The sum of the good compromise

It is not easy to evaluate this camera. You barely fit into one of the existing segments into which we are accustomed to classify cameras commonly. Above all, it is a non -. A so-called bridge or Superzoomkamera conventional blank - would be considering its quality also an insult. But no system camera, because there is not a system for a camera with a fixed lens verbautem. And an SLR sometimes not - has indeed no mirror (including ...). Well, a compact camera - even negative, because they, the RX10, just not compact (enough) is.

The thing currently costs about 1000 and is therefore, considered over all camera categories of time, well within the upper price segment. Since you already wondering, wondering what you get for it.

To answer this question, we take the camera apart times in their individual parts - which are:

- Housing and Controls
- Lens
- Imager and associated electronics
- Image quality and the influence it properties

Housing and Controls

The case is very similar to a conventional DSLR. In relation to the massive and heavy lens, it looks quite small but is great in the hand. The objective is ultimately responsible for the relatively high weight of the camera of about 800g. The controls are logically thought out and easy to reach. You can individualize within wide limits, the necessary to glance at the menu reveals a clear structure and clarity.

The viewfinder is great, large, bright, high-contrast and color match. Only in very bright conditions it darkens slightly. When wearing glasses, I have no problem to overlook him. For a comparison with the viewfinder of the Olympus E-M5, which I own, he decides for himself clear.

The camera has a so-called. Shoulder display, on which one also could have done without, especially as it has been saved here an indication of the exposure scale and it is therefore of limited use. Speaking of balance, there is a spirit level in the viewfinder and on the (tilting) display, which is very useful.

Overall, the case makes a very high-quality impression, although I do not want to put to the test the promised sealing against splash water ...

Lens

What was formerly with the hi-fi equipment? An amplifier with as many watts was needed. The quiet could cost what. Oh, and speakers were needed also still because we take but the best tan that fit the cabinet.

Somewhat exaggerated perhaps, but transferred to our subject, the story goes, in many cases something like this: A high-quality camera to be there, we take best a SLR, which are anyway the best. And look here, in this package are two objectives that we've got them all, even a tele, I can surprise you 'ranholen (most are, however, quite pitiful broken ...) You guessed it, the objectives are to a certain extent the speakers. In both cases, these are the quality-determining elements, in the "mass market" but this is often neglected.

Now comes Sony therefore and flanged to the RX10 a optics that, as an interchangeable lens for a system camera with a larger sensor (we'll get to yet), in this light intensity (through 2.8) and with this focal length range (mm camera reckoned 24-200 mm) would probably not get, not to mention of possible dimensions, weight and price.

This lens is not only the quality but also the price-determining factor of the camera - and if you caught a good specimen, of a quality that is second to none. Why "if" - now, there are reports of decentered copies with considerable blurring through various images and focal length ranges distributed.

I myself have a defect-free lens, but must take the reports that are to be read at this point in the other reviews, seriously. Even with consideration of possible misinterpretations, deficiencies in the experimental set-up ", etc., something is probably because in his core tuned ... and then also the eye-catching, blue Zeiss logo does not help much as the level of risk -. Not know, but I suspect that it has its limits, because experience has shown that the malcontents report more frequent and louder (which is perfectly legitimate), as the satisfied customers.

Dissatisfied are some with the motorized zoom. They allow you to get used to, it actually is not so fixed as to a purely manually rotatable ring.

So compared with the usual, along with system or SLR cameras (the cameras are indeed System) standard lenses sold, plays the lens of the RX10 and thus the camera itself, in the sum of the properties in a completely different league. The changes, however, if you loaded the system cameras with comparable lenses. For this job, however, to cover the entire focal length range, at least two necessary upward at a total cost of about 2000. Understandable, since larger sensors must be illuminated, which drives the material and construction costs of the lenses upward. From so-called. Full frame cameras here we do not talk, there will be even more expensive.

The differences, which can be seen if a fair comparison, are caused essentially in each installed sensor - we'll get to now.

Imager and associated electronics

The RX10 has a so-called. 1 inch sensor, which is significantly greater than those that are installed in most compact cameras, but also significantly less than his colleagues in the system cameras (where we, the ruling in this category differences in size at this point time neglect). According to generally prevailing opinion a smaller sensor is greater - assuming an equal level of development - inferior in principle. In particular, the noise behavior and in the so-called. Exemption possibilities. But this is also related to other optical laws to explain the, beyond the scope at this point.

Yes, the RX10 can picture noise, more specifically, luminance noise, be visible under adverse conditions from ISO800. And yes, the exemption possibilities are thanks largest aperture of 2.8, in place, but can provided with larger sensors, correspondingly suitable lenses, be better implemented. The dynamics, that is, the ability to dark and light areas of the image equally drawn by play, is poor despite good readings in tests, compared to my e-m5 about half an exposure level. Again the noise - that into perspective, if the scaled images to be compared in the same resolution, which means in practice that lowers expected 20 MP resolution of the RX10 on the 16 MP, for example, the E-M5,.. Then, the differences are negligible.

Overall, the disadvantages listed in the photographic life in the majority of cases are not crucial. In this life the landscape, holiday and family reunion photograph of smaller sensor can namely play also benefits that are not insignificant in my view in practice. So landscapes are due to the higher depth of focus, which bring the shorter focal lengths with smaller sensors in principle with him sharply in a wide range. And that even with relatively large aperture, which in turn allows short exposure times and thus keeps the ISO setting low. Aunt Hilde would be a photo of your last birthday party on which it does not sink behind Uncle Willi in blur. A wedding reception I would not risk as the main photographer with the RX10 as single camera, however.

Image quality and they influence properties

To make it short, the image quality of the RX10 is, assuming the latter is used in the reasonable range, excellent. Very close to the E-M5, when it is equipped with a high-quality fixed focal length. Armed with their respective standard zoom or even super zooms, all system cameras that I could compare the RX10, let in the sum of the imaging properties of springs, at least in the area to ISO1600.

The image impression looks plastic, with almost anspringe Direction detail reproduction, while color slim, act without conspicuous color cast, but with a tendency to fill blue skies, before the individual clouds especially beautiful (beautiful too cheesy). This is only an excerpt of the impressions that are so dependent on the camera settings. In low light situations, the automatic white balance can sometimes be wrong, mainly in mixed light between dusk natural and artificial lighting. Then there will be a total of slightly yellowish. In such cases, offers RAW format. Otherwise the JPEG's are so good that I can usually forego the RAW development.

I shoot mostly with aperture priority, but also the two automatics deliver surprisingly good results. (There is an intelligent and superior automatic - the next level of escalation probably the "spanning" Automatic will be then.)

Autofocus is fast and even in the dark still fail. As with all such systems, it is advisable to switch the autofocus on the display of a single field. If you do not know on what the camera really sharp. The tracking of moving subjects by the autofocus works well, but I have not tested more thoroughly.

The RX10 provides numerous scene programs and automatic functions available of which I'd like a pick. These are the so-called multi-frame ISO. This function takes several shots in rapid succession - from the hand - and charged them inside the camera into a single image. She lends itself to static subjects, especially when illuminated objects in low-light conditions. Thus obtained despite high ISO a very low-noise and particularly surprisingly sharp picture. This makes a large part of the noise-related "disadvantage of relatively small sensor up for and often leads to spectacular image results.

There are now on the Sony site is also a German manual. That latter camera has not by lying, is an outrage.

I must admit that I have occupied myself not in great detail with the important for many users video capabilities of the camera. My attempts at the highest quality level, however, brought out videos that are slightly better than those from the E-M5. For me, this is however not sooo important.

Now what you get for 1000? An everyday use in all aspects camera - an "all in one" solution that perfectly covers at least 90% of all demands - for the remaining 10% have to dig deep into their pockets.

My claim to this review is, interested, if they have persevered this far, interpreted to give some indication on the hand, whether the described "total good compromise" for it is portable or not - if not, it gets more expensive.