My Sony RX10 verdict after Nikon D200

[Phadrea]

Well, I have been using this camera for a few months as my Nikon D200 power was too unstable and I wanted an up to date camera that can shoot HD video to high quality. The video side I am not dissapointed but I can't say the same for the stills. The D200 was a dream to get good, sharp images with a wide dynamic range to work with in RAW. The RX10 however is more miss than hit. Even in RAW at 125 ISO there seems to be more noise, hardly sharp, lower dynamic range, blows out at highlights and the colours don't seem as true as the D200. This is such a shame as I thought a camera almost 10 years newer would do all that with ease. It doesn't. Even on a tripod the images are not always sharp where the D200 would never let me down.

My other problem with the video is focusing. It will not always focus, even when you lock it onto the subject thus losing the moment. I edit in Lightroom 5.

All is not lost because I have an excellent video camera with an excellent lens that I am using to get footage for microstock. At a push I use for stills but I think I will have to lean on my D200 for stills as it is far more trustworthy. Shame as I wanted a camera to carry light. I nearly got the Sony A7r but the video quality was poor. 

What I can't understand is the same sensor, lens is being used to get pretty stunning video- why such a difference in stills ? If anyone else uses this and gets great stills, I would be interested to know the settings that are it's sweet spot as I seem to get mostly sour.

[shiyali]

I have been using the RX10 since February. I have no problem with sharpness, I'm a jpeg shooter, and usually have sharpening set to -1 and still sharp enough. Colors is a bit tricky, especially when overcast or shade, I use the white balance settings to adjust colors, "shade" setting gives warmer colors, "sunny" gives good blue skies, auto can be a bit cool, but I adjust in PP. I used the Olympus e620 before, and yes Oly colors and WB is better, but RX10 has many other advantages, I like the built in HDR and multi frame noise reduction. The lens is excellent and super versatile.

[lbarn]

I am curious how the Panasonic FZ1000 superzoom which uses the same sized sensor as the RX10 but with more zoom range and 4K video, will compare. 

Not to replace my 60D, but perhaps as a travel camera or to experiment with 4K video.

[Phadrea]

Turns out I have a duff RX10 and it is going back. The company I bought if from have had a look at the RAW files I sent them and agree that it is indeed not taking good , sharp images so hopefully I will have the real thing soon. Funny enough I read another forum where a Panasonic FZ1000 user is having the same problems as me with soft, poor colour and contrast shots so perhaps there is a bad batch of sensors knocking about.

[shiyali]

Turns out I have a duff RX10 and it is going back. The company I bought if from have had a look at the RAW files I sent them and agree that it is indeed not taking good , sharp images so hopefully I will have the real thing soon. Funny enough I read another forum where a Panasonic FZ1000 user is having the same problems as me with soft, poor colour and contrast shots so perhaps there is a bad batch of sensors knocking about.

I'm sorry to hear that, I hope they can exchange it for a good copy. RX10 is a very capable machine, but I would recommend downsizing the images a bit. You cannot treat it like a 20MP DSLR, more like a 12 to 14MP one.

[etudiante_rapide]

glad u had it fixed.
mirrorless is a different camera altogether, so one has to learn the camera as it is not a DSLR.
much in the same way u never did handle a NiknF like a Leica M

other thing is many DSLR say it is not sharp with a mirrorless, when in fact, it is that their DSLR
does sharpening in default. much like in the days of Kodachrome 25 and 64, many Ektachrome users say it is sharper with Ekta when in fact it was the grain. the former was in fact sharpest.

[Hobostocker]

i tried a few mirrorless cameras recently and i'm of the opinion they're still a long way from being on par even with a cheap 400$ DSLR.

they're excellent for portability, weight, and size, but for anything else i'm disappointed, and i really wanted to buy one and my needs are nothing special, all i need is a good prime lens and a fast camera but none of them is fast as a DSLR especially regarding AF.

i think we'll have to wait 2-3 more yrs before seeing decent pocket cameras in the market, all i've seen so far as toys packed with all the bells and whistles and they don't come cheap, not at all.

[Phadrea]

The sony rx10 is not a toy by any means. I really got it for the video capabilities and when on form the stills are excellent. If it is equal to my D200 I am happy.

[bunhill]

i tried a few mirrorless cameras recently and i'm of the opinion they're still a long way from being on par even with a cheap 400$ DSLR.

they're excellent for portability, weight, and size, but for anything else i'm disappointed, and i really wanted to buy one and my needs are nothing special, all i need is a good prime lens and a fast camera but none of them is fast as a DSLR especially regarding AF.

AF speed is only important if you are taking the sorts of pictures which need fast AF.

DSLRs are great in a studio. But walking around with one today is rather like having your cell phone in a belt holster IMO. And they kind of get in the way.

[bunhill]

Double post !

[Hobostocker]

The sony rx10 is not a toy by any means. I really got it for the video capabilities and when on form the stills are excellent. If it is equal to my D200 I am happy.

ok, but i was talking about photos, not video, i don't need video, and actually i hate the idea of cameras doing video, audio, wi-fi, facebook, coffee, and who knows what more ... i want a camera just doing one thing and doing it well.

[Hobostocker]

AF speed is only important if you are taking the sorts of pictures which need fast AF.

DSLRs are great in a studio. But walking around with one today is rather like having your cell phone in a belt holster IMO. And they kind of get in the way.

i would use such pocket camera only for street photography so yes AF speed is important !
but also power-on speed, i can't work with a camera taking 3-4 second to power on and focus, it must be instant-on like a DSLR.

so what's the problem ? slow cpus ? not enough memory ? crippled-down architecture ?
i don't get it, some of these cameras cost almost 1000$, why they can't just take the same electronics of a nikon D3000 for instance and make it mirroless  with a 35mm prime lens ??

the only reason might be they have no intention to cannibalize their DSLR market and i can understand their fears but .. ?

[bunhill]

i would use such pocket camera only for street photography so yes AF speed is important !
but also power-on speed, i can't work with a camera taking 3-4 second to power on and focus, it must be instant-on like a DSLR.

Most of the world's most important 'street photographs' were taken before AF was invented. Focus is not critical and zone focusing was always the thing anyhow. If you wanted a camera to take those sorts of pictures today then the 2014 Ricoh GR would surely be better than any DSLR tourist camera.

Daido Moriyama: In Pictures

[Phadrea]

If you think the RX10 is behind SLR cameras for stills take a look at this and think again. For microstock this camera is more than enough if I shoot in RAW and post edit in lightroom. Also, having the eye and good light are also important.

http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/getting-comfortable-with-sony-rx10.html

[Hobostocker]

Most of the world's most important 'street photographs' were taken before AF was invented. Focus is not critical and zone focusing was always the thing anyhow. If you wanted a camera to take those sorts of pictures today then the 2014 Ricoh GR would surely be better than any DSLR tourist camera.

Daido Moriyama: In Pictures

sure, but we're in 2014, man.

people used film and manual focus only because technology wasn't there, today they would go digital all the way and wouldn't look back.

i've nothing against shooting with cr-ap pocket cameras, i had many and they're fun and i use them very often, but it's a pain in the as-s how much they're slow and clunky.

i tried a Ricoh some time ago, no idea what model it was, but i remember it was slow as a dog, even browsing the menu was slow !

[lionheart]

Hobostocker, don't know what mirrorless cams you looked at. Your comparison isn't up to date anymore.
Mirrorless systems are capable of great quality. Maybe you should try out an Olympus EM1 equipped
with a fine lens. Then shoot and let us know about your experience ...
And if you are into size and power have a look at the Sony RX100. Try to get one
of the first series (RX100-1). They are discounted everywhere because RX100-2 and
recently RX100-3 are out. It shares the same sensor the RX10 uses and when shooting
raw and developping your files carefully you get really satisfying results.

[Phadrea]

Well I have been fully refunded for the faulty RX10 so now I am thinking do I get a new one which is hopefully not faulty or wait and see what will come out better. The trouble is there are no full frame slr cameras out there that can shoot as good HD video and have that amazing lens.

[BaldricksTrousers]

If you think the RX10 is behind SLR cameras for stills take a look at this and think again. For microstock this camera is more than enough if I shoot in RAW and post edit in lightroom. Also, having the eye and good light are also important.

http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/getting-comfortable-with-sony-rx10.html

I don't know if its the camera or his processing but the colour/contrast of the images in that link reminds me very strongly of the results I get with the 1940s Color Skopar on my folding Voigtlander Vito I.  Strange.

[Phadrea]

If you think the RX10 is behind SLR cameras for stills take a look at this and think again. For microstock this camera is more than enough if I shoot in RAW and post edit in lightroom. Also, having the eye and good light are also important.

http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/getting-comfortable-with-sony-rx10.html

I don't know if its the camera or his processing but the colour/contrast of the images in that link reminds me very strongly of the results I get with the 1940s Color Skopar on my folding Voigtlander Vito I.  Strange.

I think it is possibly the warm early morning light and the time of year perhaps.