A friend who is not a "photographer" and doesn't want to start collecting gear, asked me to recommend a great camera that would make good images and allow him the most flexibility for shooting everything from wide angle scenes to kids playing sports. I thought about all the interchangeable lens cameras I know about but my friend is a guy who is unlikely to want to change lenses or keep several lenses in a bag. It was a weird moment for me to realize that there are lots of other, sometimes better options, out in the world besides our traditional, mirrorless or DSLR system cameras, with their raft of lenses, accessories and operational traditions.
I thought back over all the work I've done in the past ten years to come up with a camera that I had personally used and enjoyed, but one which would also meet the more limited operational parameters requested. After I cut out all the interchangeable lens cameras I was left with a handful of choices. There are the artsy-hipster-advanced artist, fixed lens prime cameras like the Ricoh GRIII and the ever-iterating Fuji X-100x series but the wide, fixed, prime lens is far too limiting for anyone other than a person who might want to have a small camera to play with but who also possesses a massive inventory of "real" cameras for those times when portraits and other long lens scenarios come into focus...
Eliminating the "art school" camera set left me with just a couple of options. There's the compact, zoom lens cameras like the Sony RX100x's and the Panasonic Lumix LX100ii but I think they are too tiny and fiddly to work with. Then I found a folder of images I made one year when I took a Sony RX10iii to the big Spring party in Austin called, "Eeyore's Birthday Party." Smiling as I flipped through the images in the folder I realized that really good, longer telephoto capability is one of the things that separates really useful, impactful and highly competent cameras from "fun, handy" cameras.
I sent along the information about the Sony RX10iii, let him know that there's a newer model but that I hadn't used it yet, and I also sent along a folder full of color and black and white images I'd taken with the camera. He was hooked. Then he saw the pricing on the RX10 series and paused. He's using a borrowed RX10iii right now but every time we speak I can see that the camera is sinking its highly capable hooks into his wallet. And his visual vocabulary.
I love the RX10 series. Each new model had something to recommend it (and a deletion to bitch about....) but I'd almost forgotten that the lure and allure for me on the two later cameras is the absolutely first class long end of that 24mm-600mm equivalent zoom. I can isolate subjects, defocus backgrounds and get stellar stabilized results with much less hassle than trying to do the same with a professional, full frame body and a bag full of lenses that, when used together, give me the same kind of reach but with the burden of more weight and complexity than most people (who aren't being paid to make photographs) want to endure.
I should never have opened the folder and re-visited the images. Now I feel the attraction of the RX10IV. Resist. Resist. Resist.
18 comments:
Before posting a screed about how great the GRIII or the Fuji X100iiii are please know I was making the remark somewhat "tongue in cheek." I don't necessarily hate one-lens, one focal length cameras. I just wish they would be offered with 40 to 50 mm equivalent lenses instead of all of them being wide angly. Some of us are indifferent to the 35mm focal length; even more so to the 28mm equiv. But the cameras I just mentioned are great for specific use cases. Please, no flames.
Sorry though....can't sanction buying anything with a fixed focal length of 28mm or under. It's just not right.
You Leica Q2 owners can flame me for that instead.
He should give the Pany FZ-1000 a look (the older one version 1). Much cheaper and almost as good.
The Pany FZ-2500 has defaulted to my goto travel camera for the same reasons you recommended the RX. I would miss the inbuilt ND filter but the RX10 is always in the back of my mind. (Autofocus is in the Sony A9 class)
Not to worry Mr.T; I will happily wield the fire extinguisher for you. The Fuji X100 is a wonderful camera with the wrong lens and the Q2 ... 28mm???!!! Really???
My first digital camera was a Minolta A2. A great design, ahead of its time; and you could get a battery grip for it that made it a joy to handle. And there was the Sony R1, somewhat in the vein of the A2, but bigger with an APS sensor and a gorgeous Zeiss 24-120mm Vario Sonnar lens. The Sony was not the most comfortable camera to hold, but as Michael Reichmann said, the lens alone was worth the price. I've looked at the RX10 and The Panasonic FZ1000 a number of times but the ergonomics on both are terrible for my hands. Wonderful lenses and great sensors aside, they just feel WRONG.
OK! OK! I'm picky. So what's my recommendation? The Nikon V3 with the 10-100mm (27-270eq) lens. No; I have not lost my mind. I've had one for four years and still love it. This camera got a bad rap because of poor positioning, poor marketing and overpricing by Nikon and it does have its foibles. They are hard to find, but if you can find a body kit and a 10-100mm lens (lens $100 at Adorama) it's worth the money. The lens is Sharp!Sharp! Sharp! at any aperture; the focus is fast and accurate and the package is tiny compare to an RX10 of FZ100. Just carry some extra batteries - you'll need them.
I had the Sony RX10 IV, but found it to be huge and heavy. OK, I'm a wimp. My choice would be the Canon G1Xii with the optional tilt-up viewfinder (EVF-DC1). I just found a nice one for $200 (I had the EVF already from my Canon M6). The Nikon 1 cameras were under-rated and the lenses were quite sharp. I'd go with the J5 model with its superior Sony sensor.
A blog post of yours almost four years ago, "2.07.2016 A Few Thoughts About the Sony RX10-2 and Why a Smart Working Photographer might want to have one around" motivated me to get one for a trip to Iceland. It pushed my Leica M8 and T aside for a number of other things too. I love it and still have it. Two years ago I wanted something with a longer reach so I got the RX10iv and find it excellent for shooting shorebirds and my wife's choral concerts. Even with the iv, I still use the ii as it is lighter and smaller and I can get it in places where "professional" gear is not allowed. My recomendation would be to get either one.
And with that suggestion....I'm .... (oh wait, I promised myself I'd be on a "gear diet" for the month of January.....) Ooops.
The RX10 IV has been my "walking around, not sure what I'll see" camera for going on two years now - you really can't beat the flexibility, and not having to sacrifice AF performance in fixed-lens camera with that zoom range is amazing. Paired with an iPhone 11, it also makes a great travel camera if you aren't averse to its bulk - I've found a nice sling bag that accommodates it quite well, along with an Op/Tech Utility sling strap that puts the camera on my right hip for quick access and comfort.
I was certainly happy to have it when we popped out of a London Underground station in the midst of a crowd, and realized that we were right on the route the Queen's procession would take on her way to re-open Parliament. This being London, the light wasn't great, and I didn't need all the zoom the camera offers, but knowing you have a camera that can do a passable job capturing just about anything you point it at inspires confidence. Getting several recognizable photos of the Queen on my first visit to London, completely unplanned, was a testament to the advisability of having something much more flexible than your phone at hand while traveling - you just never know.
I got mine slightly used a few months after they came out - the price is certainly the one major downside, but it can replace an entire camera setup for many people. Because of the zoom range and stellar AF, it is also extremely popular with amateur bird photographers. There are other cameras that match it for some purposes - Panasonic's FZ1000/2500, Canon's G1X series, even the earlier RX10 II if you don't need the zoom range and/or the AF performance - but nothing can match it as a full package.
For camera lovers the RX10 series and Panasonic FZ series would not be legitimate candidates for "I want that camera". But for the average human wanting to take all kinds of photos and most enthusiasts these high end bridge cameras might be all you need.
The FZ1000 has been my "go to" camera for my article work for about 2-years now. Most of my work is in farms and you can't beat the flexibility when at one moment you maybe doing a wide shot and then zoom out to 400 for others in such a small package. Especially when you are on and off ATVs going across farms etc. It sure beats having 2 full frame cameras with a wide zoom on one and a 70-210 f2.8 on the other.
I have even shot an entire article a few times now with the LX100. Often I'll use the LX100 for portraits and wide angle work and use the FZ1000 as a very flexible tele lens!
I've found (starting with the Nikon V1's) that the 1" sensor cameras are really good B&W cameras.
In the information you gave to your friend, did you include Alexander S. White's "Photographer's Guide to the Sony DSC-RX10 III"? It was a great help after I bought my RX10 III (also called RX10 Mark 3). I still refer to it for answers to obscure settings.
I am about as far from "art school" as one can get, but I really like my GR III. The image quality is excellent. I thought I would not like the 28mm equiv. fixed lens, and I thought I would not like the lack of a viewfinder. I'm glad I put those qualms aside and bought it. The camera is surprisingly versatile and so very compact. It will not replace my Nikons. I look forward to traveling with both. Some days in a foreign city I just want to walk unencumbered and shoot with an unobtrusive camera.
I've had my Sony RX10 (original) since 2015. It goes with me hiking, mountain biking, skiing, and adventure traveling. I prefer the original 24-200mm focal length. I love and use the built-in ND filter.
DavidB
My first "serious" camera was an RX10 that I bought used for $500 in 2015. I wanted something equally adept at shooting video as it was at taking really nice photos and with a constant 2.8 aperture out to 200mm and an internal ND filter, it fit the bill. I moved on to various ILC's (I currently use an A7III) and gave the RX10 to one of my mentees as a graduation present from college, but I still marvel at the pictures and video quality of that camera. Although it "only" shot 1080p video, the quality of that 1080p is CLEARLY superior to the 1080p in my A7III.
If Sony gave us a RX10 with the AF capability of the IV with the internal ND's and constant aperture zoom of the I and II, I'd buy one in a heartbeat.
Kirk
The only thing that holds me back is the small sensor and the possibility of that once in a lifetime shot. where a full frame would be better. Can you compensate for the small sensor size and the once in a lifetime shot by taking two or more shots and stitching them together in photoshop?
If it's a great shot it's a great shot regardless of format. The one inch sensors are mostly better than the best digital cameras of any sensor size we had in the recent past (ten years ago?) so what did you do then? Shoot two frames on a Nikon D2x? Most of the hardware is more than sufficient. Enjoy the shot and don't sweat the almost invisible differences.
Kirk...let me know if you would like to get your hands on the RX10IV to try...Van Nguyen, a Sony Pro Support rep lives in Austin and I would bet he would love to let you try one out.
The phase detect AF with the IV over any of the previous models (with contrast based AF) makes it truly a great little unit that I have even taken into pro sports and made solid frames.
Happy New Year!
Paul Gero
Post a Comment