First look: Sony's iPhone-compatible QX10 and QX100 Cyber-shot lenses

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 84
    I've been waiting for this but it's a half done product. With retina displays, we can bypass the need to place an optical viewfinder on the same box as the lens and sensor. Imagine twin 4K OLED screens built into glasses enabling a 75 degree field of view where no pixels are discernible. The display is not see-through because that wipes color saturation and makes black impossible. Displays mounted in glasses utilizes your own head to block sun or other lights from washing out the screen image. It's like head mounted binoculars no thicker than reading glasses. This is hands free to manage the wireless lens/sensor; for example, on top of a pole. The glasses are narrow enough that the upper half of the photographers field of view is un obstructed. A quick slight glance down views the screen focused with the eye muscles at rest, focused at infinity. All in 3D!
  • Reply 62 of 84

    There doesn't seem to any mention of these lens attachments providing video capture. If this feature is indeed missing, and I suspect it is, then I think this the most serious limitation. I'll be waiting for version 2.

  • Reply 63 of 84
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Bob England View Post

     

    There doesn't seem to any mention of these lens attachments providing video capture. If this feature is indeed missing, and I suspect it is, then I think this the most serious limitation. I'll be waiting for version 2.


     

    Both the QX10 and QX100 can be used to record HD video.  It's been mentioned in multiple hands-on reviews.  And, in fact, due to the QX10's 10x zoom, it has image stabilization for video use.

     

    Mark

  • Reply 64 of 84
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mark Booth View Post

     

     

    Obviously, you've never used a Digital SLR camera.  At least, not extensively.  There's a BIG difference in the image creation capabilities of a Digital SLR versus a point & shoot.  Not the least of which is tighter control over depth of field thanks to the SIGNIFICANTLY larger image sensors in Digital SLRs.  And recent Digital SLRs can focus and take a photo in a fraction of the time and in a fraction of the light needed for point & shoot cameras.



    Granted, the best camera is the one you have with you.  But anyone who thinks there aren't real and significant benefits to shooting with a interchangeable lens Digital SLR is just fooling themselves.

     

    Mark


    People seem to be still in the DSLR/Point and Shoot bind here.  The mirrorless cameras are in between.  The mirrorless cameras have large image sensors and interchangeable lenses - placing them above traditional point-and-shoots.  The new Sony products make an iPhone into a pretty good mirrorless camera.  Mark you are wrong about the "SIGNIFICANTLY larger image sensors in Digital SLRS".  The 1" image sensor on the QX100 is considerably larger than the 22 mm X 15 mm sensor on current Canon Rebel  and 60D DSLRs.  You should read the specs before commenting. If you already have the phone these products give you a good mirrorless with half the weight.  I would like to have that image sensor and interchangeable lenses.  Hope someone comes out with this.

  • Reply 65 of 84
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by csgasser View Post

     

    People seem to be still in the DSLR/Point and Shoot bind here.  The mirrorless cameras are in between.  The mirrorless cameras have large image sensors and interchangeable lenses - placing them above traditional point-and-shoots.  The new Sony products make an iPhone into a pretty good mirrorless camera.  Mark you are wrong about the "SIGNIFICANTLY larger image sensors in Digital SLRS".  The 1" image sensor on the QX100 is considerably larger than the 22 mm X 15 mm sensor on current Canon Rebel  and 60D DSLRs.  You should read the specs before commenting. If you already have the phone these products give you a good mirrorless with half the weight.  I would like to have that image sensor and interchangeable lenses.  Hope someone comes out with this.


     

    Actually, YOU should read the specs before commenting!  The QX100 has a 1" sensor.  Its dimensions are 13.2 mm x 8.8 mm.  SIGNIFICANTLY smaller than the 22.2 mm x 14.8 mm sensor in a Canon or Nikon APS-C camera.  And, of course, the full-frame sensor in cameras like the 5D are 36 mm x 24 mm, which is about NINE TIMES the size of the sensor in the QX100.

     

    Here's where you can look at the specs for the QX100:

     

    http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sony-cybershot-dsc-qx100/2

     

    And here's a little chart to help you visualize the different sizes of sensors (click image for larger version):

     

     

    The Sony QX10 sensor is 1/2" (second from the left in the chart above).  The QX100's sensor is 1", which would place it between the 2/3" and the 4/3".  A pretty small sensor when compared to the APS-C sensor in the Canon Digital Rebel and downright PUNY when compared to a full-frame sensor!

     

    I await your apology!

     

    Mark

     

    Edit:  If the above chart isn't helpful to you, perhaps this one will be:

     

  • Reply 66 of 84
    zozmanzozman Posts: 393member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by csgasser View Post

    The 1" image sensor on the QX100 is considerably larger than the 22 mm X 15 mm sensor on current Canon Rebel  and 60D DSLRs.  



     


    Well that isn't actually true, the '1"' sensor isn't actually an inch in size, its referring to a legacy scale (from memory) the Canon APS-C size sensor is actually quite a bit larger than the 1", as far as sensor sizes, its the canon APS-C, then the Nikon APS-C, then full frame.

    That really doesn't matter tho, I agree with you about mirrorless cameras, they are the camera that sits between the enthusiast & DSLR 

     

     

     

    PS, Damn, Mark beat me to it :P 


  • Reply 67 of 84
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mark Booth View Post

     

     

    Actually, YOU should read the specs before commenting!  The QX100 has a 1" sensor.  Its dimensions are 13.2 mm x 8.8 mm.  SIGNIFICANTLY smaller than the 22.2 mm x 14.8 mm sensor in a Canon or Nikon APS-C camera.  And, of course, the FULL FRAME sensor in cameras like the 5D is 36 mm x 24 mm, which is about 9X the size of the sensor in the QX100.

     

    Here's where you can look at the specs for the QX100:

     

    http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sony-cybershot-dsc-qx100/2

     

    And here's a little chart to help you visualize the different sizes of sensors:

    The Sony QX10 sensor is 1/2" (second from the left in the chart above).  The QX100's sensor is 1", which would place it between the 2/3" and the 4/3".  A relatively small sensor when compared to the APS-C sensor in the Canon Digital Rebel and downright PUNY when compared to a full-frame sensor!

     

    Mark


    Mark, I apologize.  I did not understand that '1" sensor' did not mean a 1" X 1" sensor (25.4 mm on a side).    Where does one get 1" out of 13.2 mm X 8 mm?  That's much less than 1" on a side and much less than 1 square inch.  The diagonal of that is still just 15 mm so it doesn't have a 1" diagonal!?!  Their nomenclature is very confusing and I thank you for setting me straight!

  • Reply 68 of 84
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by csgasser View Post

     

    Mark, I apologize.  I did not understand that '1" sensor' did not mean a 1" X 1" sensor (25.4 mm on a side).    Where does one get 1" out of 13.2 mm X 8 mm?  That's much less than 1" on a side and much less than 1 square inch.  The diagonal of that is still just 15 mm so it doesn't have a 1" diagonal!?!  Their nomenclature is very confusing and I thank you for setting me straight!


     

    Thank you!

     

    BTW, the inch-based sizing system stems from the vacuum image-sensing tube days.  QX100's 13.2mm x 8.8mm sensor is able to image the same amount of area as a 1-inch vacuum tube image sensor.  The inch-based sizing is simply a legacy way to reference the amount of image area that is captured by the sensor.

     

    Mark

  • Reply 69 of 84
    Can you read?

    "that is connected to the device over peer-to-peer Wi-Fi."
  • Reply 70 of 84
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AussieinHK View Post



    Can you read?



    "that is connected to the device over peer-to-peer Wi-Fi."

     

    My question was answered many messages ago.  But thank you for the input!

     

    Mark

  • Reply 71 of 84
    nikon133nikon133 Posts: 2,600member
    abarry wrote: »
    Great. A 1" CMOS sensor! F 1.8!! All good in the zoom model, although I wish they would have had a f/2.5, instead of 4.9, at the tele end. Still superb. For $500, you're getting a DSLR, pretty much.

    Question: Since the connection of the lens to phone is through P2P, does it mean I can be out in the wild taking photographs without any available Wi-Fi?

    My problem here is - for $100 more, you get Sony RX100 camera with 1" 20MP CMOS sensor, 1.8 wide end aperture (28mm equivalent), flash, full manual controls (P, S, A...). Volume of the camera (with retracted lens) does not seem to be much larger than volume of this "lenses", it is actually more flat when retracted, thus more pocketable.

    And you can pull it out of pocket or bag and shoot within a few seconds.

    To me, this looks more practical compared to carrying, attaching and removing this add-on lens to my smartphone.
  • Reply 72 of 84
    nikon133nikon133 Posts: 2,600member
    You're not getting anything CLOSE to a DSLR. Also, for $500, you can get a real DSLR, used on Craigslist with a kit lens, that will blow this away.

    That is relative. You are getting close to older DSLR models, IMHO. Even bettering in some cases. This comparing RX100 and Nikon D70s.

    Granted, far below what modern DSLR cameras can give in IQ, but DSLR nevertheless.

    And even those older DSLRs are still much better than your typical P&S, or smartphone camera... so you do get a lot of IQ with 1" systems.
  • Reply 73 of 84
    nikon133nikon133 Posts: 2,600member
    Marvin wrote: »
    There's a review here says it's based off the Sony RX100 camera:

    http://www.trustedreviews.com/sony-qx100_Digital-Camera_review

    So that's probably the best reference point for quality:


    [VIDEO]


    http://www.techradar.com/reviews/cameras-and-camcorders/cameras/compact-cameras/sony-rx100-ii-1160503/review/6#articleContent

    http://gizmodo.com/5931587/sony-rx100-review-this-camera-singlehandedly-makes-point+and+shoots-relevant-again

    "Let's say you're thinking of buying a DSLR or mirrorless camera, slapping a 50mm lens on it, and shooting whatever you come across during the weekend, buy the RX100 instead. It's smaller, and for your purposes, will yield photos that are just as beautiful with less tinkering.

    Or, let's say you're a serious photographer who doesn't want the burden of always carrying around a DSLR. The RX100 is right for you as well. No, you absolutely won't get all the same shots you can pull off with your bigger camera. But you will get some of them (especially in good light). And you won't have five extra pounds strapped on at all times. Plus, this is way better than your smartphone camera (even the good ones)."

    There's compromises all the way up any given price range. I expect the quality will come out below a $500 Canon Rebel and well below a $4000 Canon 5D and it misses features out (changing lenses for a start). It's more comparable to a fixed lens point-and-shoot in the sub-$1000 price range. If it can give similar output to the $600 RX100 for a bit less money then it'll please some people and some might put aside their DSLR on occasions. It can't, as you say, replace a DSLR for people who use the features they offer.

    Having this camera, the thing I most frequently wish for is more DOF control.

    Sure with 1.8 aperture you should be able to get decent amount of it, but... camera's exposure tops at 1/2000, and on sunny day, that is not enough to let you use 1.8 aperture. One can fight that limitation with additional ND filter, but I don't like glue-on solutions (camera hasn't got thread).
  • Reply 74 of 84

    @Mark Booth website addy? 

  • Reply 75 of 84
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,476moderator
    nikon133 wrote: »
    My problem here is - for $100 more, you get Sony RX100 camera with 1" 20MP CMOS sensor, 1.8 wide end aperture (28mm equivalent), flash, full manual controls (P, S, A...). Volume of the camera (with retracted lens) does not seem to be much larger than volume of this "lenses", it is actually more flat when retracted, thus more pocketable.

    And you can pull it out of pocket or bag and shoot within a few seconds.

    To me, this looks more practical compared to carrying, attaching and removing this add-on lens to my smartphone.

    It depends on the use case. A significant number of people take pictures on their iPhone and upload them to flickr:

    http://www.flickr.com/cameras

    You can see the iPhone takes the top 3 spots in most popular cameras - not quite sure how multiple models have over 50%, maybe some accounts are families with multiple phones. Interestingly, the RX100 takes the top spot in point-and-shoot. This lens gives people a combination of both. Flickr has over 87 million members.

    A few iPhone 5 pics use post-processing filters:

    http://www.flickr.com/cameras/apple/iphone_5/

    With the combination of the lens and phone, you get the quality of the RX100 and the immediate editing capability of the iPhone with direct upload to flickr.
  • Reply 76 of 84
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,476moderator
    I noticed that on flickr stats, Android phones don't feature very highly:

    http://www.flickr.com/cameras

    Despite outnumbering Apple's phone sales share by a large margin, they don't even register in the top 5 overall cameras. There's only one in the most popular Cameraphone segment and that's the old Galaxy S3. Even the iPhone 3G recently topped that again.

    No Nokia Lumia with the better camera, no flagship S4 or Moto X. Surely they can't be sitting in drawers too.

    The sales numbers for Android are often reported to be outnumbering the iPhone by a huge amount but the numbers are really: [B]Android - 1 billion activations, iOS - 650 million devices sold[/B], which they'll likely announce in a few days. That's pretty impressive for one company selling one new phone version per year vs so many Android handsets starting at <$100 off-contract.

    40% the Android ones are the old 2.3 devices so when it comes to flagship models running the latest OS, they are pretty close and clearly people are using iOS devices more for things like photography.

    It would be nice to see the internal iPhone camera get more upgrades. Sensor sensitivity is the big one to bring it closer to DSLR quality and they have technology already:

    http://broadcastengineering.com/cameras-amp-lenses/new-graphene-sensor-holds-promise-better-low-light-images-lower-cost

    Lenses still offer the cool effects but maybe they can have a depth sensor and do accurate DoF blurring on the phone. They can even sample offset images to get a rough idea of where things are depth-wise.
  • Reply 77 of 84
    nikon133nikon133 Posts: 2,600member
    Marvin wrote: »
    It depends on the use case. A significant number of people take pictures on their iPhone and upload them to flickr:

    http://www.flickr.com/cameras

    You can see the iPhone takes the top 3 spots in most popular cameras - not quite sure how multiple models have over 50%, maybe some accounts are families with multiple phones. Interestingly, the RX100 takes the top spot in point-and-shoot. This lens gives people a combination of both. Flickr has over 87 million members.

    A few iPhone 5 pics use post-processing filters:

    http://www.flickr.com/cameras/apple/iphone_5/

    With the combination of the lens and phone, you get the quality of the RX100 and the immediate editing capability of the iPhone with direct upload to flickr.

    True, depends on use case.

    From my point of view, having to carry same bulk, fiddling with attaching lens to phone (and possibly loosing perfect shot opportunity) and loosing RAW and manual controls is much bigger handicap than losing capability to Instagram and post immediately in Flickr or FB. But then, I don't post instantly anyway, even when I can... and I don't Instagram at all... thus my preference.
  • Reply 78 of 84
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Richard Getz View Post

     

    @Mark Booth website addy? 


     

    Photo: http://thephotobooth.net

    Blog: http://markshangout.com

     

    Mark

  • Reply 79 of 84

    This is a nice idea from Sony but its way too clumsy for real world use.

  • Reply 80 of 84

    Why no flash?  I'd love to see Canon and Nikon response to this.

Sign In or Register to comment.