 9 to 13 months.
I waited them out and now I will be buying the RX10 for under $1000. I wanted the camera for vid and vacations but didn't want to spend $1300. When it comes to ANYTHING electronics wise I always wait at least 15 months before buying it. I usually wait until they upgrade to a newer model then I buy last years.
Great review Steve! Thanks. I like you comments of the RX10 sensor in comparison to the APS-C and other sensors. Puts it in perspective. And enjoyed your photos as well. All the photos I have seen from this RX10 have surprising detail for a 1" sensor.
OMG! Yes - Sony nails it - love the aperture dial on the lens - perfect.
You CANNOT have an APS-C and still have this camera as it is ! If you used an APS-C sensor with an F2.8 constant 24-200 lens the camera/lens would weigh a ton and be a foot long. The 1 inch sensor is the biggest you could use and still have a camera of this size. Be happy that Sony has built this camera ! Nothing can touch it in this class, mainly because it is now in a class of it's own.
I have the camera and also the A7R, made epicure about 35/50cm with f4, brilliant picture, of course it's a Zeiss lens !
Did I hear a cannon noise go off when you were retracting the barrel?? hahaha that's awesome. You made no comment of that in your video and just continued as if nothing happened, love it.
obviously he added in that sound effect during video editing, along with the text saying "cannon, not Canon"
RedroomStudios obviously, I knew that was edited in as one could tell from reading my comment.
Benjamin Wells actually, your comment made it seem as if the sound was a strange coincidence that the guy either ignored or didnt hear... "and just continued as if nothing happened".
a really well thought-out camera, Sony really brought together the best of their Alpha and RX designers
This is a super lens…would highly recommend this camera to anyone who isn't a pro! Super all-rounder lens!
As a pro I would recommend the RX10 to other professionals. It's that good.
Oh god... This is like the bastard child between a DSLR and a pocket camera.
Also... If they made a lens covering a 24-200mm at f/2.8 (or even f/4) for their DSLR line... I'd be getting a Sony.
Somehow I don't think Sony will sell a lot of lenses the size of a motorcycle.
Love the review as always. Even though it's a built-in lens, does it take external filters? Living in Vegas, sun and reflection can be an issue and I like being able to use polarizing filters. Thanks for any feedback.
Thanks Steve. Great. Nice samples too. Macro key shot looks promising. Any comments on macro?
Classic review, I really like your take on this camera :)
Great review as usual, thanks. Here's my current problem. I became interested in the RX100 line a few months ago and bought a M2 just before the M3 came out. Of course, now I would rather have the M3. Many say just bite the bullet and upgrade to the M3, but I think the M2 will work OK for me as a pocket camera as I bounce around here in Hawaii. My main older camera is the Nikon D90 with a couple of lenses, including 70-300mm which is fine for the far off shots. Soooo, rather than upgrade the M2 to M3, I'm thinking the RX10 would be a better choice, especially for shots here on the farm (Kona Coffee Plantation). All the reviews I have read rave about it for amateurs like me. Big question now is - is Sony in the process of upgrading RX10 so I don't get stuck with last years model, or should I buy now? Thanks for responding ...
Nice night footage of the Fair you shot with this.
Thanks great review ...think I'll get one..I am in Az as well...also can it take a filter or something to protect the lens some?
Excellent review IMO. This looks like a home run from Sony. A bit pricey but probably well worth the price. I wish I had the $$$$ to afford it vs the Panasonic FZ-200. Look forward to seeing it sometime in person.
Another impressive product from Sony
Thanks
I kept wondering why Amazon wanted $1,300.00 for this camera, and now I know. Slick!
There is indeed a great demand for weather-sealed all-in-one cameras with larger sensors and better quality lens. I would buy RX10 in a second if it wasn't for the still very short zoom range. It is just not enough to shot birds which I would like to do (among other things). I would not even mind dropping the constant aperture if they included 2-3 times (400-600mm) more zoom.
Hi Steve, very informative video, thanks. I like the idea of this camera, perfect for backpacking, hiking, and outdoor adventures. I wouldn't be surprised to see this take off with small news outlets that need a relatively small video/stills camera with very good IQ. My only doubt is price. I think at $1000 it would be a hit, $1200 may be a touch high. Gotta say I like all the innovation coming out of Sony, they certainly are trying. Great video, and thanks for all the hard work.
Delicious F2.8 full range. Compared with a decent sized sensor. Now that is a good idea. Sure more expensive then a DSLR. but if you have to buy an DSLR + a F2.8 lens. Story changes.
Does the RX10 have Art filters like the RX100/m2 ? like watercolor etc - with the size it would have been nice to have more Fn buttons
What about the image quality?.... does it compare to a rebel with a kit lens at least?.... Even if the lens in this bridge camera is a great one... the sensor cannot compete against any dslr imho
Zoom carl zeiss lenses ,super camera.this are ,what people are taking about.good photo,video.i want this.two set.
What do you think of the new RX 10 Mark 2? Do you have a tutorial on it?
OMG OMG OMG OMG Why didn't it come out earlier. GODZZZZ
So I don't need to buy a fairly good variable ND filter with this? Will the build in ND filter be as sufficient as a seperate ND filter from ie. Lightcraft?
I'd love this lens in my a6000. Do you recommend something to replace the kit lens?
hello, I like very much of this Sony rx10, but I did not see you mention about the external flash for this camera, so is there one external flash for Sony rx10 from Sony?
probably too late to answer this question but yes, there are external flashes for this camera. go on the Sony Store website and search for RX10 and then click on the accesories link.
Bought it.... Love it!
(but for $1,050, brand new in South Korea)
Very interesting product
Wouldn't go about calling this camera a "Superzoom", as the focal range is not really that high (as superzoom falls to likes of Pannys FZ200). THIS camera is a tip-of-hat to the past Bridge-Cameras (Large body digital cameras, built in nature to an SLR, but make use of a fixed quality lens).
Glory day examples are Minolta A1/A2, Canon Pro1, Sony 828, Nikon 5700/8700. All those systems used a 2/3" sensor and most of them housed a 28-200 equiv. lens (Nikon had a 35-350). They all had tight aperture ranges, manual capacities, and constructed with extensive use of metal/magnesium alloy.
I'm otherwise very happy, to see Sony produce, such a fine all-inclusive camera.
How is the JPG?. does shoow RAW? I had one sony long time ago (think was de HX1), great camera, but the jpg where so compressed, no way to adjust that. I had to sell it, horrible artifacts, hope this is not the same story.
It's nice BUT it's hard to focus on stuff sometimes.. Esp at smaller apertures, the lens can't blow out the out-of-focus stuff to make super pretty bokeh at the 35mm equiv 200mm. You kinda can, but it's not the same as a nice piece of glass on a DSLR.. No surprise though..
The clicky wheel will wear out and soon won't be able to lock.. Why design it to slide parallel to the aperture ring?
There is sometimes a problem with color aberration..
That's just the negative. Everything else is wonderful and very nice! IMHO
Being in 2016, as an amature enthusiast photographer, I give it 7/10 with 5 being okay.
Very nice !
What's the piano song title at the end ?
thanks !
great review steve, definitely a great little camera for 99% of people who want to travel, for parties or just anything to have good iq all around where most would get a t2i and with that crap lens never use the sensor to its potential at all, where as this at least you get that nice little zeiss. great cam
Damn. 200mm f 2.8 just the best
does 1 inch sensor mean the quality of image isn't good?
May I set contrast sharpness saturation?
Lumix FZ200 25-600mm constant f/2.8 Aperture & also shoot 1080p 24p\60p also, its 600-700$ cheaper then the Rx10.
its a Sony Lens and Sony Glass with the Zeiss Name on it.
how does the ISO performance compares to Sony A77? tnx
not as good, mostly because of the smaller sensor.
Cool, a mini Leica S... :)
why not 600mm?
With 1 inch size sensor, what sides of the this RX10 can be better than those cheap 1.5x or 1.6x DSLR in terms of overall images? And with 1 inch sensor, how good that beautiful Zeiss lens can be done for this RX10 although it claims F2.8 all cross the board? Did anyone knows that if NOT a 35mm equivalent size sensor, F2.8 is nothing but just a selling badge for consumers not knowing much about photographing?! All I would say is, yes for this RX10 design is kind of more convinenence than those conventional DSLRs in the market but NEVER could say the image quality is going to be better off at points at all.
+DirectX3 It will be the same (depends on lens, which you will use on DSLR). But DSLR with 200mm lens can be much bigger and even more expensive. You just dont have "all in one" in it.
+DirectX3 Why does everyone keep mentioning the sensor size? It's the real world results that matter, not some stats on paper. Sold my A7s for RX10 mark 1 and I'm very pleased with the results. vimeo.com/136338082
***** Cool. What about pictures quality and low light performance? Fullframe must destroy 1 inch, or not? :)
TRY I'll do some tests A7s vs RX10 mark 1 in a few days and will get back at you.
Cool, thanks
One Inch sensor on this camera. 13.2² + 8.8² = 15.86²
Why try to inflated the number?
Only say the smallest number.
Use the smallest number from this sensor, a 8.8mm sensor.
And a fullframe as a 24.00 sensor.
what the hell are you talking about? some sensors are measured the same way tv screens are, on the diagonal. it's not about inflating the number because sensor sizes are still relative to each other.
RedroomStudios Then how many inches on a 1/1 sensor (full frame)?
And how many inches on a Red 6K camera?
angelisone well if you seriously want me to do the math... 36² + 24² = 43², which equates to approximately 1.7 inches. but it's just easier to call it a full frame or 35mm!!! (you have heard of a 35mm camera right?) not familiar with a Red6. clearly the diagonal is ONE standard way of measuring AND naming sensor size. Sony didnt just make it up! certainly I have never heard of nominally calling a sensor by it's smallest dimension.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format#Table_of_sensor_formats_and_sizes
RedroomStudios It's all marking hypes. If they started from the beginning with 1.7 inch sensor then people would be lost with the word "Full Frame".
We can all agreed like the tire sizes.
They start out with a Metric Number.
Then throw in a Ratio Number.
And ended up with a Standard Number.
And in shoe sizes, those number are surely not in Inch nor Metric.
We call them (sensors) at smallest number.
And EFS, DX, 4/3 and m4/3 as reduction lenses.
angelisone whatever... your arguments dont even make sense. in fact they kind of support my point. in any case, I hope you lose lots of sleep over this. people who care enough to know the size of the sensor are also smart enough to understand the relative size compared to other sensor options. the names and sizes of sensors may not be consistent but you seem to be the only one who is bothered by it. please look up the meaning of the word "nominal". sensors are given names that reference some aspect of their size AND that will be easily memorable. NO, "WE" dont call sensors by their smallest dimension, we call them by their agreed on names as shown in this link I provided you before: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_sensor_format#Table_of_sensor_formats_and_sizes
I guess you will just have to go on bitching and moaning about the names of sensors while the rest of us are busy making use of our equipment. I can see by some of your other comments on here that you are nothing but a moaner and a bitcher. have a crappy day.
You sound like Tyle for inner fidelity haha
If you've got the cash, and if the I.Q. and premium performance features live up to the press this camera's been getting, it looks as though Sony just rewrote the book on the capabilities of a bridge camera, and kicked Canon's SX and Panasonic's (Lumix) FZ lines of cameras right in the teeth.
The 'cannon' not 'Canon' tag was useful... Fanboys might have cried foul otherwise.
You should compare to the new Olympus Stylus 1 for half the price
Fz200 has this for breakfast
I really wish this had APS-C.
I don't think you are suppose to zoom manually. It will destroy the motor.
Excuse me, but isn't this really an f-7.56 24-200 lens? If you multiply the focal length by the 2.7 crop factor, you also have to multiply the aperture. The two are mathematically connected and cannot be separated. Sony marketing can't break math rules.
***** It's true what you say in terms of exposure if you assume certain ISO levels are meaningfully represented by each number across different sensor sizes - but this is wrong. ISO is a measure related to per surface area, so 640 iso across a 1" sensor is very different to the light sensitivity of 640 iso across a 35mm sensor. That's why larger sensors have less noise at "equal" ISO levels, because it isn't really equal at all.
Hence on the RX10 at 400 ISO will have similar noise to 1000 ISO on a same generation full frame sensor. It's not just about bokeh, it's all about the total light. And 2.8 on a 1" sensor simply gives less light than 2.8 on a m4/3, aps-c or 35mm.
bianzhengnazi Sorry my maths was wrong. RX10 400 ISO will have similar noise to (400 x 2.7 x 2.7=) 2900 ISO on full frame.
***** True enough that BSI and other features (which are probably harder on larger sensors) make a difference. My RX10 kicks my old GH2 in the noise department at the same ISO, even given the different generations I mentioned as a factor this is impressive. I have heard about the "smaller sensor size is more efficient" in and of itself, independent of things like BSI only present on one sensor in comparison, but have not heard compelling evidence or reasoning why such an advantage would exist physically. Perhaps you could point me to such info, I'm always keen to update my knowledge.
Nevertheless, the counter point I raised remains: ISO cannot be used as a standard (as the term implies) across different sensor sizes, as it is a measure of scaling to the reading of light per sensor area, not per "proportion of total frame". Hence beware multiplying focal lengths and not f stop numbers by crop factors for smaller sensors when assessing cameras.
Intro is abit much... but good video as always
$5 for a Twinkie??? What a total rip-off that fair was!!
at target i saw sony Rx10 for 199.99 $
Qetsia DIY
It's also got a 1/2.3" 12 mp sensor, that stinks.
Try again.
and leica lens
Sony ripped-off many owners at $1200.
Now, they are going under $850.00 because the Panasonic DMC-FZ1000 is here.
So don't buy the Sony FDR-AX100 for $2,000.00.
Like they screwed with many owners using the SLT-A99. Then gave away a flash/grip.
Now under $2,300.00. And a new model is coming in 2015.
JoeSzilagy Sony got a lot of upset customers owning the A77, A99, A7, A7r, AX100, RX100, RX100 Mark II, NEX-7/6/5/3.
Many are cancelling the pre-order A7s.
You buy a camera with your hard earned money and within one year they come out with a replacement.
Remember the SLT-A99. They later throw in flash & grip because the camera eats battery, the flash overheat & with the dreaded flash delayed.
Your camera lost value in big time.
JoeSzilagy B&H Photo has lower to $300 less. Many small camera stores are not happy with Sony.
What will they (stores) do when they can't move cameras in stock while a newer and lower models are now available?
Canon & Nikon are laughing at Sony for pumping out better cameras after 9 to 13 months.
I waited them out and now I will be buying the RX10 for under $1000. I wanted the camera for vid and vacations but didn't want to spend $1300. When it comes to ANYTHING electronics wise I always wait at least 15 months before buying it. I usually wait until they upgrade to a newer model then I buy last years.
JoeSzilagy
Ok, I will look into this. I will visit Aden Cam on Yonge st. Thanks
Lee! Sorry, but it might have been the FZ1000 for $919, or whatever it was- I just checked. Aden has the RX10 for $1099.
And half the IQ, with a 1/1.7" sensor...
Good camera for posers, though.
Looks real pro...
From the look of your hand you still insist on skateboarding to work.
Show the pictures and video you're talking about. Terrible.
Zoom carl zeiss lenses ,super camera.this are ,what people are taking about.good photo,video.i want this.two set.