aftab: For those who wanted to see footage/sample video
The video is cool but seriously why did they upload it at 320p to youtube? Can we at least get 720p?
This would be an amateur astronomer's dream until they saw the price.
It isn't perfect but it really is close to perfect for my needs.
I understand why people still buy Canon DSLRs because they have so many Canon lenses that they don’t want to get rid of. However, I don’t understand buying a compact fixed lens camera from Canon when the competition is so obviously superior.
I am sure this is a fine camera. However, gaining the 400-600mm range is not worth giving up almost everything else that would make your picture quality and shooting experience better.
The one thing this camera has going for it is the Canon name. Otherwise it simply can’t match what everyone else offers.
Overall a decent set of images. I would have liked to see a few more pictures with people in it though since this camera has been marketed at the high resolution portrait photographer market.
You can just tell that Dpreview is loving this camera already.
Does the lead guy have a broken leg?
mpgxsvcd: I feel confident that the RX100 MKIV can do everything that the enthusiast user would ever want to do and probably just about everything that the pro-sumer user would want it to do. Some cameras may do specific things better but nothing does everything as well as this camera does.
I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend this camera to virtually everyone. Even if you are a Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, Olympus, Fuji, Pentax….etc fanatic this camera would have to intrigue you.
If you need more reach then I am certain the RX10 MKII would probably fit your needs better.
The improvements in Auto ISO alone should get this camera the gold award. It will get it for a number of other reasons as well though.
I feel confident that the RX100 MKIV can do everything that the enthusiast user would ever want to do and probably just about everything that the pro-sumer user would want it to do. Some cameras may do specific things better but nothing does everything as well as this camera does.
80% of the performance for 20% more cost. We are Canon and we make impossible, possible.
What I got from this article is that the Canon 5DSR would be a world beating camera if its competitors didn't exist anymore.
mpgxsvcd: Wonderful images but this is not the right application for this camera. Those are more landscape than they are astrophotography. Those pictures did not benefit from the “a” in the 810A at all and it is wrong to claim that these pictures demonstrate the cameras full capabilities.
You need to photograph objects with Hydrogen Alpha reflections like the Horse Head Nebula, M16, The Rosette Nebula, and M42 through a telescope to show why the 810A costs so much more than its non-astrophotography counterparts.
This article was nothing more than one guy showing off his night time landscape pictures and masquerading them as astrophotography. That is a disservice to the 810a which is truly a quite capable astro camera when placed in the right hands and in the right location.
That is the issue. Everyone thinks that you have to spend many thousands of dollars to do Astrophotography at all. I spent $1500 on my entire astrophotography setup including guided-tracking mount, 8 inch telescope, and fully modified camera.
That is roughly the same amount extra you spend on one of these “Modified by the factory” cameras over a non-modified camera.
If Dpreview wants to send one of those modified cameras my way. I will show them exactly what this article should have looked like with a minimal amount of AP equipment.
white shadow: Nice series of shots but do you really need this camera to shoot them?
Nikon made this camera for an entirely different purpose than what this photographer used it for. It offered him no benefit at all over the non-astro version of this camera.
“This gives such nebulae 'pop' with a more saturated red appearance, even in wide angle shots of the Milky Way.”
What Nebula? Most Nebula are way too small to see in such a widefield image. All I see is our galaxy and that has too much non-Ha light to demonstrate the benefits of this camera.
You are right. It is more that Dpreview is masquerading this as an example of astro photography. However, I was under the impression that Dpreview asked him to do this article for them. If that is the case then this most certainly is what he feels is an example of astrophotography.
Either way this does not represent what this camera is capable of. His Milky Way exposures do not contain a noticeable amount of Ha light. He is misguided in his conclusions there and he is misrepresenting what this camera is capable of.
Wonderful images but this is not the right application for this camera. Those are more landscape than they are astrophotography. Those pictures did not benefit from the “a” in the 810A at all and it is wrong to claim that these pictures demonstrate the cameras full capabilities.
Jim Hully: Once again Panasonic USA forces you to buy this camera with the kit lens., no body-only option. DPReview, why isn't that a "con" in your conclusions?
I don't want the hear the usual witless suggestions about just selling it. Tell you what, next time you have your car serviced, let the dealership sell you a new wheel. Not something you wanted but hey you could always sell it...
I am just curious about this. However, if Panasonic sold the camera without the lens for $50 less would you buy it without the lens or would it need to be closer to $100 or more of a discount before it would matter to you?
mpgxsvcd: “Auto ISO is not available at all when shooting video.”
Can you clarify that statement a little bit? Surely you don’t mean that this camera cannot control ISO during video recording? How does ISO function when you hit the record button in one of the stills modes?
Does that mean the camera cannot shoot video at all in stills mode? That would be a change from how the Panasonic cameras have operated in the past and not a good change either.
$399...... I will just stop you right there then.