Thought it was cex Spelt wrong

Continuous f2.8 zoom, that's pretty decent.

Same price at Jessops

ok sorry £10 dearer at Jessops

the mk3 was only just under £900 on amazon a week ago and is far superior

An official manufacturer refurb with the standard warranty so not really like getting a secondhand one

Not really a deal though, it was available for about an hour only so there was probably only the one available.

There were 5 left when I went on to the site 30 minutes after the deal was posted

Worth noting, these cameras also have a lot of pixels in them, which over a period of time can come loose and turn into dust flakes. However, the grain it turns into is only noticeable when taking photos in the dark.

Fair enough. £509 vs £900 though so nearly twice as expensive.

raw image? maybe thats why they fall off - they need cooking or they'll rot

Are these cameras really still a thing? If you want tot start to get into photography seriously and you buy that, as you learn you will quickly be disappointed and regret you didn't get a DSLR or at least a MILC, or just go out and spend £30 on an old Pentax ME Super and smack yourself round the head with it.

Seriously you could get a DSLR for that and a lens upgrade and still have enough money left for a lapdance.

Humour bypass? :wink:

Yep, it makes for a great travel camera. With a very versatile fixed lens and dust/weather sealing it is ideal for those who enjoy taking photographs, but would rather not lug around a suitcase full of camera gear and have to take care over every lens change.

This isn't like the majority of crappy bridge cameras, the sensor is the same 1" type sensor found in the RX100 series. It offers substantially better image quality than a P&S and a lens with reach that could never be achieved in this form factor on a DSLR.

Very good price, although it was released 3.5 years ago.

Much better price at Jessops now..
http://www.hotukdeals.com/deals/sony-rx10-digital-camera-450-with-cashback-jessops-2747186

Yep! Now £529.

Thats utter twaddle my friend. Think of a situation where the lenses are interchangeable between bodies with different sensor sizes. Are you trying to tell me that the physical property of the lens changes, depending on what camera body it is attached to? So its an f.1.8 lens on a full frame body, and something else on an aps-c sensor? Of course it isn't.

The f-stop is a property of the lens only. Its the ratio of the diameter of the aperture in the lens and the focal length of the lens.

I think you must be confusing it with something else maybe?

I know what I'm talking about, I've read a book about photography.

If you overextend the focal length it can snap. Better to use the camera when the depth of field is fairly deep, which means it will have a softer impact if dropped.

Loose pixels can be a problem in more expensive cameras as there as so many of them. Sometimes when you take the lens off you can see them fall out.

whilst aperture is simply a ratio the measure of equivalence is a way of measuring ability to control depth of field and light collecting ability
the lens would actually be equivalent to F5 in asp-c though rather than f4 which is decent enough imo and much better than smaller sensor cameras
edit: got this from the book coathanger read :laughing:

Again, that isn't correct, the physical characteristics of the lens do not change depending on what camera it is mounted to, or the size of its sensor.

The only difference will be that a smaller sensor records a different bit of the image cast by the lens than a larger sensor - and if that is then printed out at the same size, it will look different. But that is a function of the sensor, not the lens.

Or perhaps we are misunderstanding each other here? Are you meaning that a different focal length will produce a similar image on different sized sensors? So the smaller the sensor the smaller the focal length needed to produce the standard sort of zoom range?

Troll

i never said the physical characteristics changed
aperture number in itself is utterly useless - its a ratio - it has no units so no basis for comparison unless using the same lens/sensor etc
so you use equivalence to compare different sensor/lens combos

the image capture part is incorrect as its a separate combo not the same lens on a different sensor

the different focal length thing is also obviously not what i meant as its taken care of by the 24-200mm 'equivalent'

Again nonsense. The correct exposure is a combination of the shutter speed and the f-stop. If your exposure meter gives you a reading of 1/500 and f8 at iso200, then that is correct for all cameras and all lenses, with either an iso200 film, or digital set to iso200.

Ah, so you are joking. I honestly couldn't tell from your first comment if you were trying to be funny or were just badly informed. Turns out it was both.

did i say anything about exposure? noise/quality is a function of light per pixel which isn't measured either by aperture or exposure

I think you are just very confused what you are talking about! But not too worry. :smile:

I have one of these, amazing camera. Was lucky enough to get mine a year or two ago before they went up in price, and even more lucky to have got a returned one from John Lewis with £90 knocked off

Price reduced - plus 2 years Sony Warranty