Jump to content

Nikon DL - Better than the RX100iv?

JonathanStewart

By JonathanStewart,
in Sony Alpha News & Rumors

 Share

Recommended Posts

JonathanStewart Collaborator

JonathanStewart

Posted
Posted

The new Nikon DL compacts look pretty sweet. They're probably packing the same Sony sensor found in the RX100iv, but it looks like the implementation may be even better.  The one with the most attractive lens, for me, the 24-85mm, is also the cheapest at $650. 

 

On paper, these have everything the RX100iv does, but you lose an EVF in favor of a touch screen, and wifi for bluetooth only.  They've got built-in time-lapse, HFR, 4k video, OSS and electronic OS, and Nikon say they've eliminated rolling shutter, which is a huge problem on the RX100iv in 4k. 

 

Not sure you power it with USB (probably not). That, and the fact that I've already got a zillion backup batteries for my RX100iv means I probably won't be switching, but still . . . 

 

Has Nikon bettered Sony in the premium compact?  The 24-500 version looks arguably better than the RX10ii.  If I were buying today, I'd probably get the Nikon.  

 

Your thoughts? 

 

http://nikonrumors.com/2016/02/23/nikon-dl-cameras-specs-comparison.aspx/#more-102482

Link to post
Share on other sites
Wesley Enthusiast

Wesley

Posted
Posted

The new Nikon DL compacts look pretty sweet. They're probably packing the same Sony sensor found in the RX100iv, but it looks like the implementation may be even better.  The one with the most attractive lens, for me, the 24-85mm, is also the cheapest at $650. 

 

On paper, these have everything the RX100iv does, but you lose an EVF in favor of a touch screen, and wifi for bluetooth only.  They've got built-in time-lapse, HFR, 4k video, OSS and electronic OS, and Nikon say they've eliminated rolling shutter, which is a huge problem on the RX100iv in 4k. 

 

Not sure you power it with USB (probably not). That, and the fact that I've already got a zillion backup batteries for my RX100iv means I probably won't be switching, but still . . . 

 

Has Nikon bettered Sony in the premium compact?  The 24-500 version looks arguably better than the RX10ii.  If I were buying today, I'd probably get the Nikon.  

 

Your thoughts? 

 

http://nikonrumors.com/2016/02/23/nikon-dl-cameras-specs-comparison.aspx/#more-102482

 

I would personally take the RX100 as it's a true compact experience. Integrated lens cap and EVF.

 

Looks like DL 24-85 has 4" more depth, optional hot shoe EVF, and regular lens cap which will make it bulky. However if it's like the Nikon 1 than expect faster AF.   60fps is ridiculously fast as well.

 

A good competitor for the RX100.

Link to post
Share on other sites
JonathanStewart Collaborator

JonathanStewart

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I would personally take the RX100 as it's a true compact experience. Integrated lens cap and EVF.

 

Looks like DL 24-85 has 4" more depth, optional hot shoe EVF, and regular lens cap which will make it bulky. However if it's like the Nikon 1 than expect faster AF.   60fps is ridiculously fast as well.

 

A good competitor for the RX100.

 

No doubt a good competitor and it should push Sony to improve as well.  Indeed it is bigger than the Sony, which matters in that category.  I've had two of the lens cover/caps on the RX cameras jam up on me. They're too fragile, so I'd welcome a regular lens cap, or maybe just put on a slim filter and not worry about it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
pjpo98 Rookie

pjpo98

Posted
Posted

This isn't a Sony sensor but rather the Aptina sensor with PDAF as used in the rest of the Nikon 1 line. It absolutely kills me that Sony leaves PDAF out of the RX line when they have the technology. An EVF is great, but I really don't miss it on my RX100ii. At least Sony has the best implementation for it to be hidden away until you do need it. Add in things like the ND filter, filter threads, 1/16,000 sec shutter, and you have some solid benefits over the RX.

 

The big deal on the DL line is the 18-50 model that somehow isn't getting as much attention. There has never been an ultra wide compact, let alone one with at least a 1" sensor or bigger. And they could have just let it be a slow lens like their own 18-35mm f/3.5-5.6, but no, we have a really bright f/1.8-2.8 which equates to f/4.8-7.5 FF. My walk around kit is a FE 16-35 and 55mm, and this essentially includes that whole range. The RX100ii is f/3.2 at 50mm, so it's still even faster than that. This is perfect for backpacking and all sorts of travel. Every realtor needs this to take respectable photos of their listings instead of using their dang phone!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest all8

Guest all8

Posted
Posted

Importantly, the Sony has an EVF (without having to pay extra) plus slog. But for anyone not bothered about those the Nikon looks superb.

 

Have you seen how much a Sony RX100 IV costs? The price if the EVF is "baked into the cake"!

 

The Sony RX100 is really a nice size, however that Nikon DL 18-50 looks like it might be better (although larger). Personally I would rather the Nikon DL 18-50 with real camera controls and none of the automation/scenes - dial for shutter speed, dial for aperture, and zoom control on the lens.

 

But the price ... of both ... I prefer what I get from my Ricoh GR over my RX100 ... and the only slightly more expensive Leica X (113) gets me a camera which behaves like a camera ... I think they could all do a little better.

 

Nikon DL 18-50 looks pretty good, I doubt Sony is about to make a real camera anytime soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest all8

Guest all8

Posted
Posted

FS7 or FS5?

 

 

Why not both, just glue them together and stick a PASM and SCN dial somewhere?     ;)

 

Sony and Nikon and the rest continue to put these idiot features into compacts, but the target audience has long since given up and got themselves an iPhone ...

 

I would rather see a shrunk down version of the RX1, with an APS-C sensor and some kind of Zoom, than an RX100 V which struggles to keep up with what the latest smart phone can do. Dido for Nikon, nice, but really ... aim a little higher since the compact market is almost completely dead.   :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
Golem Mentor

Golem

Posted
Posted

Cameras without viewfinders are lame.

 

Yes, they do make pictures, and may have

excellent IQ, tricky fun features, etc, but ....

THEY ARE LAME.

 

Altho I understand that the majority of them

come in very handy if you need to send text

or voice mail .....

Link to post
Share on other sites
chrisqphoto Enthusiast

chrisqphoto

Posted
Posted

Not sure you power it with USB (probably not). That, and the fact that I've already got a zillion backup batteries for my RX100iv means I probably won't be switching, but still . . . 

 

Has Nikon bettered Sony in the premium compact?  The 24-500 version looks arguably better than the RX10ii.  If I were buying today, I'd probably get the Nikon.  

 

Your thoughts? 

 

http://nikonrumors.com/2016/02/23/nikon-dl-cameras-specs-comparison.aspx/#more-102482

but the lens is not a constant aperture, so you lose light as you zoom, giving it the same problem that Panasonic FZ100 (did I get the right model #?) that alone kills it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • Pieter
      Blurry images on Sony 70-350

      By Pieter · Posted

      I've been using this lens extensively without any sharpness issues. At long focal lengths, you'll have to factor in the need for a faster shutter speed (< 1/500-ish at 350mm) and other factors like atmospheric distortion, fog/dust haze, etc. All these factors contribute to a deterioration of image quality at longer focal lengths.
    • Cameratose
      Blurry images on Sony 70-350

      By Cameratose · Posted

      That's supposed to be a pretty good APS-C lens. Can you try it on a different camera just for the heck of it? Friend? Camera shop? The lens is noted for sharpness, so if you're having as much trouble as you say, you may want to look into a replacement or repair. 
    • broz_tito
      Blurry images on Sony 70-350

      By broz_tito · Posted

      Hi everyone, I’m reaching out to the community because I’m facing a persistent image quality issue with my Sony 70–350mm f/4.5–6.3 G OSS lens, and I’d like to know if this is normal behavior or if my copy is defective. Problem description: I’ve extensively compared the 70–350mm G OSS with my Sony 18–135mm f/3.5–5.6 OSS, using a Sony A6700, under controlled conditions: • Identical lighting and background • Same subject and position (LEGO figure, consistent framing) • Tripod or steady support • Manual focus or AF with center point • Same shutter speed (e.g., 1/200s), similar ISO (ISO 4000–6400), RAW + JPEG • OIS turned on (and also tested with OIS off) My observations: • At 135mm, the 70–350mm G OSS delivers softer, flatter images than the 18–135mm, even when stopped down. • At 350mm, the sharpness drops significantly – the center is soft, and textures (like LEGO tiles or fabric) appear blurred or smudged. • Contrast and micro-detail are noticeably inferior across all focal lengths. • The 18–135mm at 135mm (even cropped) retains better edge sharpness and detail definition. • Both JPEG and RAW files confirm the issue – this is not just JPEG processing or noise reduction. Question to the community: • Have others experienced similar softness with the 70–350mm? • Is it possible I have a decentered or optically misaligned copy? • Is there a known issue with OSS introducing softness at long focal lengths? I wanted to love this lens due to the range and portability, but currently it’s unusable for anything where image quality matters. I’m considering returning or sending it for service. Thanks in advance for any feedback or comparison results you can share.  

  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...