Dear friends.

I can confirm the following regarding Sony’s RX10 SteadyShot as stated by Sony’s technical marketing manager:

-Optical SteadyShot Active Mode: roll correction is achieved by crop-out of the picture.
-Optical SteadyShot Standard Mode: pitch and yaw correction are done only with optical stabiliser function, therefore no cropping.
-OFF: Neither optical nor electrical stabilisation is processed.

The resolution of Active Mode is a bit worse than the other 2.
Standard mode and OFF should be the same image quality.

Thank you!

Johnnie

Oh no, how horrible! Do you think I should cancel my order and get a GH3 instead :-)

You could also start to learn how to use your pocketcam and save yourself another 1000+ dollar :) You might find that hard to believe but there still exist people that do find good overall image quality important for their productions.

I think it would be a perfect replacement if one of my sony cx730's would die, it should be a better camera in a lot of areas, especially in terms of control, though not so sure how it would compare in low light. I currently use my handicams exclusively for indoor ceremony at a wedding or to record danceperformances and for that they are perfect little camera's but for all the rest I prefer a dslr.

In the eoshd video I also see burned out whites, only wonder how that would look if there is a white wedding dress on a sunny day.

-Optical SteadyShot Active Mode: roll correction is achieved by crop-out of the picture.
-Optical SteadyShot Standard Mode: pitch and yaw correction are done only with optical stabiliser function, therefore no cropping.
-OFF: Neither optical nor electrical stabilisation is processed.


Looks like the same how the sony cx handicam series deal with stabilization, active mode also crops a part of the image to further improve stabilization.

You could also start to learn how to use your pocketcam and save yourself another 1000+ dollar :)

Ha ha, oh come now, Noa, surely you are not saying the BMPCC is able to do what the RX10 can do, that they are comparable? I am still playing around with my BMPCC, learning. I like the ProRes image, raw bores me to tears. It's still a pig to operate but I haven't put it up for sale, for now.

The RX10 - the more I see and read the more I like it. One videographer whom I respect who now has one says it outperforms his GH3 and his GX7. The videos out there, more and more on YouTube everyday are not dissuading me in the slightest either. If you have a moment of remarkable lucidity and decide to sell your GH3 and purchase a RX10 then do let me know. Now that I have a couple of Panny lenses I might be tempted to get a GH3 in order that I might have first hand experience, side by side if you will. Naw, the GH3 just doesn't tick enough boxes though as you have demonstrated it is possible to get nice video out of the thing.

The RX10 - might just be the cat's pajamas :-)

I"m still waiting for your "meet me in big sur" HX20v counterpart but I"m sure the rx10 will even do much better in your capable hands :) When you get the camera show how good it is instead of telling it, then I might replace my gh3.

Pardon me for going a little off-topic, is it you John who posted a BMPCC video (ProRes) of Waikawa Bay a while back. I remember loving those gorgeous shots despite some being out of focus but that's understandable given how "pig" the camera is to operate. If you did post that I suggest you forget about getting the RX10 and saving some more money for a real video camera instead. Not only does the codec break down noticeably when stressed, the resolution, dynamic range and gradation in static scenes don't appear to be much different from a number of palm-sized Sony Handycams I use, e.g. CX760E, PJ760VE and NX70P. I'm afraid no matter how hard you try the image you get will just not be comparable to that Waikawa Bay video.

Thank you Wacharapong; that was indeed me. I should first point out that I consider image capturing devices somewhat like golf clubs. Even though I don’t play golf I find the analogy useful as most people have an understanding of the game. I would no more think of approaching the fun of image capturing as a one-camera exercise than one would head out onto the golf course with just one club in the bag. Which camera to pull out of the bag is very much determined by the lay of the land and what I am trying to achieve bearing in mind the important variables. Even if I was intent just on putting practice I might bring along more than one putter and chose as I see fit at the time. It’s not this or that but rather this and that.

Another useful analogy is to consider motor vehicles. What is the best motor vehicle? Bearing that in mind what do you suggest in the way of a real video camera?

One camera missing from my bag of tricks is a walk-about device that is lightweight and highly portable; that captures both high quality still photographs and decent quality video as well as checks most if not all of my boxes and that is quick and easy to use. The camera I have that comes closest to fitting that bill is a NEX 5n with a Sony E 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 attached. For my purposes this setup has limitations that the RX10 will resolve.

Regarding the AVCHD codec deployed in the RX10 could you please point me to footage that demonstrates the shortcoming you mentioned? That would be most appreciated. I have several cameras that record AVCHD and have not experienced that phenomena as yet. Mind you, I don’t really do heavy grading.

In any event my plan to add the RX10 to my kit is not to replace any of my other clubs but to compliment them. My lowly HX20v has a place too and when Noa sends me the round trip ticket plus expenses I shall pop it into my pocket and go shoot the Big Sur thing for him. Of course I will also need a couple of weeks recovery time in Honolulu paid for. Be that as it may the RX10 I believe will do many things better than the HX20v does, and vice versa.

Based on the specifications, the footage especially MTS files I have viewed and the rapidly emerging mini-reviews of experienced videographers I am thus far convinced that purchasing an RX10 is money well spent. Whether or not I shall be able to deliver Waikawa Bay Way quality footage (in focus) using the RX10 I shall explore, of that you can be sure. I hear what you are saying and thank you for your input. I shall attempt to understand the dynamics involved. But that is not the end of the story as I don’t see the RX10 as a direct replacement of the BMPCC. I certainly do not expect the RX10 to be such a pig to operate; in fact I believe it might just be fun.

Cheers...

If the RX10 faces anything in the market it is that distinctly dual personality - is it a still camera that shoots video or a video camera that shoots stills...?? Yes, yes it is...

I've already said that the photographer will say "too expensive" (from that standpoint it is, sort of - I'm trying not to think of what I have in my Alpha cams in comparison...), and the video guy will have a bit of trouble getting their head around a still camera with video emphasis... It's a new class of camera, there will probably be a few kinks to work out (hopefully via firmware updates), and it's a unique "hammer" - one that may not fit everyone's toolbox, but for many, it could be one fine tool, even if there are some "flaws".

I'm not seeing any "fatal" flaws in footage I've seen, as in deal breakers - not something I can say for some other "popular" cameras I've tried or considered. I'd even say some shots have stood out as "eye candy" - good camera work, but also a good camera... you can sort of tell that whatever the "critiques" that one must have in a review, the camera was not overly standing in the way of creativity and good camera work, if that makes sense.

I'm trying to remember when I last shot video with a video camera... lately it's been the RX100/M2 and the HX300 - why? Because they are small, light, easy to get acceptable results with, and yeah, they happen to be fun to shoot... the results look "fine" to me, no complaints under most conditions. I'm sure they are not "perfect", but they beat most of the cameras I've used in recent years, and again, light and easy to carry, so I have them when the opportunity strikes.

I'm not expecting a 1" sensor cam to have "better" image quality than the A77/A65, or a VG series video camera, or... or... but I know the RX100 and now the M2 version do a fine job, and like John says, the 100M2 will be "the right club" at least some of the time, even after there's a RX10 in the bag! Will everyone want or need to have one... prolly not, but that's why there are lots of different cameras, right?

From my view, the RX10 will definitely replace several cameras I've got, and possibly a couple others, but some other cameras (like the RX100M2) will definitely be remaining in the "fleet". As John says, you don't go golfing with one club, or take a tool bag with just a pair of pliers, or go to the racetrack with a minivan...

….a walk-about device that is lightweight and highly portable; that captures both high quality still photographs and decent quality video as well as checks most if not all of my boxes and that is quick and easy to use.
Alternatives to the RX10 would be:
- Panasonic G6 + 14-140mm Lens (A little better stills, comparable video quality, same codec, nearly similar in size/form factor, cheaper)
- Panasonic GX7 +14-140mm Lens (Even better stills, better video quality, same codec, more of a cross between the RX10 and RX100 and weighing more or less the same as the RX10, a little more expensive)

Now you could have one camera to make sure you get the shots and the other to make sure that if you have unlimited time and patience the shots you get would more likely be the ones that truly impresses.

I am a Panasonic guy and a big fan of the G6 (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00CFCTDD6?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creativeASIN=B00CFCTDD6&linkCode=xm2&tag=din0a-20), but the RX10 (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00FRHTSMW?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creativeASIN=B00FRHTSMW&linkCode=xm2&tag=din0a-20) vs G6 (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00CFCTDD6?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creativeASIN=B00CFCTDD6&linkCode=xm2&tag=din0a-20) +14-140 comparison breaks down in low light.

The 14-140 cannot match the light gathering performance of the RX10 (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00FRHTSMW?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creativeASIN=B00FRHTSMW&linkCode=xm2&tag=din0a-20)'s constant f2.8 lens.

And neither camera has a built-in ND filter or a headphone jack. The GX7 doesn't even have a mic jack.

Panasonic's only real answer to the RX10 (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00FRHTSMW?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creativeASIN=B00FRHTSMW&linkCode=xm2&tag=din0a-20) is a GH3 with 12-35 and 35-100 lenses - but that's less than 10x total zoom - and carrying two lenses around is a lot less convenient and a lot more money.

The RX10 (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00FRHTSMW?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creativeASIN=B00FRHTSMW&linkCode=xm2&tag=din0a-20)'s strength is clearly not its codec. Its competitive advantages are its lens, its convenience and its price. This will be the sweet spot for a lot of buyers this holiday season.

I'm sticking with Panasonic for now, but if Sony can lift the 30 minute continuous recording limit outside of the EU and fix the codec, I'll get rid of my GH cameras and buy the "RX20" :)

Heck, if they add RAW to the "RX30", I'll sell my BMPCC (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00CWLSHUK?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creativeASIN=B00CWLSHUK&linkCode=xm2&tag=din0a-20)!

Cheers, and best of the holidays,

Bill

Sony make a point of having a clean HDMI for external recording which will solve any concerns about the AVCHD codec and allow for long record time too. Still think we will see this sensor in a real camcorder though.

I agree with having different cameras though. For skiing I have my HX30V and GoPro 3 Black Edition. Both go in my ski jacket pockets ( or on my helmet). The rest of the time the HX30V lives in my wife's handbag to take photos of the grand kids. RX10 is still too big for this task. For theatre shoots my NX5U and now FDR-AX1 with NX30U and CX700, several heavy tripods and Manfrotto clamps . Tasks are very different and need different tools. "One size fits all" is not a likely proposition. With modern technology there are a lot of overlaps that did not exist in the past where depending on needs a single camera may fit the job .

Ron Evans

The 14-140 cannot match the light gathering performance of the RX10 (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00FRHTSMW?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creativeASIN=B00FRHTSMW&linkCode=xm2&tag=din0a-20)'s constant f2.8 lens.

Don't forget that RX10 has a smaller sensor than M4/3 cameras, so despite the larger aperture they have almost the same light gathering ability. The 2.8 is equivalent to 4 in the M4/3 format.

Only as it regards depth of field otherwise 2.8 is 2.8.
If you light a scene and shoot the GH3 the 5DIII and the RX10, they will all read the same exposure at f/2.8.
The other difference is that the smaller sensor will have more noise.
But as far as equivalent light gathering, 2.8 will expose the same on the RX10 as it will on the 5D.

^
Yes, but the smaller sensor pixel size will decrease light gathering ability from that constant f2.8 roughly in proportion to sensor size (really in proportion to pixel size given equal sensor technologies, but there is only roughly a full stop difference between backlit and regular sensor technologies). So, a f2.8 lens on the RX10 will roughly be equal to a F4 on the MFT, for producing equivalent exposures under conditions of low light, and only under those conditions if they had equal sensor technologies. However, the Sony sensor is backlit and I am not aware that most MFT sensors are, so the difference in pixel size is negotiated by sensor technology. F2.8 always produces the same illumination, actually T2.8 is always the same, but then the issue is what can the sensor do with that light when conditions are marginal. If there is an excess of light then this constraint does not apply.

...I suggest you forget about getting the RX10 and saving some more money for a real video camera instead.

Right on! I've been thinking about John McCully's Waiwaka video... Hmm, he might save up for a Red Dragon for his golf bag: that would really hit it for me. Now back to reality...

...a Red Dragon for his golf bag...

Yeah, right! That thing with lenses, battery and so... I would need a real live caddy! Too much hassle, too inconvenient altogether and it doesn’t even do stills. Forget it; I prefer the RX10.

Here’s another half-decent review from Canada. Just look at all that snow, and yes, I do declare I see blown highlights!

Seems to me the reviewers must find at least one problem or they might be perceived as not doing their job, or worse they might be perceived as beholden to the manufacturer. And guess what; that bad old horrible dastardly AVCHD codec is the problem. Wouldn’t you know it!

Sony engineers must be complete idiots, ha ha.

Sony RX10 Hands-On Field Test - YouTube

Just look at all that snow, and yes, I do declare I see blown highlights!

That snow looks like it's radioactive, is there someone that owns the camera that is seeing the same that highlights blow out easily?

That snow looks like it's radioactive, is there someone that owns the camera that is seeing the same that highlights blow out easily?

Ha ha, maybe it is radioactive. He did point out that this was a Canadian Defense testing ground and one might come across unexploded ordinance and you just never know what those Canadians might have been up to.

If you want to see well controlled highlights check out Dan Carter on Vimeo and in particular his Arizona Biltmore Resort (Sony DSC-RX10). Note what looks like wide dynamic range. I would say he might have about 14 stops, or more perhaps :-)

One has to ask how was it edited and did the NLE used manage Superwhite recorded by all the Sony's AVCHD. If not it will be clipped and loose all the highlights detail. I tend to rework all the output from my cameras using the YUV filter in Edius to bring in range and correct gamma.

Ron Evans

That's an interesting statement Ron, if that is actually the case that could explain this "problem" most users don't seem to be aware about. I"m currently downloading Dan's rx10 video so I can have a better look.

You would need his raw unedited files to really check though.

Ron Evans

I now note that Dan used a polarizer which may have enabled greater dynamic range to be captured.

Must say Dan's footage is the best I have seen so far from this camera, it was partly cloudy that day so that can have an effect on perceived dynamic range but nevertheless it looks very good, also the indoor footage.

I agree; by far and away the best I have seen off the RX10. Dan did a great job. I am encouraged, may I say re-enthused.

I tend to rework all the output from my cameras using the YUV filter in Edius to bring in range and correct gamma.Ron Evans

That's very interesting Ron. I need to understand how that works in Vegas Pro 12, if in fact it does. You don't happen to know Vegas Pro do you? Or even if you would be so kind as to point me in the right direction in Edius that might be a useful point of departure for me.

Many thanks...

My apologies for the somewhat off-topic deviation.

What app can I use to control the camera with my smartphone?

I now note that Dan used a polarizer which may have enabled greater dynamic range to be captured.

Definitely another "must have" accessory - polarizer to cut glare - have one on the RX100M2, well worth having... must go check out Dan's work, as he had good mastery of the RX100M2, which should help with the RX10!

As for the Camera store review -
Snow is another one of those "worst case" scenarios - but again, "- EV" would be your friend. Polarizer is a good add, and I'm looking forward to experimenting with the DRO more. All in all, even if the snow WAS "hot", the images overall looked pretty decent - skin/face exposure and tones looked good - the camera does seem to favor proper exposure for the likely "subject" over whatever background "radiation" levels might be. What I did see looked quite promising, and with a little adjustment, I should think any "issues" could be dealt with.

That's very interesting Ron. I need to understand how that works in Vegas Pro 12, if in fact it does. You don't happen to know Vegas Pro do you? Or even if you would be so kind as to point me in the right direction in Edius that might be a useful point of departure for me.

Many thanks...

My apologies for the somewhat off-topic deviation.

I do use Vegas 12 but mainly for audio so am not used to fine tuning of video in Vegas. You can see the effect though easily by placing an AVCHD clip from a Sony camera on the time line, view waveform to see that ire is around 109 most of the time for white, then apply the Broadcast filter to the clip. The whites will blow out and loose all detail when viewed in the preview monitor. Just like the hot snow of the Camera Store video. The equivalent to YUV filter for Edius in Vegas would be the levels control but I am not good at explaining these. The control is easier in Edius. Matthew Scott is the expert at grading in Edius Matthew Scott Cinematography Blog (http://mattscottvisuals.com/blog/2013/11/15/-dead-therapy-colour-grade-before-after)

Ron Evans

Ron, many thanks for that, most appreciated. I need to get up to speed with that and playing around with the BMPCC and Resolve has been something of an eye opener. I do understand that learning to use the RX10 in order to extract the most from it will also involve upgrading my Vegas Pro skills.

Folks need to get over saying pros don't use AVCHD. That's a completely ridiculous assertion with no basis in reality.

Dan Carter's style and his preference have always been shooting from a solid support i.e. tripod, monopod etc. with minimal camera movement and quite often stationary with static scenes. This is a type of shooting that stresses the codec, focusing/exposure/AWB response significantly less than typical handheld shooting with moderate camera movement does.

For instance, my Sony CX760E, now a two generation old design, has 24, 17, 9 and 5 Mbps 25p AVCHD modes. For talking head shooting with some subject's hand, arm and facial movements but with the camera mounted on the tripod, all of my assistants in the studio, myself included, mostly cannot tell the differences between the 24, 17, 9 Mbps files played back on our 23 and 27 inch 1080p Samsung monitors. Only when we go down to 5 Mbps do we see some differences in artifacts and smearing of fine details but even so they are still not quite noticeable when viewed on a 50 inch HDTV from about 7-8 foot distance.

I'm pretty sure the RX10 will show similar characteristics with respect to compression artifacts in it's video modes. However it should do somewhat better as it's a newer design but we won't know for sure unless someone mounts it on a solid bracket along with the likes of GH3, GX7, G6 or RX100 and shoots the exact same scene with identical movement.

I think that it's not that you "can't" use AVCHD, it's the feeling that the max bitrate (28Mbps in 60p) is not quite up to the task when there's a lot of motion in the frame, resulting in artifacts and less detail than the cameras are capable of, due to the results of the necessary compression and resulting loss.

I've found 60p to be pretty clean when freezing frames, but it has to be stressing the limits of the bitrate in complex scenes with high motion - more data points changing that have to be "handled". 24p will reduce the number of frames and take some stress off the bitrate (IIRC 24p tops at 24Mbps?), but then you get the problems with potential stutter when motion is involved...

Seems like the complaints are with scenes with more motion, but otherwise the CODEC is holding up fairly well. This of course will become quite a bit more interesting when 4K becomes the expected capability - you somehow have to process all those extra data points and still be able to write it to memory, and of course play it back too... more heavy processing... and more storage space...

HDV had problems "back in the day", and that wasn't long ago, earlier implementations of AVCHD at lower bitrates were "OK", but better bitrate = more data points = better images... - it's a constant engineering battle to handle more and more data...

EDIT: I see Wacharapong was posting at the same time... yes, lower motion stresses the codec less, fewer changing data points per frame (more "similar" data points from frame to frame that don't have to be dealt with), so you can "get away with" lower bitrates and it still may look OK... of course those of us who like to shoot things moving about quickly, while shooting handheld with minimal additional support might have different expectations <wink>.


All that aside, the RX10 looks pretty good to me overall, should be a handy and versatile tool. 5 years from now, it'll probably look "dated", but that's tech. Actually, might look "dated" by next year, but right now, it's in a class by itself.

Well my FDR-AX1 at 60P looks nice. That data rate is 150Mbps. So for 4 times the pixels that data rate is 5.4 times that of AVCHD with a newer codec implementation. It needs a fan to keep it cool though !!! But to be fair the difference between 24Mbps 60i of my NX5U and 50Mbps of the FDR-AX1 at 60P 1920x1080 is not noticeable on the things I have shot so far. The FDR-AX1 has a cleaner image. All on a tripod and low movement though.

The processing needed for 4K at the moment needs a big box and a fan. Not something one would expect in something like a RX10. However an external box with a fan may be perfect !!! If one can get a connector that will stay in place on the camera.

Ron Evans

I agree, there are issues with the codec in certain situations and it is far from perfect. I bump against these limits all the time when shooting in AVCHD. My point is that in several RX10 reviews there is a fair amount if complaining about the codec and its unsuitability for pro work. This statement is patently wrong. Having issues does not remove it from the pro arsenal. And, for its faults, it also does quite a lot very well. Just pointing that out for anyone new to the format that may be swayed by these rediculous statements.

Folks need to get over saying pros don't use AVCHD. That's a completely ridiculous assertion with no basis in reality.

This.
Showtime didn't seem to have any problem paying me for the video I shot for them on my FS100.

It's no different than there being the potential for strong moire with the BMPCC.
It doesn't change the fact that it can deliver an image as good as nearly any you'd want for a quality TV spot.
It is a limitation in certain, very real circumstances (like AVCHD can cause low resolution in areas of motion in certain circumstances.)
But of course it can be used for pro work.

Anyone who has a problem with the RX10 (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00FRHTSMW?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creativeASIN=B00FRHTSMW&linkCode=xm2&tag=din0a-20) at 28mbps AVCHD can simply connect the camera to a $695 Ninja 2, and have a ProRes camera that will run with the big dogs for less than $2000:



Atomos Ninja and Sony RX10 Setup Guide on Vimeo




Recording to ProRes, the image quality and gradeability seem to me to be significantly improved:



Sony RX10 recorded to Ninja2 on Vimeo




These two videos (along with Andrew Reid's "Run and Gun" and Dan Carter's "Arizona Biltmore Resort") have put this camera back on my radar screen.

Imagine having this sensor and zoom lens in a true camcorder body, with ND filters, XLR inputs, SDI, timecode in/out and recording to XAVC.
That would be one heck of a run and gun camera, with shallow depth of field better than S16.

Then it would be the FS700 :)

The quality in that video from Christopher above looks fantastic from the RX10.

It would be great to see some more samples with some clips shot to the internal of the RX10 and to a Ninja or something similar. I know that there is a difference but....... oh hang on I could always hire a Ninja for a day.

^
And to grade these clips in a neutral manner, not super saturated to hide subtle variations as too many of the report samples are, both n grading and inthe sue of the vivid setting.

We're in the earliest of stages of seeing what this camera might do.
Everyone's busy on the holiday, with a few grabbing shots as they try out settings.

What I'm seeing so far is pretty much the camera I was hoping for. An outdoor all-in-one system that will look really good under 800 ISO and maybe great under 400 where I shoot 95% of everything we produce.


I'd be using this with a semi-permanent variable ND to get the most out of that Zeiss glass and to keep it in the proper range.
And who knows, with a ninja and NR off (always) it might look great at higher ISOs with a little good post NR.

Of course there's no ideal anything, and if there were an ideal camera, you certainly wouldn't be paying $1300 for it. But the RX10 was certainly developed to check off virtually every box that a lot of shooters/producers have been asking for for several years.
Sony was actually paying attention.
In this case, it's not about being incredible, it's a camera that seems to be good enough at everything a DSLR could/should be by now - and they actually did it.
It seems Sony has, in a way, done what Canon did about 5 years ago with the 5DII - except Sony did it intentionally.

This is a sort of "90% camera", plus or minus. IOW, it's a camera that should cover MANY possible shooting situations well enough to satisfy a reasonably particular "enthusiast" buyer, and tick many boxes for the pro that is looking for a "serious" camera for casual and some pro use. All in a fairly compact package.


Some of the observations in those links are helpful to understand the market dynamics - MOST of the images/video being shot and shared today... are probably from CELL PHONES... it's the camera that is in everyone's pocket (the camera that is "best" is the one you have with you when the moment strikes...). Arguably, the "quality" is marginal to outright BAD, from a "serious" photographic standpoint, but it's the CONTENT that matters, so they sort of deal with it... that's probably "enough"... and unless the consumer wants to spend quite a bit, they probably won't be complaining enough to justify buying a "real" camera. And if they DO, they probably won't carry the extra device(s) most of the time!

And of course each new generation of cell phones will have a better "tiny" sensor module, with a tiny lens, but it WILL take better and more acceptable pictures/video - it's inevitable, and the "consumer" point and shoot and basic camcorder is likely already "dead", it just hasn't faded out of the market... EVEN IF the average P&S and low end video cam likely outperforms the cell phone, people just aren't going to carry 2-3 electronic "toys".

The short of it is that "consumers", who are enamored of tablets and cell phones are "OK" with the limited image quality they provide... leaving a rather more limited market for "enthusiasts" and "pros". There's a big gap between those who know what an "f-stop" is and those who probably think it means something entirely different...


Manufacturers have to step up their game to produce something worth spending money on In a tight economy...

The "pro" or enthusiast image/content creator WILL spend more for a "serious" camera, but also probably appreciates not having to lug around a huge bag of expensive gear everywhere (and likely already HAS most of that gear). Sony "gets" this - the RX100 found an entirely new market - a small camera that had superior image capture capability... it beats a cell phone or P&S, and has full manual video, and they sold a lot of 'em...

The RX10 represents another "new market" - it's a very capable still camera, and they realized that it could ALSO be a very capable video camera. Sure, it's not a traditional video camera form factor, but if you've shot with an SLR or any of Sony's earlier bridge models, you realize it's pretty easy to shoot with. I've said already that it's "expensive" as a stills camera, but not so much as a video camera... think about it for a minute, and you'll realize if it were a "Handycam", it'd be several hundred dollars MORE than the $1300 price. And the stills from a Handycam don't cut it, from my experience. It may indeed prove quite interesting to see what if anything Sony's video division does with this sensor/processor combo...

I don't know if the RX10 will be the "ideal" camera, but it will cover so many bases that it will likely be the "hammer" that I grab when I need a little more than the RX100M2 can do and I don't mind a little bigger camera. The two together will be nifty multicam setup in a small package.

I needed a replacement camera for my nex-ea50 that I sold a few days ago so I went ahead and ordered the rx10 yesterday and did some very quick shots just now, I have too much editng work to spend enough time with the camera at this moment but I"m very impressed what this little powerhouse offers, what I have seen so far is a usable 6400iso and a very effective stabilisation, even at full tele. Also the viewfinder is good so I don't need to add another loupe for the lcd screen. I have one last wedding this year (on 14 Dec) and this thing will be with me all day, then I can say and probably show some more real life footage, the venue I will be shooting in has some challenging lightconditions.

For those who've used this camera, has there been any issues with overheating in video mode?

The manual states that if you restart immediately after the 29 minutes cut off the camera immediately upon warning because it might shut down due to overheating. I have never explored this.

There was a document included in the package stating that if the camera or card got hot during recording it was normal behavior, not sure how that will be in real life use.

Definitely would like to see some heat/time tests, since this was a major issue with the NEX and early Alpha APS-C cameras. I would expect SOME thermal gain from the sensor and processor, especially since they supposedly are reading the entire sensor and at 5K...

REALLY hope they got the thermal issues under control in this one - I suppose I probably should try toasting the RX100M2 with some long clip video recording... haven't noticed any problems or any reports, but haven't "stress tested" either.

I've wondered why they didn't shoehorn 4K into this little beastie - maybe it would have melted the memory sticks! From the specs, MOST of the capability is there for 4K output, but as our own Ron Evans has reported, the 4K cameras run pretty hot, and require an internal fan... all those little 1's and 0's running around must create a heckuva lot of friction!

Anyone in the southern hemisphere got hands on an RX10 - it's cold enough to snow here... even if I had one, it'd probably not get very warm at the moment!