@markro41 " Best idea is just keep doing stuff you like."....yeah.....even when it's boring and you have no idea what else to do ! LOL...and I don't waste time with like buttons....and I only listen to physicist, philosophers, world class gallery owners, world cinema makers, and real breathing artist....that use the word filmic. Since you're not in one of those groups, and you have obvious hostility to aesthetics theory, you have nothing to teach me. And another point, while we're here....when you're doing a sample video of the newest kid-on-the-block gimbal camera....move the camera. Hint...that's why they put it on a gimbal, grasshopper. Now go buy another camera to make yourself feel better.

@kurth Links to your videos? Even if they are good, which I doubt otherwise you wouldn't be discussing here, it does not excuse spreading misinformation or your evident hostility to learning. Filmic, LOL. Pretentious claptrack by wannabes.

And new features expand creative possibilities, at least for those not closed minded. There is no trade off between image quality and content, image quality enhances content.

Oh, and keep hitting that dislike button on my videos, they increase traffic.

One of the reasons photography has been relegated to the trashbin of instagram is mediocre content.

All human history it had been mostly same sort of content quality, even worse.

Thing that we see now is that due to marketing and profits all normal filters are off. Do not worry, next stage will be next, much more advanced version of sorting and filtering.

@kurth

Well, I am ok with Mark samples and especially that they are over 30 seconds.

I think it is part of his intent to make it boring. May be he just need to buy squirrel

Yeah you do have to check facts first, unless you don't care about truth and/or don't care about whether others take you seriously. Just a suggestion for your own good. And stating that you know what is good and useful also suggests you don't want to learn. Don't know why you are here then. The mark iv is on sale now, $100 off, and still $100 more than the RX0 ii. Did you actually go to the link? Or do you just "know" it is not on sale or hope someday it will be even lower in price to prove you right?

Dont care about camera color science? LOL.

I am not claiming the RX0 ii is great, just pointing out its advantages to people who seem factually challenged or lacking in imagination. I got nothing to sell, I am not a vlogger dependent on favors from manufacturers, just acutely sensitive to misinformation. I use GoPro's, RX100's, Sony and Panasonic mirrorless, got no particular manufacturer bias.

Right. The RX0 has more absolute resolution with stabilization enabled and supports clear image zoom. That's all great... though for most of the stuff where I want to use that style of camera (e.g. stuck to a car with a suction cup or attached to a backpack strap, etc), it's less of a big deal if there's some slight resolution loss. The camera might be worth it for $600, but for pretty much the same price, you could get in on the preorder for the Z-Cam E2C. :)

@EspenB Yeah, I know about linear mode, but since I'm shooting 4K, it doesn't do me much good. And yeah, it would be nice if the mic input were included on the body, but at least the adapter is pretty small. Fingers crossed that someday, GP offers an option without the fisheye lens... it's not like decent rectilinear M12 lenses cost that much or are rare.

@kurth "But you could actually use it as a stills camera too, unlike the rx0." "the rx100 mark iv ...the same price!"

You obviously need to check your facts, again, before emoting. First, the RX0 takes 15M stills, in RAW too. With eye AF and all the profiles. 16 shots per second too. Better color science than all the RX100's and RX10's. Second, the RX100 iv is $100 more than the RX0 ii. See https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1159879-REG/sony_dsc_rx100_mark_4_digital.html

At least most vloggers get their facts straight and are not hostile. Hey guys, whatsup?

@markr041...OMG...I made a mistake....shoot me....the rx100 mark iv ...the same price! It also has a faster zoom lens, a real evf , and a usable lcd! ....alas no mic input. But you could actually use it as a stills camera too, unlike the rx0. The vlogging thingie...well, how many fuxin vloggers in the world are there? All of them trying to monetize their mediocre lives on youtube ? ...it's disgusting. Sony is swatting at flies. It does make a good but expensive crash camera though. ps....fixed aperture (ugh) and no af-c. Jeez....how difficult would af-c be on a fixed focal length fixed aperture lens ?

C'mon, the RX100 iii does not shoot 4K or 1080 120p. The RX0 ii is the cheapest 1" 4K (oversampled!) shooter from Sony. And, the RX0 takes an external mic; no RX100 cameras does. The RX0 does time-lapse, not the RX100 VI. And, finally, Sony claims the color science is better (skin tones) than all previous RX models.

Again, put the RX0 ii on a small gimbal with an external mic and you have something special for shooting video, not just for vloggers.

@markr041

They made it not because original sold well. They do it to cover costs. This is my theory.

As requirements for multicamera setups exist, but it is niche thing.

@EspenB

I still want to understand, who is target audience?

I understand multicamera usage for specific markets, but for all else it is mostly overpriced limited thing.