Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Sony' started by Aushiker, Sep 12, 2017.
Hands-on with the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 IV
That's a beast of a camera. 38 oz, but the lens is 24-600. The full frame counterpart would be "hefty".
It is now a real speed demon outclassing most dslr/mirrorless bodies. Having recently upgraded to the Mk III I'll not be buying this time.
C'mon, what else do you have to spend your money on?
Just bought a new bass guitar after 12 years without one - I'm going to fight the progress of my PD.
38 oz? That is a beast, indeed. Just for fun, here's a simulation comparing it to a Fuji X-T1 + 16-55 F2.8 WR. Exactly the same weight, but the Fuji lens is much shorter due to the physics of having the larger sensor. I think my back and neck would ache if I carried either setup on a hike or bike ride.
Compact Camera Meter
Yeah, it's big and heavy, alright. I was in B&H about a month ago and handled the RX10 Mark III. I remember handling it when it first came out and it seemed so heavy. But, this time, the Mark III didn't bother me at all.
I don't know how I'd feel about the Mark IV. The entire RX10 range is pretty impressive if the cameras fit one's needs.
In the end, I picked up an open-box Panasonic FZ1000 from Samy's for $529. A lot lighter. No WR, but I don't know how much faith I'd put in Sony's WR anyway. Still, that doesn't mean the RX10's aren't pretty great. I'd be eager to hear from anyone who buys the RX10 Mark IV.
I'm torn on the 1" sensors. When I look at the images on screen my RX100ii and FZ1000 can't compare with my APS-C cameras at all.
But I just did a 120x80 cm canvas print from a 4K video frame from the FZ1000 and it came out pretty good..
I guess depending on what one is shooting, if you compare images taken with APS-C and one-inch sensors side by side, you'd see a difference.
I own full-frame, APS-C, micro four-thirds and one-inch sensor cameras. All have their place and their jobs. But, generally, I'm fine with one-inch sensors up to ISO 3200 for non-critical work.
I've come up with a non-classy solution. Create extensions for the neckstrap using parachute cord. With about an 8-inch extension on each side, you can then sling the camera/strap cross-body (for example, over the right shoulder, camera hanging at your left hip). No neck pain; it won't slip off your shoulder (unless your head comes off, then you have other problems), and it's an easy carry even with a heavier camera that can be grabbed at your hip and easily pulled to your face. I've done it to three of my cameras. It doesn't look cool, but it works well.
Here's a pic of a somewhat shorter version, but the principle is the same:
If you want to look a little less unkempt, you can melt the ends of the parachute cord.
I have RX10 III and it is on the heavier side, but then there is not much anything that small with that lens reach... I use Canon g3x, and the shutter lag is very bad on that. Otherwise I prefer its smaller size. I still have my m43+Oly 70-300, but the lens is nearly a stop even slower that Sony RX (the sensor difference is m43 and 1" is less than a stop)... IV is tempting, but III prices went down so much with people upgrading... A few photos from last weekend with III:
Nice work, Serhan. I handled an RX10 Mark III recently and, if I were in the market for such a camera now, I'd go with that over the Mark IV. At least until prices came down. And, in the world of Sony, that could take a while.
If I were to start over and not want multiple lenses, this would be tempting.
Just for fun, I went to my favorite enabling site, camerasize.com, and ran a simulation on the RX10 M.IV and a Pentax K-30 with a 55-300 WR lens. The Pentax combo is slightly heavier, and gives "only" 450mm FF equivalent, but the Sony is actually somewhat larger in some dimensions. Compact Camera Meter
I'll bet the Sony's autofocus is better, though.
Probably. The K-30 doesn't have the speediest AF I've tried.