Sony Rx100 VI with full sensor 4K & HLG

[mercer]

32 minutes ago, Don Kotlos said:

LX200 can't arrive fast enough. Add mic input and the new 20MP sensor and it should be enough. I wouldn't even mind if it offered oversampled high bitrate 1080p instead of 4K.

Idk, I hope they keep the lower MP sensor. The LX100, like the GH5s, has a little more mojo that I think is directly related to a 12mp sensor. I do agree that it could use a mic input and the all-i 1080p, though. 

[Don Kotlos]

The sensor was the same 16MP of GH4. The lens just covered less area so you ended up with only ~12MP. To tell you the truth I wouldn't even mind if they used the 12MP sensor of GH5s but I guess for many the ~10MP stills would be a problem. 

[BTM_Pix]

33 minutes ago, eoslover said:

the 200mm sharpness is pretty decent

and the bokeh is not bad for 200mm f4.5, a clear better choice over Panasonic if budget is not that tight

Its certainly got a ton going for it over the Panasonic but its well over twice the price so by putting that lens on it they've put themselves in that sort of comparison area with consumers.

Funnily enough, I quite fancy this in the camcorder format of the AX700 where you are getting the variable ND and the mic input and the better ergonomics but it just seems like a bad compromise in the RX100 format for me. 

I have the RX100 V and I bemoan the lack of a mic input and more than one ND setting far more than not having enough reach on the lens but I need to stop thinking about the different RX100 versions as "upgrades" as their naming and pricing suggests because they all co-exist together for different uses I suppose and the RX100 VI is for people who do need that.

[Andrew Reid]

It's all gone a bit focus group. I think consumers want the longer zoom, and to hell with the built in ND or fast aperture. What the slower aperture essentially does is give you a smaller sensor, so not much point of it being 1" in terms of the look now. May as well be small chip.

I would have liked a longer zoom but not 200mm at all costs. 24-135mm F2.0-2.8 would have been great.

For the money, and 6th model, I'd expect a bit more of an ergonomic flourish of creativity, the old form factor is very tired and the Panasonics are a lot nicer to use especially LX100.

[Mokara]

2 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

I guess the demand/market for cameras like this is more reach, as the RX10 and now the RX100 both sacrificed speed on the wide end for a longer zoom range. They've gone from a compact an advanced shooter would carry to an all-in-one compact to try and attract the superzoom shoppers. Pour one out for the RX100 series, its now been neutered to have a longer zoom while losing its appeal to enthusiasts. The large sensor compact fad seems to have passed. Its been two years since the mkV after a string of annual updates, I bet this camera is the last of the RX100 line until something revolutionary happens on the sensor side.

I still dream of that Nikon DL with the 18-50/1.8.-2.8, I have an ebay alert in case one of the functioning show cameras escapes from Nikon....

Chris

There will be more. Performance enhancements will come from processor improvements, not sensors.

[no_connection]

that is not a 24-200 f2.8-f4.5

it's a 9-72mm f2.8-f4.5

or 24-200 f7.4-f12.4 (opening is 18mm high which would be f11 so there is likely some errors somewhere in there or it's not optimal in size)
At the wide end they could have made it a LOT faster than it is.

Front element would have to be 44.4mm which is as large as the entire lens assembly. Or 76% of the cameras height.

25 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I would have liked a longer zoom but not 200mm at all costs. 24-135mm F2.0-2.8 would have been great. 

That would have been a 24-135mm f5.4-f7.5
or 8.9-50mm f2.0-2.8

[Mokara]

58 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Its certainly got a ton going for it over the Panasonic but its well over twice the price so by putting that lens on it they've put themselves in that sort of comparison area with consumers.

Funnily enough, I quite fancy this in the camcorder format of the AX700 where you are getting the variable ND and the mic input and the better ergonomics but it just seems like a bad compromise in the RX100 format for me. 

I have the RX100 V and I bemoan the lack of a mic input and more than one ND setting far more than not having enough reach on the lens but I need to stop thinking about the different RX100 versions as "upgrades" as their naming and pricing suggests because they all co-exist together for different uses I suppose and the RX100 VI is for people who do need that.

You need to consider what these cameras are primarily used for, and that is as a travel camera. For that application the longer zoom is certainly more useful than aperture, since most of your shots will be in good light anyway and you will be stopped down, meaning a large aperture is a waste.

[BTM_Pix]

30 minutes ago, Mokara said:

You need to consider what these cameras are primarily used for, and that is as a travel camera. For that application the longer zoom is certainly more useful than aperture, since most of your shots will be in good light anyway and you will be stopped down, meaning a large aperture is a waste.

I have the mark V and I use it primarily as a travel camera.

For me, I use a lot of it indoor or in lower light so it's the reverse for me. Even when it's in good light I prefer the option of the wider aperture if I need it hence why I have a variable ND permanently on it totally defeating the object of it being a compact camera

But, as I said, I do see that other people would prefer the longer reach and I have to get out of the mindset of thinking a mark VI would be an "upgrade" over a mark V because that's not how it works with the RX100 and it's just a different set of compromises in the same body.

I'll stick with the current set of compromises the mark V gives me but I'm sure the mark VI ticks the boxes of other people. 

As I say, in the camcorder format (where it has some additional features and where I would use it for a completely different purpose) I think it's a pretty compelling package.

[Trek of Joy]

2 hours ago, Don Kotlos said:

Nah I wouldn't say so. No internal 4K, no oversampled but aliased 1080p, slow f/4 aperture , tiny screen, no AF etc. 

And I was thinking something more in the line of Olympus TG5 style. Just with a much larger sensor. 

Ahh, that would be interesting, when you said action camera I thought GoPro. I'm guessing no 4k on the RX0 because of heat. But something like a 28mm equiv. F/1.4, fully waterproof/shockproof and such would be a very compelling camera

49 minutes ago, Mokara said:

There will be more. Performance enhancements will come from processor improvements, not sensors.

Global shutter is one improvement I can think of - which IMO will find its way into smaller sensors before any m43 or larger sensor simply because of phone volumes. Sony has too many heat management issues for any dramatic improvements over existing models, despite their super stacked sensor no 4k60p.

I guess we'll have to wait and see if there will be more. There's really not much in the space to begin with and at $1200 I'd be surprised if this is a big seller. The original was a bargain, this is now well into really nice 2-3 lens ILC territory. The only advantage now for the RX100 is smaller form factor. I'd be willing to bet the EOS-M50, Fuji XT20 - and a few other ILC's - outsell this by a wide margin, people spending real camera cash will want a real camera.

Chris

[eoslover]

For someone who wants better low light @ the wide, just buy the RX100V.

For someone who wants to take some wildlife/concerts and travel shots, it's almost a no brainer to pick RX100VI.

[newfoundmass]

47 minutes ago, eoslover said:

For someone who wants better low light @ the wide, just buy the RX100V.

For someone who wants to take some wildlife/concerts and travel shots, it's almost a no brainer to pick RX100VI

RX100VI would definitely NOT be what I'd recommend anyone shoot a concert with. That aperture range is no good for most concerts I shoot. 

[kye]

10 hours ago, IronFilm said:

And STILL no mic input. Sigh. 
The RX100 line up would be so perfect as a vlog machine if only it had a mic input to go with a flip up screen

No mic input is crazy in these days of everyone wanting a shotgun mounted in the hot shoe.  But wait..  maybe it's not a vlogging camera after all?  Hmmm..  What other situations is external audio not required??..........   if only it had spectacular image quality and shot RAW.......

9 hours ago, Don Kotlos said:

On the upside it shoots 24fps RAW !!!!

IT'S A CINEMA CAMERA!!!

BREAK OUT YOUR CLAPPER BOARDS PEOPLE - THE POCKET 2 HAS AN AF-C BEAST OF A COMPETITOR!!!! 

???????

[Edit - it's got a HDMI out - don't some external recorders have an audio in??  Maybe it's also a PRORES beast!!!! ?]

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

I have the mark V and I use it primarily as a travel camera.

For me, I use a lot of it indoor or in lower light so it's the reverse for me.

(on a more serious note!!)

I completely agree with this.  My journey into photography started with a sub-$100 P&S which was completely crap in low light, and this made it basically useless after sunset.  All indoor lighting is a challenge for small sensor cameras until recently, and if I was a non-camera-geek civilian and I was spending $1k+ on a camera and couldn't take photos of my candlelight dinner while on holiday I'd be pretty annoyed.

[thefactory]

So with no built-in ND filter (and still no filter thread) worse aperture, same bad battery life and same 4k recording limit (I doubt if overheating has improved) and of course no mic jack. Not to mention the price. 

How is this an improvement for video shooters? 

[Turboguard]

Before buying the LX100 for my husband, I got him a Sony A6XXX something and neither of us like the image quality so I got him the LX100 and he still uses it weekly on his little hobby rounds around the city. I saw the release video for this new Sony and it has the one thing my husband wants, articulating screen! After reading your comments in this thread, I might recommend to him to stick to the LX100 for a little longer in case Pana decides to drop something later this year! Glad I came to read this thread!

[JurijTurnsek]

The RX100 naming scheme is unfortunate, since the average affluent consumer (which is target market) would be very confused if the VII was an upgraded V lens design and no the continuation of this new lens. Same goes for RX10 - they could've evolved the camera with the original lens (24-200) and kept the super-zoom lens a separate line, each with different intended markets. Just make it a 2 year cycle for both lens designs, since 1" sensors are not really seeing much progress each year anyway.

[ND64]

Now I understand why Nikon cancelled the DL. If you can't make a modern premium compact and yet keep it under $1000, you better forget it. 

[nigelbb]

All those complaining that this is a step back from the RX100 V should realise that as previously the new model is an alternative not a replacement for older models. You can still buy the RX100 plus the II III IV & V. They do the same with the RX10 so you can still buy the original plus the II III & IV.

[Mokara]

20 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

Ahh, that would be interesting, when you said action camera I thought GoPro. I'm guessing no 4k on the RX0 because of heat. But something like a 28mm equiv. F/1.4, fully waterproof/shockproof and such would be a very compelling camera

Global shutter is one improvement I can think of - which IMO will find its way into smaller sensors before any m43 or larger sensor simply because of phone volumes. Sony has too many heat management issues for any dramatic improvements over existing models, despite their super stacked sensor no 4k60p.

I guess we'll have to wait and see if there will be more. There's really not much in the space to begin with and at $1200 I'd be surprised if this is a big seller. The original was a bargain, this is now well into really nice 2-3 lens ILC territory. The only advantage now for the RX100 is smaller form factor. I'd be willing to bet the EOS-M50, Fuji XT20 - and a few other ILC's - outsell this by a wide margin, people spending real camera cash will want a real camera.

Chris

Overheating in cameras is due to the processor, not the sensor. That is the limiting factor. Doing processing on a 4K workflow, particularly compression, is much more taxing on a processor than a FHD workflow. The sensor doesn't care, it is doing the same work for both 4K and FHD workflows (more in the case of FHD, since that usually has higher refresh rates). If the sensor does not overheat when doing FHD, it won't overheat during 4K since it is doing exactly the same thing or less. The thermal bottleneck is the processor.

7 hours ago, Eric Calabros said:

Now I understand why Nikon cancelled the DL. If you can't make a modern premium compact and yet keep it under $1000, you better forget it. 

They cancelled the DL series because they were having manufacturing difficulties and the delays meant that it would have been effectively obsolete relative to the competition by the time it arrived.

21 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

It's all gone a bit focus group. I think consumers want the longer zoom, and to hell with the built in ND or fast aperture. What the slower aperture essentially does is give you a smaller sensor, so not much point of it being 1" in terms of the look now. May as well be small chip.

I would have liked a longer zoom but not 200mm at all costs. 24-135mm F2.0-2.8 would have been great.

For the money, and 6th model, I'd expect a bit more of an ergonomic flourish of creativity, the old form factor is very tired and the Panasonics are a lot nicer to use especially LX100.

They probably did an analysis of the exif data on publicly posted images and concluded that almost no one uses the wide apertures anyway, while longer focal lengths predominate, so it was an acceptable compromise for the camera to optimize it in a way that would be more useful to the majority of users.

[Andrew Reid]

2 hours ago, Mokara said:

Overheating in cameras is due to the processor, not the sensor... The sensor doesn't care, it is doing the same work for both 4K and FHD workflows. The thermal bottleneck is the processor.

I would like to thank Mokara, the Panasonic engineer for clearing that up!

Quote

They cancelled the DL series because they were having manufacturing difficulties and the delays meant that it would have been effectively obsolete relative to the competition by the time it arrived.

A big welcome to the Nikon product manager, Mokara!

Quote

They probably did an analysis of the exif data on publicly posted images and concluded that almost no one uses the wide apertures anyway, while longer focal lengths predominate, so it was an acceptable compromise for the camera to optimize it in a way that would be more useful to the majority of users.

Thank you Mr Sony san!

[salim]

3 hours ago, Mokara said:

The thermal bottleneck is the processor.

Which shows how much further the mobile phone processor manufacturers  (Apple or Qualcomm) are that they can process 4k/60p and compress it like crazy without the phone melting in your hand. They've become very efficient and powerful. This makes me hopeful that you don't need to have a very large box around the processor to help with heat management, as long as you can make processor and its code more efficient and just do some creative heat sink design inside the camera around the processor you can have very capable yet compact systems.