Sony RX100 - 1-in Sensor

[corkyg]

Looks like Mr. Sony is really getting serious. A 1-inch sensor in a pocket camera opens up a new ball game in low light, candid digital photography. But, maybe the $600+ price tage will be a barrier for some - especially these days.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/28/t...love-state-of-the-art.html?src=me&ref=general

 

[snoturtle]

If the reviews are good I may have to replace my s90 with one
Though I do wish it had a little more zoom

 

[dougp]

Eh, minimum zoom is 28mm with a 3:2 ration and 29mm with 16:9 - it claims that the 1:1 is 36mm. The f1.8 is nice, and particularly good at f4.9 on the long end.

 

[AkumaX]

S.L.R.........

 

[SecurityTheatre]

I'm a big SLR fan myself, but these kinds of changes are good.

All P&S cameras are diffraction limited. Increasing the resolution on those tiny sensors just doesn't help. You need more glass, bigger lenses, larger sensors, etc to see any real gains in image quality.

It strikes me, for the price, this is targeting the "SLR owner wants a pocket camera" rather than "grandma wants good photos".

It is what it is.

 

[kbafewx]

i have this same issue... how can I fix this

 

[corkyg]

i have this same issue... how can I fix this

Please clarify - there is no issue in this thread. It is strictly FYI.

 

[CptObvious]

Looks nice but I'll wait until I see low-light samples. It's impressive that they can fit a 1" sensor inside a super-compact body, but the sensor is still 1/3 the surface area of APS-C and 1/2 of Micro 4/3rds. I think the NYT article is blowing it out of proportion.

 

[twistedlogic]

I think the NYT article is blowing it out of proportion.

+1

Especially when they say things like "insane amounts of detail and vivid, true colors" and "is as customizable and manually controllable as an S.L.R"

Either way, $650 for a compact camera is insane.

 

[gevorg]

Sony is deceptive when claiming a “1 inch” sensor. Its image area is only 8.8 x 13.2 millimeters (0.34″ x 0.52&#8243, so where is the FTC when you need them to stop this baloney?

 

[germinop]

apparently, the camera had to give up a couple features to keep it compact. So that will also be taken into consideration for buyers, along with the price. Have you guys checked out the samples at http://www.squidoo.com/sony-rx100
very good IQ, I must say

 

[Munky]

This is the camera I wanted Nikon to make since their N1 system was introduced - a pocketable semi-large sensor camera. I already have a DSLR, and don't need to waste money on another interchangeable lens system. Just give me the best possible IQ in something small enough to fit a pants pocket. The specs look good, the sample images I've seen are good - I hope Sony doesn't screw it up with buggy firmware or atrocious noise reduction.

 

[corkyg]

I think the NYT article is blowing it out of proportion.

Very good point. It sure won't be the first thing that NYT has blown out of proportion.

 

[CptObvious]

Yep the actual size of the RX100 sensor is 2/3" diagonal, which means it's neither 1" across, diagonal, or squared. Only in the alternate universe of camera maker land is 0.67" = 1". The FTC should sue Sony for false advertising.

 

[gevorg]

Yep the actual size of the RX100 sensor is 2/3" diagonal, which means it's neither 1" across, diagonal, or squared. Only in the alternate universe of camera maker land is 0.67" = 1". The FTC should sue Sony for false advertising.

What about perimeter?

On a serious note, they should just specify the light gathering area in mm^2 or sq. in. Sensor specs should not be dumbed down like TVs.

 

[Throckmorton]

DPReview has a diagram to show how huge the 1" sensor is. Then in the specs they list: 1" (13.2 x 8.8 mm)

 

[Munky]

Yep the actual size of the RX100 sensor is 2/3" diagonal, which means it's neither 1" across, diagonal, or squared. Only in the alternate universe of camera maker land is 0.67" = 1". The FTC should sue Sony for false advertising.

To be fair, this is not some recent development. Other sensor vendors have been making alternate-reality claims for years using the inch rating. The 1/1.7-inch sensor in the Canon S100 is not actually 1/1.7 inches diagonally either.

 

[Cattykit]

David Pogue is at it again after Final Cut X fiasco.


Anyways, I like the camera beside the price.