Sony RX100 IV

[yosemi]

1200 for this camera abit high

 

[Gribber]

1200 for this camera abit high

On its camera LCD, the pictures turns out damn good.

put it on my computer seems so-so.. don't know if the problem lies with the demo unit or what.

went to buy the A6K instead...

 

[faithsilence]

On its camera LCD, the pictures turns out damn good.

put it on my computer seems so-so.. don't know if the problem lies with the demo unit or what.

went to buy the A6K instead...

Cos its much smaller on the camera LCD, plus different contrast/brightness etc. And the RX100 has a much smaller sensor than APSC or FF sensors, also can't expect that kind of IQ.

 

[jermss]

For its compact size there is really nothing close to the quality.... maybe LX100? but its honestly bigger and heavier.. this is really pocket size..

still thinking very hard on which to get.

 

[a562140]

not much difference in mk 2,3,4 for me in terms of picture quality
i think the pricing comes from additional features like flash, retractable screen, ovf upgrades and of course profit margin

the mk2 is a hulluva camera today compared to all others and represents excellent value (if you don't need the other features)

waiting for next lens upgrade, hoping to see 2mm wider

 

[magnus]

am hoping for more zoom.

not much difference in mk 2,3,4 for me in terms of picture quality
i think the pricing comes from additional features like flash, retractable screen, ovf upgrades and of course profit margin

the mk2 is a hulluva camera today compared to all others and represents excellent value (if you don't need the other features)

waiting for next lens upgrade, hoping to see 2mm wider

 

[elpibe10]

Was looking for a RX100 IV but ended up with a LX100. Good price plus some extra free gifts from Panasonic until end of August.

Those who are really into 4K video can consider the LX100 too.

LX100 is good but the key difference (for me at least) is that it's not trousers pocketable. If I'm willing to carry a camera externally, there are better options around (compared to the LX100).

i only bought mt m3 last yr

really clear pictures

Nothing wrong with Mk III. It's still one of the best pocketable compact cameras.

I bought mine early last month after comparing it with the IV and decided that I'm not willing to pay that hefty price difference for the 'improved' features.

 

[guile]

Bought it during pre order period for $1235 from TK. It being my first ever digital camera as I've been using camera phones in the past.

Got 64gb Sony U3, Leather case, Leather strap, Battery+Charger set, Tempered glass screen protector.

The spare batter+charger set is useful as you can charge it with a power bank, so i always have 1 in the camera, and 1 spare.

Can't really comment on the IQ as I can only compare it with my camera phone...lol. But it's good enough for me and the slow mo video is fun to play with.

 

[SMLeir]

I'm planning to get a camera for an overseas trip, interested in vlogging my experience as well as take some photos during the journey. Came to know about the rx100 through youtube, apparently its the "best portable vlogging camera". However, my friend introduced me to the Samsung nx500 (I know that it isn't really a point-and-shoot, please bear with me here), its able to shoot full 4k video, has higher megapixels, and is also cheaper than the rx100 mk IV. I'm conflicted whether as to pay around $1k for a point and shoot, or slightly lesser for a "dslr". Wondering if anyone has any experience with these cameras, please do chime in your thoughts!

 

[Illusionist_85]

paying premium for a MIC product

 

[RockingHorse]

I'm planning to get a camera for an overseas trip, interested in vlogging my experience as well as take some photos during the journey. Came to know about the rx100 through youtube, apparently its the "best portable vlogging camera". However, my friend introduced me to the Samsung nx500 (I know that it isn't really a point-and-shoot, please bear with me here), its able to shoot full 4k video, has higher megapixels, and is also cheaper than the rx100 mk IV. I'm conflicted whether as to pay around $1k for a point and shoot, or slightly lesser for a "dslr". Wondering if anyone has any experience with these cameras, please do chime in your thoughts!

It is not about higher megapixels, it is all about the sensor. the bigger the sensor, the better the picture is gonna be. Pic will be more warmer, more define. For me, it is all about the sensor. I have an old digital camera with a single digi megapixels but with a big sensor. And it is better than some of the camera with 12 megapixels. It is the sensor.

 

[Gribber]

A6k vs rx100iv.

A6k will win imo.

In terms of IQ that is

 

[indigo_dc]

It's good but expensive. Definitely better than the RX100-III, compare it to the G7X from canon.

I have a review and head-to-head guide on my website in my signature.

Will you be using the super slo-mo video and 1/32000th sec shutter speed? Or do you just want a high quality compact?