• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Sony RX10 1V the new boy. (1 Viewer)

Given the reviews and the massive weight and size reduction from my 7d2 + 100-400mk2, I am planning on giving one a try. If it can do even close to as well with seabirds I will sell all my Canon gear and be blissful to be rid of the weight.
 
Given the reviews and the massive weight and size reduction from my 7d2 + 100-400mk2, I am planning on giving one a try. If it can do even close to as well with seabirds I will sell all my Canon gear and be blissful to be rid of the weight.

I look forward to hearing how it compares to the same set up as I, and many other birders, have.
 
I often think that the future will be with high quality bridge cameras,they will render large slr's a thing of the past.
These are the ideal cameras,huge zoom range,fairly compact and in the future awesome image quality.
However,if you are critical about image quality,i'm afraid you will be disappointed.These 1"sensor bridge cameras do give amazing IQ,but you do need good conditions to extract their potential.
They still can't compete with a good slr and quality lens i'm afraid.......the best results still require the effort of carrying bulky equipment at the moment.
 
I've long since given up hope of making any money out of photos so I can cope with an increase in noise. Although it doesn't look that big an increase if you're dropping from a 7D mark ii rather than a full frame. What I have struggled with when using a bridge camera (I have a rarely used Canon SX50) is the much higher chance of missing the shot. It sounds like the Sony is just as likely to get the shot as an SLR, with its quick autofocus, madly high fps and big buffer. Having said that, as I have a a couple of rainforest trips coming up soon, I may wait a bit or take the financial blow of having one of these as well as a SLR rather than instead.
 
Hi Steve,
The higher end bridge cameras are certainly quicker and they do give great results in the right conditions,so if you dont need the better quality that a good slr gives,the sony is a great proposition.
The other thing with this model is i believe you cant crop photos in the camera.This is not an issue for some but i wouldnt be without it.
 
I've long since given up hope of making any money out of photos so I can cope with an increase in noise. Although it doesn't look that big an increase if you're dropping from a 7D mark ii rather than a full frame. What I have struggled with when using a bridge camera (I have a rarely used Canon SX50) is the much higher chance of missing the shot. It sounds like the Sony is just as likely to get the shot as an SLR, with its quick autofocus, madly high fps and big buffer. Having said that, as I have a a couple of rainforest trips coming up soon, I may wait a bit or take the financial blow of having one of these as well as a SLR rather than instead.

The new Sony is weather sealed, which should be a plus in the rainforest.

I'm pretty sure that one of the reviews mentioned a super zoom feature at reduced resolution, so there are interesting operating quirks to this model.
In general, Sony cameras have somewhat distinctive operating menus, so it is advisable to spend some time getting familiar with them beforehand, in order to get the best out of them in the field.
 
The RX10 series all allow in-body crop shooting modes - this might be different to post-processing cropping in camera, which they won't do -but you can shoot in various crop modes. Smart teleconverter mode allows a 1.4x or 2x crop to be added to the existing zoom range with reduced resolution modes chosen, and clear-image-zoom allows a similar crop mode to be used and then uses camera software to up-res back to the original resolution of 20mp.
A buddy I shoot with regularly, who has a bunch of cameras, also picked up one of the RX10IVs...the shots have been very impressive, especially the focus tracking on BIFs and moving subjects which is quite close in performance to the mirrorless A6300/6500, and A7RIII. The APS-C sensor cameras are probably a bit better, but the extra depth of field of the 1" sensor allows for a little more leeway while still achieving good focus on the subject. He has been enjoying the RX10IV alongside his A7RII and A7RIII, A6300, and A99II.
 
I'm itching to know if this great-sounding 1Kg RX10IV could really be a near-match for a birder currently using a 2.8Kg Canon 7Dii + 100-400ii. The specifications and non-birder reviews suggest that it really could be. Have any birders with this Canon set-up taken the plunge and tried it yet?
 
Steve, I am placing my order in a day or two for delivery on the 6th to coincide with my being back in California. I will be very keen to see how it does, I'm really not fussed about the loss of sensor size if the autofocus performance is as good as promised! The real test, for me, will be focusing in dark understory in tropical forest, and even more than that, focusing on seabirds from rocking boats... we will see.
 
Steve, I am placing my order in a day or two for delivery on the 6th to coincide with my being back in California. I will be very keen to see how it does, I'm really not fussed about the loss of sensor size if the autofocus performance is as good as promised! The real test, for me, will be focusing in dark understory in tropical forest, and even more than that, focusing on seabirds from rocking boats... we will see.

Really looking forward to hearing a comparison. I'm hoping my days lugging around nearly 3kg of camera gear are numbered.
 
Thanks indeed pbjosh and ditto SB. I'm mainly hoping that it really will focus on a moving small bird in a bush 30 yards away nearly as well as the 7Dii + 100-400ii.
 
Thank you BruceH. Well, that is another enthusiastic review, with a good wildlife and birds-in-flight perspective too. It's almost enough for me to take the plunge, but he is coming at it from a lower spec Bridge camera perspective and not from the Canon 7Dii + 100-400ii perspective, which is the comparison I'd really like to hear about.
 
Stephen Ingraham, who does a fair share of bird photography, posted his review of the Sony RX10 IV. He had previously been using the RX10 III and says the new model is better yet.

http://psnp.lightshedder.com/?p=1379

The eastern bluebird shot.........i certainly would'nt say that is amazing feather detail and the double outline on the branches is'nt great either.It's good but for most it's still a choice between weight and image quality......you still can't have both,even with this latest offering.
I still believe that when technology allows,the all in one camera will be the future.......this is'nt it compared to an slr if image quality is a top priority.
 
Last edited:
The eastern bluebird shot.........i certainly would'nt say that is amazing feather detail and the double outline on the branches is'nt great either.It's good but for most it's still a choice between weight and image quality......you still can't have both,even with this latest offering.
I still believe that when technology allows,the all in one camera will be the future.......this is'nt it compared to an slr if image quality is a top priority.
Well, that partly depends on how much has been lost from the raw in turning it into the reduced size web jpeg that we see in the blog, of course. I'm hoping that the original raw shows more detail at full size. Maybe I'm hoping for too much, but I'm still hoping....
 
I was excited when i looked at the spec but looking at reviews they show decent results for BIF, looking at users images on flickr most i have found are none too good.
 
Agree the sample shots on that page don't inspire in terms of absolute quality, but I'm not trying to sell photos or win awards with this camera (or a 7DII). I want to see how it does in terrible light for record shots and how it does for AF on seabirds against a choppy ocean.
 
Agree the sample shots on that page don't inspire in terms of absolute quality, but I'm not trying to sell photos or win awards with this camera (or a 7DII). I want to see how it does in terrible light for record shots and how it does for AF on seabirds against a choppy ocean.

Why spend all that money on a camera that you only need for "record" shots......just curious.My panasonic fz200 was great for a bridge camera with a constant f2.8 aperture throughout its entire zoom range,fast af good enough for birds in flight and more than good enough for "record " shots.Just saying that there are some decent cameras out there that would fulfill your needs without spending ridiculous amounts of money.I'm bemused.:eek!:
 
It is not as good as an SLR because of its smaller sensor but the Sony has 4 times the sensor size of the Panasonic. Personally I'm after more than record shots but I am willing to have a small reduction in image quality for a much smaller and lighter setup as long as it is as 'useable' as a SLR. I haven't tried the Panasonic - and I have heard it's very good - but I know my Canon HS50 drives me nuts in all but optimum conditions. I probably will keep my SLR - for a while at least - but as someone who considers themselves a birder/naturalist first and a wildlife photographer second really am getting to the point where I'm sick to death of carrying it but I do still want to be able to take good photos.
 
Last edited:
Why spend all that money on a camera that you only need for "record" shots......just curious.My panasonic fz200 was great for a bridge camera with a constant f2.8 aperture throughout its entire zoom range,fast af good enough for birds in flight and more than good enough for "record " shots.Just saying that there are some decent cameras out there that would fulfill your needs without spending ridiculous amounts of money.I'm bemused.:eek!:

I've seen and played with the FZ200 and FZ1000. In optimal conditions they can take pretty good photos but they have much smaller sensors and much more primitive autofocus. Certainly they are better than the next rung down of bridge cameras but there's nothing about them that made me think that, functionally, they were anywhere near a 7D2. The RX10IV purportedly is the first bridge camera to close that gap. Sure, it seems a bit expensive but it should have image quality a large step up from the vast majority of bridge cameras and it purportedly competes well with a 7D2 on autofocus performance and I am guessing that the somewhat better IS might compensate for the smaller sensor in terms of getting AF to work and getting any sort of usable picture in extremely low light.

As I said, I'm not trying to sell photos, upload stuff to Facebook, or impress anyone. I am looking for a camera that is good enough to be worth carrying in rainforest for photos of rarities and little known species, but that doesn't weigh 3kg. I'm pretty confident that the Sony will be that camera, my biggest worry is not AF or image quality, but how slow electronic zoom lenses are.

If the Sony can also do as well as the Canon in getting identifiable shots of petrels then the Canon will get sold down the river as quickly as possible.

In any case, I've ordered the Sony and will report back in a week or two once I have started to play with it and have formed some rudimentary opinions.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top