It is ok bokeh as it comes from big amount of contrasty green and yellow leafs.
bokeh looks a bit harsh to me from the dog photo.
Very nice photos, but strange bokeh on the dog photo. I don't see it in the flower photo above it.
http://www.slashgear.com/sony-rx10-first-impressions-samples-04304129/
Above video is interlaced for some reason.
More sample photos from Steve:
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2013/11/02/three-quick-shots-from-the-sony-rx10/
Steve Huff's video sample
Shot the Sony RX10 at the State Fair to see how the video quality would be. It was dark and I shot in 24P. I feel the camera is spectacular with video. The on board mics are fantastic, the IS works well and the lens covers 24-200 with a constant f/2.8 aperture.
Is it me, or does it seem like the camera has limited DR, and highlights blow out harshly? While it has good detail the DR seems more like consumer camcorder, looks good until it fails catastrophicly.
Also, some highlight lens flair. An all in one for JJ Abrams to take on vacation?
Some lower light stuff
Are these photos just badly taken or is the camera just not very good? They are some of the noisiest samples i've seen for a while
When I look at it esthetically want to not like it for technical reasons, but when I simply watch it, it is engaging and connects with me as if I'm there. This will be a great tool for those who just want document what is in front of them a good amount of quality. I can see this being the what I recommend to friends and family who want to shoot good video, without having to do any camera system building in the future. This at $995 would be a perfect buy for many. Too bad it is priced above the magic $1,000 price point.
@imdjay Yes, I have no idea why the whites were so over-exposed in the disco, and the reviewer should surely have realized that Sony has a "low" microphone setting available. In fact, first technically deficient video I have seen from Gordon. But definitely encouraging. Video is a little soft, like the 2013 Sony camcorders. Easily sharpened. Zooming was smooth, with no obvious focus hunting, definitely encouraging...
i'm encouraged
The camera feels very solidly built, no rattling or tolerances, with a great feel to both the metal and plastic parts. The buttons and dials all have a great tactile response.
RX10′s autofocus was operating relatively quickly, nowhere as fast as that of Olympus’s latest Micro Four Thirds cameras, but fast enough for most purposes.
http://www.thephoblographer.com/2013/10/26/first-impressions-sony-rx10-superzoom-compact-camera/
Andrew Reid just tested the RX10 against the A7 and A7R. According to Andrew, the RX10 looks very good, similar to the GH3.
http://www.eoshd.com/content/11380/new-sony-a7-a7r-rx10-exclusive-hands-look-video-quality
The concern I have,and what may well put me off buying is if there is a fault with the lens then the whole camera is unusable and vise versa. Also I have a V1 and these babies are dirt cheap. I can pick up a 10-100mm for around £350 quid in a nice compact package with a bit more zoom. Yeah I know its not a constant f2.8 nor zeiss but I tend to use a zoom outside in the day stopped down. So my initial interest is waning on the RX100...maybe when its cheaper. But thats just me :-)
have there ever been hacks for sony nex/alpha cameras?
i've already emailed sony about upping their bitrate to compete with the gh3, but i won't hold my breath that they'd do anything. either way, i'm preordered. if it ends up not living up to its specs, i'll just return it. but i've got good vibes about it. that's a standard zeiss badge they bolted to the side, which should indicate it lives up to zeiss standards, and if it does, that's a precious piece of glass.
Hmm. Here we have the 29 min. limit mentioned again. Not very promising. If that´s true (at THIS price point), it´s not interesting any more (at least for me). =/
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!