Sony RX10 with 24-200mm constant f2.8 zoom and 1" sensor !

...and remember this camera has hdmi out , and hopefully well implemented...if sony lives up to the hype.
 
dustylense said:
Look, some people NEED Raw because they have no clue on how to operate or tune a camera. It's their crutch they depend on to compete against those that understand camera basics. Rewind 10-15 years ago and they wouldn't even be commenting here because film would have just baffled them. RAW RAW RAW RAW! Try working with 8x10 sheet film that had at best 7 stops laditude.
Treat avchd like transparency film, get it right in camera and watch (unsderstand) you exposure, and these cameras can do spectacular things. Pro implementations of avchd like the c100s, fs700, gh3 are quite robust. I'm gonna guess that this rx10 will be just as good.
Click to expand...

I love raw because I did used to shoot 16mm film and supervised the transfers to video for editing and finishing. I like having that kind of depth of visual information and control over finer aspects of image quality. There is no depth to long GOP AVC. By the time it comes out the back end of the camera 98% of what that sensor captured has been thrown away.

The creative possibilities of the digital tools we have at our disposal are truly mind boggling. But they are worthless if there is no data to feed them.
 
Last edited:
Razz16mm said:
I love raw because I did used to shoot 16mm film and supervised the transfers to video for editing and finishing. I like having that kind of depth of visual information and control over finer aspects of image quality. There is no depth to long GOP AVC. By the time it comes out the back end of the camera 98% of what that sensor captured has been thrown away.

The creative possibilities of the digital tools we have at our disposal are truly mind boggling. But they are worthless if there is no data to feed them.
Click to expand...

Razz, since you don't list your real name, nor have a signature to point to anything you'v ever done, the only conclusion i can personally deduce just from your comments on this thread are that you've either never shot anything on AVC, or that you did once, mucked it up, and now declare it as horridly as you do. either way, you're obviously not an authority on AVC and cameras that shoot it.

And please, don't make this a 'this is better than that' thread, no one contests that raw is a good thing, but people have different needs, and different cameras shoot different formats, and AVC is one of them and it whether you like it or not, it's being used by all levels of all industries, so just because it isn't raw, or because it is AVC, doesn't make it useful or useless by default.
 
Dusty has some of the better real world experience of the different folks I've talked/shared with remotely.
Like me (except for the C100) he shoots and has shot with the same cameras and lenses under daily production schedules and deadlines.

I was thing of you DL when I mentioned the "if this 24mbs codec is implemented like the C100 codec".
I've had the chance to work comparatively with C100 footage, BMC, GH3, 5DIII and probably using most of the same lenses.
They can all do amazing work in the right hands just like RED and Alexa can look average in average hands.

I used to invest a fortune every year on the best camera setups possible.
And then something happened.
Cameras like the original 5D, while nothing like the traditional cameras that I've had for our team over the years, suddenly delivered an image that made it worth adjusting traditional expectations.
A lot of really serious producers agreed.

Today, I'm all about the amazing potential of any number of these little beasts.
You and a lot of people I know realized/showed that for all intents and purposes, the C100 24mbs was virtually indistinguishable from an HDMI signal from that camera and for that matter from the 50mbs output of the C300.

In midst of the creative direction of this museum we're just finishing, I had to run around the last six months shooting several films in constantly changing and challenging conditions. A camera like this (on paper) with ND, peaking, zebras, OIS AND a 24 - 200mm 2.8 Zeiss zoom would have made any number of shoot days incredibly different.
There are times (no sh#t) that I've been hanging from kayaks on open rivers, atop 40 story wind turbines on mountain ridges etc., and because of the way I work, I'm literally switching lenses (no grips allowed or possible in a lot of this) and screwing on ND filters while doing it.

I know you can imagine, if this camera really does have the next level processing that allows it to cleanly subsample 5k image to 1080, that the image may be outstanding. And if Sony and Zeiss put anything like the quality of, say, the Lumix 12-35mm 2.8 on this with OIS - it could be a little dream camera for the bread and butter work a lot of us do.

Sure I'd love a 50mbs codec, but really, even the 24mbs vs the 50mbs on the GH3 is indistinguishable to virtually anyone who matters (clients and end viewers.)

Can't wait to see footage from this, which I assume is coming quickly with Nov. release.
 
I actually hope this little puppy has a great AF system as well on top of being able to hopefully process the sensor down to a nice detailed 1080p image. While I think the HDMI out will still be 8bit, at least its there. In the video they show an XLR adapter for this camera as well.

So my hope is that this camera will be a small compact light run and gun replacement to a 2/3 in sensor with a pretty darn good focal length built to the camera with the ability to record high quality sound. Cameras like this add options to ones arsenal and tool kit. And if it can fit in the corner of the bag all the better. I've seen lots of RX100 videos that blew me away so I can't see why this camera will not do the same.

I will definitely be keeping my eye on this camera. If they can get that subsample from the sensor into the 1080p done right, this might be a very powerful camera to have in your camera bag.
 
People who use RED and ARRI products professionally day in and day out will have a different thought process about production life. The thousands who started using a Canon 5DmkII in 2008/2009 and still use it in 2013 will defend it forever. Times are changing and image quality will get better and cameras will be cheaper. Ironically, some of my own personal and successful work has been shot on a point-and-shoot.
 
back to discussing THIS cam......

rather odd there's no mention of filter thread size. BH shows as none, though there's a 62mm denotation on the front of the lens. any mention of an adapter, misprint, or otherwise?
 
Darren Levine said:
Razz, since you don't list your real name, nor have a signature to point to anything you'v ever done, the only conclusion i can personally deduce just from your comments on this thread are that you've either never shot anything on AVC, or that you did once, mucked it up, and now declare it as horridly as you do. either way, you're obviously not an authority on AVC and cameras that shoot it.

And please, don't make this a 'this is better than that' thread, no one contests that raw is a good thing, but people have different needs, and different cameras shoot different formats, and AVC is one of them and it whether you like it or not, it's being used by all levels of all industries, so just because it isn't raw, or because it is AVC, doesn't make it useful or useless by default.
Click to expand...

I agree that all of these cameras have their uses and perfection is relative to purpose. My pro shooting days were in the 70's and 80's mostly marketing and training films for corporations like GE and Michelin. Much of it on 16mm film because practical high quality mobile video solutions didn't exist.
Now I shoot for fun and design sophisticated commercial AV systems for a living from telepresence meeting spaces to 15 megapixel + command and control display systems for nuclear plants.
Raw is not the universal solution, for sure. For videographers doing commercial work it is of limited practical use. The "content is king" crowd doesn't care.

But for visual artists exploring the boundaries of what is possible with digital film making raw digital motion cameras are as essential as they have become to fine art digital still photographers. AVC is not a satisfactory creative substitute.
I do not own, and would not buy for my own creative use an AVC video camera in the prosumer class. I have sampled, edited, manipulated, explored footage from many of them. Most recently S-log2 from an FS700 as well as the Panasonic GH series, AF-100, BMCC, BMC pocket cam, Ikonoskop, Digital Bolex, and Reds beginning with the original RED 1 in 2007.
I currently own a Nikon digital SLR ( non video) and a Canon GL2.
 
Those of you already trying to poo-poo the video quality of this camera before you even see it...

Have any of you SEEN the video that the RX100 and RX100M2 put out? It's PHENOMENAL quality for its size and price. And it fits in your pocket (literally) with lens.

Take a look at this: http://vimeo.com/45682834

Now consider that the RX100 Mark 2 (RX100M2) recently released is superior (esp. in the areas of low light and noise) to the above footage, and the RX10 (based on the RX100M2 sensor) is superior to THAT.

That quality, for the price, the video features (manual EVERYTHING, peaking, zebra, focus assist, histogram, clean output, audio and headphone jacks, ND)...and WITH lens (a Zeiss constant f:2.8 24-200mm equivalent)....I mean...COME ON.

Think about what a kit to equal this - with inferior video - cost just two years ago...
 
Last edited:
Darren Levine said:
back to discussing THIS cam......

rather odd there's no mention of filter thread size. BH shows as none, though there's a 62mm denotation on the front of the lens. any mention of an adapter, misprint, or otherwise?
Click to expand...

The (little brother) RX100M2 has a filter adapter available from Sony. I can't imagine they would ignore filters on the RX10.

My guess is it's a built in 62mm front thread (not requiring any adapter). If that's not the case, there will be a filter adapter, like the RX100M2.
 
My only complaint about this camera is that there is no 1920 x 1080 30p recording mode. You have to drop down to 1440 x 1080 to shoot 30p. 90% of the corporate work I do is shot in 30p. Not a deal breaker, just thought it was odd.
 
Steve R said:
Those of you already trying to poo-poo the video quality of this camera before you even see it...
Click to expand...

I don't understand pixel-peeping critiques at all with any camera these days. I would happily shoot on just about any camera (consumer or pro) released in the last couple of years. Technology, schmepology - the only limiting factor these days is who is behind it.
 
Built-in 3 stop ND, declickable constant aperture f/2.8 24-200mm IS lens, sensor that's bigger than blackmagic pocket, zebra, focus peaking, 4:2:2 clean hdmi, headphone out, mic input, 1080p 60fps, Up to 10 fps at 20.2 MP, plus, according to imaging-resource hands-on preview, no line skipping to produce 1080p video.

I love shooting with 5D3 and its set of lenses, but I am excited about this camera that I can literally grab and go.
 
bumkicho said:
Built-in 3 stop ND, declickable constant aperture f/2.8 24-200mm IS lens, sensor that's bigger than blackmagic pocket, zebra, focus peaking, 4:2:2 clean hdmi, headphone out, mic input, 1080p 60fps, Up to 10 fps at 20.2 MP, plus, according to imaging-resource hands-on preview, no line skipping to produce 1080p video.

I love shooting with 5D3 and its set of lenses, but I am excited about this camera that I can literally grab and go.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I love one of the review sites that said this was made for the soccer mom market.
What would a soccer mom possibly understand about let alone want: peaking and adjustable zebras, XLR inputs, ND filters, declickable iris, 60p, uncompressed HDMI out....and a group of fully assignable buttons
Seriously, this is probably the most specifically designed video DSLR ever, it's feature set is closer to a Canon C100 - with 60p
Obviously it's totally different sensor and a fixed lens, but it's more video centric for pro use than the 15k 1D-C
For $1300? boy, have things changed, lines blurred.

This will be an immediate addition to the kit if the IQ is there and the processor and 5k sampling is certainly promising for that.
 
any samples of what the rx100 v2 can do at iso 3200+?

pretty remarkable how good it is despite its relatively small pixel size
 
hammerhorror said:
My only complaint about this camera is that there is no 1920 x 1080 30p recording mode. You have to drop down to 1440 x 1080 to shoot 30p. 90% of the corporate work I do is shot in 30p. Not a deal breaker, just thought it was odd.
Click to expand...

That is strange that it can do 1920x1080 60p but not 30p. I guess you just have to shoot 60p and output 30p in post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top