Tariq Gibran wrote:
Anything larger than about 4.3"'s is going to be cumbersome for single handed holding and front pant's pockets in my experience. That said, going from a 3.5" Nexus One to an HTC Sensation with that 4.3"'s was a huge improvement and is still very comfortable to carry in a pocket and hold with one hand. I'm actually somewhat shocked (well not really, they have historically proven to be pretty dogmatic about things... like single button mice for instance) it has taken Apple so long to increase the physical size. After using larger and more featured phones for so long, I personally don't see how people get along with iPhones in their current state...except for the great camera! ...Show more →
Check this out for a possible explanation:
Supposedly Apple has a set priority to maintain a size where the keyboard can be accessed easily by the thumb in a one handed grip.
I really like the iphone's straightforward design and ease of use.
pingflood wrote:
Those two charts do not agree with each other.
In one, the 808 covers around 63% horizontally of the 4/3 sensor.
In the other, around 81%.
after closer inspection they did seem wrong to me as well, one i found at dpreview the other was from a google search
i didn't like either of them so i made my own, here it is down below
Nokia 808 certainly has a very interesting camera though I can't say the same about my iphone 4s camera. Sure it is better than any other camera phone that I have used in the past and is fairly good if lighting is not challenging. But in less than ideal conditions, it cannot even match the 2MP canon point and shoot that I had 10 years ago, let alone the s95 or rx100 types cameras. And the argument about the cell phone camera quality being good enough for facebook / web, is not very valid. Even with my wife's s95 which is far better than my iphone, it is easy to get lots of ruined shots which are obviously bad even at when viewing at my 13 inch laptop. So yes the fact that the RX100 gives higher performance in a similarly sized package as s95 is exciting as far as I am concerned. Sure it is not a replacement for a DSLR but I am all for having better quality "snapshots"
kahren wrote:
after closer inspection they did seem wrong to me as well, one i found at dpreview the other was from a google search
i didn't like either of them so i made my own, here it is down below
Its not "cheap" but given the XZ-1 was once about $499, and the LX5, G12 etc all were once going for well over $400, and last but not least the Fuji X10 was $599, I don't know if a $650 RX100 is really that out of line, especially given its sensor is the size of the Nikon V/J1 series.
If you crossed a Fuji X10 at $599, and a Nikon J1 at $699, and a Canon S100 at $439 you'd end up with the Rx100 and being a new product and a Sony its going to have a little premium but $650 still isn't bad.
Probably drop to $599 soon though just to be a little more inline but I don't think the enthusiast compact market buyers will really be that turned off by the price tag.
If you'll spend nearly $500 on a 1/1.7" sensor compact, you'd probably happily spend $600 or even $650 on one that gives you a 1" sensor as thats a pretty major upgrade.
millsart wrote:
Its not "cheap" but given the XZ-1 was once about $499, and the LX5, G12 etc all were once going for well over $400, and last but not least the Fuji X10 was $599, I don't know if a $650 RX100 is really that out of line, especially given its sensor is the size of the Nikon V/J1 series.
If you crossed a Fuji X10 at $599, and a Nikon J1 at $699, and a Canon S100 at $439 you'd end up with the Rx100 and being a new product and a Sony its going to have a little premium but $650 still isn't bad.
Probably drop to $599 soon though just to be a little more inline but I don't think the enthusiast compact market buyers will really be that turned off by the price tag.
If you'll spend nearly $500 on a 1/1.7" sensor compact, you'd probably happily spend $600 or even $650 on one that gives you a 1" sensor as thats a pretty major upgrade....Show more →
Your reasoning on the price is sound. I'm more concerned about how that lens performs in the corners than how the sensor performs and would like to get some better info on that before I commit. I still think Pogue's sample photos are underwhelming.
Jeff Kott wrote:
Your reasoning on the price is sound. I'm more concerned about how that lens performs in the corners than how the sensor performs and would like to get some better info on that before I commit. I still think Pogue's sample photos are underwhelming.
Hopefully the lens while maybe a little soft wide open can sharpen up stopped down, which I think would rather negate the optics for most real world shooting.
If one is shooting wide open, its usually because its either low light or they want a bit of subject isolation (not that a 1" sensor at 28mm equiv is going to give much) but regardless, in both cases, they probably aren't the type of shots where corner performance is that important.
However, given it is packing 20 megapixels and actually has the potential to produce some nice files, it would be great if it could sharpen up acceptability and actually have a pocket sized camera that could make a nice 12x18 landscape print.
My old Canon G10 was nice this in this regard with a pretty decent lens honestly, but the real issue was the insanely noisy little sensor (even ISO80 had some noise in blue skies and ISO200 was beyond bad already)
If the lens can't deliver though, then it rather makes the high resolution all for naught. Who needs a 20meg file thats soft right ?
Make it a 12 meg sensor and make it better at high SO and it would be a cool low light snapshot camera.
But yea I was really suprised when I saw that size.. And it actually gives nice photos with touch of Zeiss...