kahren wrote:
the rx100 is pocketable, the lx5 gf1 not so much, adding an evf to the rx100 would make it no longer pocketable. I think that is the big point, this seems to be more inline with the canons s100 intended use.
I don't understand your point. Do you think the Sony rx100 is significantly smaller than the GF1 or LX5? If you take off the accessory EVF the camera hasn't gotten any larger (except any minimal increase in size for the attachment connection).
Hmm I don't know if they can fit all that much more electronics in there. Keep in mind, the sensor is relatively huge and so is the folded lens if you compare it to the S100.
I'd rather have a tilting LCD but again, size.
This looks like it's just big enough to fit into the inner breast pocket of a sports coat or to a back jeans pocket. That's a perfect size for a casual camera.
They could have maybe squeezed it in there, although I don't know how much space would have been required for the accessory port, internally. The RX100 is smaller than both the LX5 and GF1.
Jeff Kott wrote:
I don't understand your point. Do you think the Sony rx100 is significantly smaller than the GF1 or LX5? If you take off the accessory EVF the camera hasn't gotten any larger (except any minimal increase in size for the attachment connection).
for fitting in a pocket, yes i think its significantly smaller, if you are not fitting it in a pocket it really doesn't matter.
i think even a nex with kit lens is better to carry then any of these, if you are not gonna bother to put them in a pocket.
the s100 would still be way nicer to have in jean pocket then the rx100, but if you need every last bit of IQ there are no cameras right not that can equal the rx100 for its pocketability. imo
millsart wrote:
That is why its called an accessory though, because you can take it on/off as needed. If your planning to take the on a walk and want it in a pocket, leave the EVF at home. If your going to be doing some shooting at the beach etc where an EVF could be handy, or you simply prefer not to hold a camera at arms length, snap the EVF on.
It gives versatility and choices to the end user
i just don't see how they can add a port plus a hot shoe without making the cameras taller, and it looks like making this camera as small as possible was their top priority.
you can see here that the screen takes up the full height of the camera
For someone like me that only has a basic phone (not a priority spend for me) I guess this makes sense as a pocket/take everywhere camera that takes 'pretty good' casual images that are better than other point and shoot cameras.
However, most of the people with the money and tech awareness to buy this type of camera probably have a good camera phone already. Therefore, why would they carry 2 devices around that take 'pretty good' images and neither have a viewfinder /EVF?
Why not have a good camera phone device plus a dslr/mirrorless that takes superb images when they know they will want to be take nice photos?
Guess it comes down to how often a given person needs something with better IQ than a camera phone, yet not so much the IQ of a larger mirrorless option.
Likewise, how often someone is willing to carry something larger than just their phone, but doesn't want to be burdened to a mirrorless option.
Really its no different than a mirrorless system vs a DSLR. Many want better IQ than a compact but can compromise for less than a FF DSLR because they want something easier to carry than a DSLR.
Everyone wants that "golidlocks" camera that gives them the best possible IQ in whatever a given person feels to be the smallest thing they are willing to carry, or that best fits in the type of clothes they were etc.
Just as we all have different IQ needs, we all typically have different styles of dress.
Exactly the same thing I see with people trying to find a defensive handgun for CCW permitted carry. People want stopping power but what might work fine for jeans and an untucked shirt wouldn't work for a dress suit. Thusly you see people arguing about how they couldn't imagine carrying a 380 when there are sub compact 9mm's that ride just fine in their in waistband holster, yet the people making those claims have never worn a suit jacket in years.
ricardovaste wrote:
A bit "yawn late to the show" for me. If they'd brought this out two years ago it could have been interesting. Unless I'm missing something obvious...
If I'm not mistaken, I believe this is the smallest camera made with a larger than P&S sized sensor, which makes it interesting. It would be a great camera to have in a purse, briefcase, backpack, etc.
FlyPenFly wrote:
Those new Walther 9mms and Sig sub compact 9mm's are tiny. Pretty much all of them hurt the webbing of my hands when I've shot them.
From last I read, a 380acp doesn't have the penetration to match 9mm when using the same quality HP ammo.
True enough, but I'd certainly never want to be on the receiving end of even a 380auto just the same.
I personally find the sub compact 9's to still be a bit too large. They are a little smaller than my M&P 9c, but still fairly substantial, especially compared to something like a Ruger LCP 380, KelTec etc which is so very thin.
I think if it were me, and I wanted to go with something a little power powerful than a 380acp, I'd pick up a Ruger LCR in 38 Special and shoot +P rounds. Its thicker and larger than a 380 auto of course, but the overall silhouette is less than a stocky 9mm sub compact. Not to mention it could also be fired from a jacket pocket and there are no worries of failure to eject or cycle etc. If it goes "click" simply pull the trigger again.
Needless to say, firearms don't really have much to do with this thread, but as you can see, they really do have many parallels to what one is willing to carry, be it a camera or a defensive pistol
douglasf13 wrote:
If I'm not mistaken, I believe this is the smallest camera made with a larger than P&S sized sensor, which makes it interesting. It would be a great camera to have in a purse, briefcase, backpack, etc.
Does that 41meg Nokia cameraphone still have what would be considered a p&s sensor ?? I thought it would be larger than the standard p&s but really have no clue if its just 1/1.7" or what not
millsart wrote:
Does that 41meg Nokia cameraphone still have what would be considered a p&s sensor ?? I thought it would be larger than the standard p&s but really have no clue if its just 1/1.7" or what not
millsart wrote:
Wow, thanks for that, very interesting.
Got to say while I'm not rushing to upgrade, I certainly won't be complaining if/when my cell phone has a sensor like the 808 Pureview in it.
i have a nokia n8 and while i am overall pretty happy with it, i would go buy the 808 right now if it was $400-450 but the current $650+ price is stopping me
