Review: Sony's high-end Cyber-shot QX100 wireless camera lens for iPhone

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 34
    takeo wrote: »
    That's kinda like saying why buy a car when you can buy a hubcap. The Olloclip is neat but it's not even close to being the same thing in any way. These Sony products are extremely high-end full cameras just without a viewfinder.

    Your definition of "extremely high-end camera" is what photographers would call a compact consumer camera. It's precisely the type of camera the iPhone is replacing.

    If all you want is an iPhone with an optical zoom, the Olloclip is an inexpensive solution.
  • Reply 22 of 34
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Takeo View Post

     

     

    That's kinda like saying why buy a car when you can buy a hubcap. The Olloclip is neat but it's not even close to being the same thing in any way. These Sony products are extremely high-end full cameras just without a viewfinder.


     

    Sony and extremely high-end full camera does not belong in the same sentence. I don't know of one professional photographer using Sony. Canon and Nikon for those wanting high-end. 

  • Reply 23 of 34
    My iPhone 6 wish list: 
    • <span style="line-height:1.4em;">Maintain 8mp but larger sensor, larger pixels.  Allows more light to be captured and less noise. With the 5s increasing sensor and pixel size, the 6 </span>
      unfortunately<span style="line-height:1.4em;"> probably won't. Good read. </span>
    • <span style="line-height:1.4em;">Faster shutter speeds. If you have more light coming in, you can increase the shutter speed and therefore lower blur. This is important for objects moving and not just you moving. Capturing that flower in the wind. </span>
    • <span style="line-height:1.4em;">Zoned Exposure. Just like your auto-focus is zoned, so should exposure. This will allow the iPhone to adjustment of exposure levels across the image. HDR is today's answer, but I think a better job can be done. (again, without having my 5s to test)</span>
    • Image Stabilizing (IS): Yes, the 5s has some IS, and if mine ever arrives I'll be able to test this out. Apple uses Image-blending stabilization but with the M7 we could see optical image stabilizing. The current 5s approach + optical IS might be a great combination. 
    • Wide Area Flash (WAF): The 5s flash concept sounds appealing with the new amber light. What I would like to see changed is each of these two lights parsed into 4 with each having their angle slightly adjusted away from center. This will allow the light to spread wider across the exposure and give less of that 'deer in the headlight' look. This with the zoned exposure would be huge. 
    • Move flash further from the lens to reduce redeye. 
    • Glass to be actual glass. I will always maintain that the quality of glass far outweighs the quality of the camera body itself. The amount of light and the quality of light good glass can bring into the sensor is priceless. The iPhone has plastic glass. I want to see this moved to real glass (might be the sapphire?). I can't imagine plastic allowing as much light, or as pure light to pass through as actual glass does. With my experience with photography and the huge difference of quality glass can make, this may be the single biggest advancement Apple could make in the 6. 

    If I'm not mistaken the iPhone has used actual glass lens elements since the iPhone 4 and with the iPhone 5 the cover was switched to sapphire crystal. Secondly I'm unclear on why you think the M7 would impact having an optical image stabilization. If anything it would improve the image processing capabilities; however even that the M7 doesn't introduce any new sensor technology. The M7 is meant to provide a lower power processor that can capture and process sensor data without having to constantly wake up the A7.
  • Reply 24 of 34
    These comparisons are silly. What kind of metering was used?

    A slight change in the framing can change the exposure. Every frame was different.
  • Reply 25 of 34
    studentx wrote: »
    These comparisons are silly. What kind of metering was used?

    A slight change in the framing can change the exposure. Every frame was different.

    I noticed it too, and it appears no attempt was made to manually set the exposure. I can only assume either: (1) Neil isn't a photographer, (2) the camera doesn't tell you and gives no options, or (3) it doesn't matter to most casual Facebook / Instagram / Flickr users who will just point and shoot.

    However, know its not (2) with the iPhone because you can use the touchscreen to point to your subject and the iPhone switches to spot metering.

    What I don't get is why HDR wasn't turned on. The iPhone 5s has a terrific ability to prevent overexposing the sky then photographing backlit subjects like the building, when using HDR. Why not use that?
  • Reply 26 of 34
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PopinFRESH View Post





    If I'm not mistaken the iPhone has used actual glass lens elements since the iPhone 4 and with the iPhone 5 the cover was switched to sapphire crystal. Secondly I'm unclear on why you think the M7 would impact having an optical image stabilization. If anything it would improve the image processing capabilities; however even that the M7 doesn't introduce any new sensor technology. The M7 is meant to provide a lower power processor that can capture and process sensor data without having to constantly wake up the A7.

     

     

    Yes, the outside lens is Sapphire, but the inside elements are still plastic: 

     

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/7329/some-thoughts-about-the-iphone-5s-camera-improvements ;

     

    The M7 can probably more quickly detect movement from the gyroscope and return that data to the optical image stabilizer (if Apple uses one) than older Ax systems where the Ax could be burdened with other tasks. The iPhone is probably too thin for an OIS, but one can hope. 
  • Reply 27 of 34
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Richard Getz View Post

     

     

    Sony and extremely high-end full camera does not belong in the same sentence. I don't know of one professional photographer using Sony. Canon and Nikon for those wanting high-end. 


    High end is a bit of hyperbole for these cameras, the Q10 is based on a Sony bridge camera, small sensor larger zoom range, the Q100 is based on the RX100 series which is a high end compact camera. It has a much bigger sensor than typical P&S and a price to match. The new cameras have some limited uses but I do not see them getting real popular. Just to slow to set up and too big for the use envisioned. Sony's Cyber-Shot division has come out with some good camera lately, so the occasional miss is not a big deal. The RX100 and RX1, both proved to be very desirable cameras. 

     

    As far as pro cameras go, certainly most use Canon and Nikon bodies but there are pro's using Sony FF and APS-C cameras as well as other brands. If it was not for companies like Pentax, Sony, Fuji and Olympus the DSLR market would be even more boring than it is now. 

  • Reply 28 of 34
    This product is destined to fail - period. Having worked as Product Manager for a major CE company, I feel I am in the position to make such statement. The whole concept is just a big non-sense, as many readers have pointed out: if you want to take quality pictures anywhere, possibly with the convenience of a good optical zoom, why not just carry a pocket camera that can cost way less, fires up in split seconds and without all the hassles of all these physical connections (wifi/body attachment). And that's what I do - I carry a very small Sony cam with an excellent 20X zoom with me most of the time, and have taken great, interesting pictures. I really think Sony Mobile and Apple should explore those folding zoom lens that are found in many credit card thin cameras (especially Sony's) as they are really compact with excellent image quality that make them suitable for use in mobile phones - hope they take note !
  • Reply 29 of 34
    To me this defeats the beauty of using a mobile phone as a camera, its always with me and taking up very little room in my pocket.

    When I need more than 8 megapixels and different focal lengths I'd rather use a proper camera, far more responsive.
  • Reply 30 of 34
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wally626 View Post

     

    High end is a bit of hyperbole for these cameras, the Q10 is based on a Sony bridge camera, small sensor larger zoom range, the Q100 is based on the RX100 series which is a high end compact camera. It has a much bigger sensor than typical P&S and a price to match. The new cameras have some limited uses but I do not see them getting real popular. Just to slow to set up and too big for the use envisioned. Sony's Cyber-Shot division has come out with some good camera lately, so the occasional miss is not a big deal. The RX100 and RX1, both proved to be very desirable cameras. 

     

    As far as pro cameras go, certainly most use Canon and Nikon bodies but there are pro's using Sony FF and APS-C cameras as well as other brands. If it was not for companies like Pentax, Sony, Fuji and Olympus the DSLR market would be even more boring than it is now. 


     

    I was not commenting on the quality of these lenses within their category, but the high-end comment was out of place. Yes, if stated high-end compact cameras, I would not even be able to comment as I have no knowledge in that space. 

     

    I'm sure there are professionals somewhere using non Canon or Nikon gear, I just don't know of any or have heard of any. I strongly disagree with your last sentence. 

  • Reply 31 of 34
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,743member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by realpaulfreeman View Post



    To me this defeats the beauty of using a mobile phone as a camera, its always with me and taking up very little room in my pocket.



    When I need more than 8 megapixels and different focal lengths I'd rather use a proper camera, far more responsive.

     

    Not sure about opinions here, but when the NYT publishes your photos, you probably did something right:

     

    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/10/23/magazine/mag-23Look.html?_r=0

     

    Yeah. iPhone + Hipstamatic. 

     

    Details:

     

    http://connect.dpreview.com/post/6401294793/

     

    His site:

     

    http://www.benlowy.com

  • Reply 32 of 34
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

     

     

    Not sure about opinions here, but when the NYT publishes your photos, you probably did something right:

     

    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/10/23/magazine/mag-23Look.html?_r=0

     

    Yeah. iPhone + Hipstamatic. 

     

    Details:

     

    http://connect.dpreview.com/post/6401294793/

     

    His site:

     

    http://www.benlowy.com


     

    I don't think they published based on the quality of the photographs. 

     

    Also, the colors are way off; these most have had post processing. 

  • Reply 33 of 34
    quadra 610quadra 610 Posts: 6,743member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Richard Getz View Post

     

     

    I don't think they published based on the quality of the photographs. 

     

    Also, the colors are way off; these most have had post processing. 


     

     

    It's increasing the legitimacy of iPhone (mobile) photography.

     

    Yes, these have had post-processing, but given that they were done with Hipstamatic, that's expected, and it's part of their charm. And they look great, too. 

     

    I'm not even going to get into what VSCO (VSCO Cam) has done for iPhone photography. I've been very impressed with the product and the results (as have many others.) No big-ass lens needed. 

  • Reply 34 of 34
    This device is pointless. What is Sony thinking? If you have to go through the trouble and expense of using a camera that will far exceed your cell phone, then why not just invest in DSLR camera at a similar price point but has infinite more capability?
Sign In or Register to comment.