Ricoh has confirmed it is developing an “x” variant of its GR IV enthusiast compact. The GR IVx will be built around an all-new 40mm equivalent F2.8 prime lens.

The new model will use the same 26MP BSI CMOS APS-C sensor as the recent GR IV, rather than the 24MP FSI chip used in the GR IIIx.

Ricoh

The company has released the full planned spec of the camera, suggesting development is already well advanced. Details include a lens with 8 elements in 6 groups, including 3 aspheric elements, which is a more complex design than the previous model.

As with the 28mm-equiv GR IV, the specs say we’ll can expect improved startup times, a move to 5-axis image stabilization and the adoption of the larger DB-120 battery. It will also see the adoption of faster WiFi 5 standard.

Ricoh says the GR IVx will be launched in “Winter 2026 or later,” with no details of price yet given.  For reference, the GR IV hit the shelves three months after its development was announced.

It’s been over a month since we launched the new DPReview.com website, and we wanted to give you an update.

We realize that a lot of the work we’ve been doing hasn’t been especially public-facing, so it hasn’t necessarily been obvious that this really is a Beta: we are listening to feedback and we are continuing to improve the site.

As well as fixing some glitches around user logins, we’ve been doing a lot of work to ensure that the site always delivers completely untouched, out-of-camera JPEGs, when you click through or download an image. This isn’t a requirement that the CMS software we’re using is usually expected to maintain, with the consistency that we need. So it’s meant a lot of work behind the scenes to ensure that we can live up to the high standards that we demand and that you can expect.

OOC images and HDR support

As a result of this work, we can now be confident that “Ultra HDR JPEG” files: JPEGs with HDR gain maps embedded, can be viewed correctly when you click through, but also when they appear within articles, if you have a compatible screen and browser.

HDR imagery is only likely to become more accessible and more prevalent in the coming years, so being able to correctly represent these files was important to us: both so that we can show the progress as it’s made and because it ensures we’re delivering all images exactly as they came out of the camera.

This may seem esoteric but it’s fundamental to the way our reviews are conducted: we provide unedited files precisely so you can draw your own conclusions, rather than just take our words for it.

Light mode and improved camera comparisons

With this done, we’re continuing to work on projects that you’ve been requesting and things that will be more obviously visible to readers of the site and members of the community. These include a “light” version of the site for editorial content, for those people who don’t like the site’s original white-on-black appearance.  We’re also working on a more advanced camera comparison tool that makes more extensive use of our camera specs database.

Neither is ready yet, but they’re just two of the more obvious features that we’ve heard the demand for, and are planning to deliver. In the meantime, please bear with us and keep letting us know how we can make the site even better.

Want to stay up to date on the latest product news and releases? Add DPReview as a preferred source to ensure our independent journalism makes it to the top of your Google search results.

The Leica SL3-P is a high-speed, high-resolution L-mount full-frame camera built around a 44MP BSI CMOS sensor. It’s the latest in the company’s SL range and perhaps the most polished and all-round capable camera in the series so far.

Key specifications

• 44MP BSI CMOS full-frame sensor with phase detection
• up to 40fps shooting with AF in 12-bit mode. Up to 15fps in 14-bit.
• Subject recognition AF
• 8K open-gate video up to 24p (7.2K open-gate up to 30p)
• Full-width 8K (UHD or ∼DCI) up to 30p
• Full-width 4K up to 30p, 4K/60 and 4K/120 with increasing crops
• Content Credentials image certification
• Battery rated to 383 shots per charge
• IP54-rated all-metal construction

The Leica SL3-P will be available immediately at a recommended price of $6695 excluding tax in the USA, or €5990, including sales tax.

Index:

• What is it?
• How it compares
• Body and handling
• In use
• Video
• Autofocus
• Initial impressions
• Image quality
• Conclusion
• Specifications
• Leica press release

What is it?

Thus far, Leica has produced high-resolution SL models and high-speed SL-S versions. The SL-P appears to be something of an attempt to merge the two lines, offering both high speed and high resolution.

The result is something akin to Sony’s recent a7R VI or, perhaps more pertinently, the Panasonic S1RII: not an out-and-out sports camera but more a studio and landscape camera that’s happy to venture further afield. That Panasonic comparison is unavoidable as the 44MP, 40fps headline spec is shared between both cameras, as are their processors, even if the branding of them differs.

However, our experience of the SL3-P and the S1RII reminded us of how different you can make two cameras, even if you start with many of the same components and have similar destinations in mind.

Leica talks a good game about building cameras that last, and that’s immediately apparent in the feel and heft of the SL3-P. But what’s really striking is how few control points the Leica seems to have. That minimalism, honing the camera down to its core functions and little more extends to the menus and interface, meaning it gives a very different experience to the Panasonic. Or, indeed, any other mainstream camera.

How it compares

Although it offers both high speed and high resolution, the SL3-P doesn’t match the do-everything levels of capability of the Nikon Z8 and Canon EOS R5 II, with their stacked CMOS sensors. Instead it’s closer in ethos to the Sony a7R VI or, perhaps unsurprisingly, the Panasonic S1RII, essentially delivering a studio and landscape camera that isn’t scared of a little action, rather than a camera you might pick for sports work.

We’ve also compared it here to the SL3, which offers higher resolution but less speed, if absolute image quality is more important to you than the added speed.

It probably shouldn’t come as a surprise to find that the SL3-P’s specs are a very close match for those of the S1RII. The differences between the two cameras aren’t something readily captured in a specs table.

The original SL3 offers a slight boost in resolution capture but at the cost of a lot of the new camera’s flexibility. Sony’s a7R VI offers both though: higher resolution and competitively fast shooting with excellent autofocus and slightly wider dynamic range. It’s hard to imagine how two user interfaces and user experiences could be more different, for two cameras ultimately trying to do the same thing, though.

Body and handing

The SL3-P uses the same body as the existing SL3 models: a solid, angular block of a thing with a few large control points and a substantial grip to wrap your hand around. The Leica branding across the viewfinder hump is so beautifully proportioned that it’s easy to assume that this series (and, perhaps, a series of film cameras before it), have always looked this way. So it was a shock to see the original SL in the company’s archives and see how far the design has evolved.

There are two buttons on the front of the camera, two on the top and one on the back, none of which have marked functions. Instead they can be re-programmed with a long press. In addition there are three marked buttons on the back of the camera: Play, Fn and Menu.

Then there are the three large command dials: one towards the front of the top plate, one protruding from the rear of the right shoulder and a third on the top left of the camera (which I kept forgetting about, as it’s such an unorthodox place to find one).

Beyond this there’s a small rubber joystick on the back of the camera, and that’s about it. Relatively few control points and still fewer dedicated ones. No switches for focus mode or AF area, not even the seemingly obligatory stills/movie switch: that’s controlled by swiping left or right on the rear screen.

We’ll touch more on the user interface in the ‘In use’ section of the review, but Leica is continuing to refine the rather elegant and focused interface it introduced in the SL3. For instance, in this latest camera, the company has re-worked the way you select a video mode: letting you select the parameters that are most important to you: frame rate, resolution, codec, etc, then filtering down the available list from a seemingly unmanageable 193 down to the handful that fit your requirements. It sounds obvious once you’ve seen it done, but it’s cleaner and simpler than most cameras we use.

Viewfinder and screen

The SL3-P has the same viewfinder as the other SL3 models: a 5.76M dot OLED panel (1600 x 1200px) with 0.76x magnification and a 21mm eyepoint. A large circular rubber cushion makes the camera comfortable to use if you wear glasses and there’s a -4 to +2 diopter adjuster set behind that cushion.

The rear screen is a 2.33M dot (1080 x 720px) panel mounted on a tilt up/down mechanism.

Ports

The SL3-P has the same port arrangement as its sister models, with 3.5mm headphone and mic sockets and a full-sized HDMI socket under a large, rubber flap on the left flank of the camera. Below these is a USB-C socket that can be used for data transfer (10Gbps), tethering (including to an iPhone) or charging.

Battery

The camera uses the same BP-SCL6 battery as its siblings: a 15.8Wh unit that powers the camera to a rating of 383 shots per charge, when tested to the CIPA protocol. As always, this tends to significantly under-represent the actual number of shots you can expect to get, but a rating of nearly 400 shots per charge is the sort of number that should means an enthusiast photographer rarely has to worry about topping-up on a day’s shooting. It’s only intensive shooting such a weddings, or anything involving a mixture of video and stills that are likely to call for you to have a spare to hand.

In use

One of the Leica’s most compelling aspects isn’t something you can see from product photos or interpret from the spec sheets: the user interface.

The SL3-P uses the latest iteration of the back-to-basics interface Leica has been refining over the past few years.

At its heart, it’s designed around putting the key photographic parameters at your fingertips and minimizing the extent of, and need for, menu options. For instance, holding down a customizable button or long-pressing any of the on-screen icons brings up a list of other functions you can assign to it. In fact one of the few options present in the main menu is one to filter-down which options are presented to you, when you long-press a control point to customize its function.

The result is an interface very focused on the fundamental settings of photography. It affords you the luxury of just ignoring what’s going on in the interface, much of the time, and just letting you concentrate on the settings assigned to the two big dials, and what you’re seeing in your viewfinder.

the rest are designed to be configured (and reconfigured) to suit your shooting style and preferences.

This minimalist approach extends to the body and its control points, too, with a smattering of custom buttons, a joystick and three large, solid-feeling command dials being your points of contact. It’s remarkable how few dedicated control points there are and while, for my shooting, I found myself sometimes wishing for an AF mode selector, with a little work it’s very likely that you can set the camera up in a way you find very quick and easy to work with.

Because it’s such a different way of working, the interface takes a little bit of getting used to, though. It rewards you for taking the time to adjust to its design philosophy. One aspect of which is learning to save your setup as a user profile, or risk discovering that selecting the default profile erases any customization you’ve started applying.

It’s also worth recognizing what is and isn’t included in these profiles. Exposure mode is, but specific exposure settings aren’t, so my attempt to build a profile for freezing the action and another one, with a slower shutter speed, for panning ended up being unsuccessful. Likewise, it’s worth carefully planning your profiles before saving them: I thought it would be handy to define a custom button to switch between profiles. Which was great until I pressed the button and switched to a profile with different custom buttons settings, so couldn’t get back.

Overall it works very well, though, giving a very photo-focused shooting experience where, for all the cleverness that modern cameras have brought, you end up remembering that the only things that really matter are shutter speed, aperture value, composition and where you’re going to focus.

Video

Despite us saying that the SL3-P has a very photo-focused interface, it’s probably better to say that it’s a very exposure-focused. Swipe left on the camera’s settings panel and you get a similar but now video-centric display, with yellow, rather than red accents.

The SL3 offers an incredible range of video modes: 157 in total. These range from 8K open-gate capture, that uses the full extent of the sensor, via 8K in either 1.89:1 or 16:9 aspect ratios and on to 4K capture, again with a choice of aspect ratios. But the camera also offers a selection of other resolutions for each of these capture regions, letting you strike a balance between resolution capture and speed.

Like Panasonic’s S1RII, the SL3-P doesn’t quite have enough pixels to capture DCI 8K (8192 x 4320px) footage so instead outputs 8132 x 4288px footage. UHD 8K is no problem, though, so you can also select the more conventional 7680 x 4320 resolution, if you prefer.

As you’d expect of a modern camera, you get the choice of 10-bit Log or HLG, or 8-bit if you don’t plan to color grade, and you’re targeting SDR displays.

Video options:

As with the Panasonic S1RII, the SL3-P has a Dynamic Range Expansion mode in video, which reads each exposure in both low conversion gain mode for maximum highlight capture and in high conversion gain mode, for cleaner shadows, and combines the two, to boost DR.

This is available in any resolution mode but only at frame rates up to 30p. In each case it increases the readout rate by around 33%. So, for instance, the UHD 8K/24 mode increases from 23.9ms to 31.9ms.

The SL3-P’s video options are, as you might expect, very similar to those of the Panasonic S1RII. It lacks the ProRes RAW option of that camera (though the 1.3x crop on the Panasonic’s Raw mode means it’s not the camera’s best feature). It also misses out on the waveform display option that the S1RII offers. Realistically, given its lower cost and the inclusion of a fan and more flexible rear screen, the S1RII is a better stills/video camera than the Leica. But, looked at the other way: as a primarily stills-focused camera, the SL3-P has a very broad set of very competent video features.

Autofocus

The Leica’s autofocus behavior is as innovative and unconventional as the rest of the UI.

The camera has three AF area modes, but offers more than three AF areas. The first is called “Spot / Field,” the second is called “Multi-Field / Zone” and the last is called Tracking.

The clue is in the forward slashes. Spot / Field lets you select a single AF point of various sizes, while Multi-Field / Zone lets you choose between an adjustable AF zone and all-area AF, where the camera selects a subject from anywhere within the frame. Once you’ve chosen an AF zone mode, you can adjust it by pressing the AF area on your rear screen or long-pressing anywhere on the live preview. This then lets you use the rear dial to adjust the focus area size.

Like Panasonic’s recent cameras, the camera will track recognized subjects when you have subject recognition turned on, but won’t track non-recognized subjects at all. So you’ll need to turn subject recognition on and off depending on what you’re trying to photograph. We’d definitely recommend configuring a button to do this.

By default, the camera’s Tracking AF mode gives you a small rectangle that resets to the center of the frame at the end of each burst. However, while you can’t change the size of the initial target, you can configure the tracking target to revert to wherever you last triggered it. So, for instance, if you want to track a car down through a series of curves, across your frame, then have the camera jump back to where the next car is likely to arrive, you can.

Autofocus performance

We were pretty impressed with the SL3-P’s autofocus performance. It doesn’t quite match the best of its peers in terms of apparent infallibility, but its subject detection is good and highly tenacious. Close examination showed that, while the camera is very quick to focus on fast-moving subjects and usually very effective at following them within the frame, it’s not always perfect at driving the focus to exactly the correct distance. We used a selection of primes and zooms with the SL3-P and got an excellent hit rate but motorsports felt like they were at the very limits of what the SL3-P can do.

Like the Panasonics, subject recognition is a separate mode from general tracking AF, so you’ll need to toggle in and out of a subject recognition mode if you want the camera to give its best performance for recognized subject types but still be willing to focus track the rest of the time. Interestingly, we didn’t encounter the failure to find focus that we saw very occasionally with the S1RII (though not the S1II, post firmware update).

It’s all a significant step forward for the SL series and helps contribute towards the sense that the SL3-P can handle pretty much anything. It’s only when compared with the very best (often pro-sports tested) systems that it falls a fraction short.

Initial impressions

The Leica SL3-P is the fastest-shooting camera Leica has ever made and should, in principle, be the only SL model they need to persist with. It offers an awful lot of what the SL3 offers, in terms of resolution, and it outperforms the more speed-focused SL3-S.

The subject recognition AF performs impressively well: finding subjects very quickly and following them well (especially when it’s a subject the camera has been trained to recognize). Just as the user interface as a whole takes some getting used to, it’s worth digging around in the menus and familiarizing yourself with the SL3-P’s AF logic before you go out shooting. Without an instruction manual it wasn’t obvious that Leica had grouped its AF area modes, or how to switch between them, nor that you can override the camera’s default behaviour when it comes to AF tracking.

Some issues you can’t overcome, though. The sensor is fast, but it’s not as quick as the best stacked CMOS sensors. So the camera will start showing a slideshow of the images you’ve just shot, when you’re shooting at its fastest rates, making it very difficult to keep pace with the action. Similarly, we were advised to shoot Raw-only and to disengage Content Credentials, to get the best performance.

Richard Butler

And, even with that done, the camera’s approximately 20ms (1/50 sec) readout rates in 12-bit mode mean that rolling shutter will be apparent if you’re trying to follow really fast action.

In this respect it’s a lot like the Sony a7R VI we recently reviewed: very fast for a high-res studio/landscape camera, meaning it’ll handle itself very confidently in a much broader range of circumstances than that. It’s not quite the high-res, high-speed all-rounder that Canon’s EOS R5 II and Nikon Z8 are, but it’ll still be more than enough camera for a very broad range of photographers, taking a very broad range of photos.

The challenge, as ever with Leica, is the price. It’s a beautifully built object, constructed in Portugal and Germany, that wears the Leica name and is likely to sell in relatively small numbers, when compared to the volumes of the large Japanese manufacturers. As such, the price is high.

For that money you get the fruits of some very clever design work, in a body that feels like it’s designed to last decades. However, parts availability and the continued march of technology (we can already see that sensors and AF will continue to get faster), will make it difficult to match the sense of longevity that a Leica film camera gave you. So, as always, part of the calculus comes down to: how important are those five letters to you?

Image quality

Studio test scene

Our test scene is designed to simulate a variety of textures, colors, and detail types you’ll encounter in the real world. It also has two illumination modes, full even light and low directional light, to see the effect of different lighting conditions.

As you might expect, there’s no meaningful difference between the Leica and the Panasonic in terms of detail capture (the very slight difference shows how good the comparison tool is at highlighting the smallest of differences in focus), or for that matter, the Nikon Z8. However, the 66MP Sony a7R VI clearly captures finer detail than its rivals.

A quick check in JPEG mode shows that the default color rendering of the SL3-P is distinct from that of the Panasonic, though, with differences appearing in the blues and caucasian skintone patch, in particular.

Beyond this, there aren’t any real surprises: noise performance is solid in Raw, very closely matching the performance of its peers. JPEG noise reduction looks similar to that of the Panasonic, with what appears to be more sharpening added, by default, to pull out detail. The Auto white balance also looks to be working harder to neutralize the tungsten light used for our low-light mode.

Conclusion

The SL3-P is an inherently difficult camera to review. Leica’s luxury pricing always makes its cameras hard to assess, because the concept of value has a personal component. This is made more pertinent when there are direct, like-for-like rivals at lower prices, and still more stark when some of these less-expensive rivals share significant amounts of their hardware and capabilities.

The SL3-P’s works rather differently from any other camera in its class, despite that commonality with other cameras. Its large, prominent finger and thumb command dials and comparatively small number of other control points, along with the large, relatively uncluttered viewfinder make clear that this is a camera centered on the most fundamental aspects of photography: exposure and composition. Everything beyond that is secondary.

It takes a while to get used to the SL3-P’s way of working, but once you have, and have set up user profiles for your different types of shooting, it’s really quite elegant. It means the SL3-P doesn’t have every possible bell or whistle that its rivals do, but it is refreshingly good at letting you just get on with your photography. And it’s a very capable camera: it delivers a good amount of resolution and dynamic range while also delivering Leica’s best-yet autofocus.

Unexpectedly, for a camera so focused on photography, the SL3-P has a strong video feature set. Swipe on the screen and you find a camera with 10-bit and ProRes 422 capabilities, a false color display for setting exposure and the ability to upload LUTs, either to give a corrected preview or to bake into your footage. It’s hard to tell how many SL3-P buyers will make use of the video capabilities, but those who do are unlikely to be disappointed, except, perhaps, by the battery life.

Richard Butler

Ultimately, though, there’s no getting away from the SL3-P’s price. Those five large, bold letters along the front of its viewfinder hump mean it’s priced unlike anything else on the market. Leica is an exclusive, luxury-priced brand: you either buy into its history, its mythos and its pricing model or you don’t. As the line of cameras with the most direct mainstream competitors, comparison is unavoidable, and it’s implausible, almost to the point of impossibility, that the SL3-P could be objectively so much better than its peers as to justify the price difference on rational grounds. No SL camera could ever be good enough to win over those people that don’t buy into the Leica brand.

Which is a shame as, aside from price, it’s one of my favorite cameras in its class. It’s supremely solid feeling, does a wide range of things very well and feels like a camera designed and developed by people who’ve prioritized photography over technology. But most of us aren’t in the position to ignore the price. And, because our rewards include a consideration of value, we can’t sensibly give it an award. Some people are going to love this camera: probably the best SL camera yet, but we can’t ignore the fact that you can buy a more technically capable camera for half the price.

Scoring

Scoring is relative only to the other cameras in the same category. Click here to learn about what these numbers mean.

Compared to its peers

The Sony a7R VI is the rationalist’s choice, compared with the Leica. It has a similar stress on resolution while still offering very decent speed and video capabilities, but it does so while offering more resolution and slightly better dynamic range. It also has a higher resolution viewfinder and significantly longer battery life, it also uses the best-supported modern lens mount. However, we find it hard to imagine anyone who’s used both concluding that the Sony is better designed or nicer to use.

On paper, particularly in light of the L² technology sharing agreement, the Panasonic Lumix S1RII and SL3-P seem to be extremely similar cameras. In practice, it’s remarkable how different they are to use. The S1R II is covered in buttons and switches and its menus are full of options, whereas the SL3-P is much more pared-back. The Leica is also a fair bit larger and more substantial in the hand. Other than lens mount, using the Panasonic is much more like using a Sony or Canon than like using the Leica. And that user interface philosophy is one of the main distinctive things the SL3-P offers, compared to its rivals. The S1R II isn’t a half-price Leica and the SL3-P isn’t a modified S1R II.

If you’re really into sports photography or video production, the Nikon Z8 or Canon EOS R5 II are probably better choices. Both have stacked CMOS sensors that read out much faster than the Leica’s, meaning less rolling shutter impact in both stills and video shooting. Both also offer Raw video capability and, at the professional end of the market, an extensive pro support network. Both cameras offer a good degree of backward compatibility with their extensive SLR-era lens mounts but also exist in manufacturer-restricted but increasingly extensive lens ranges.

In many respects, the Leica SL3 is the SL3-P’s only direct peer, because it’s the only one that also buys you a Leica. The SL3 has the higher image quality, with a fraction more resolution and dynamic range, but without the video or autofocus performance of the faster SL3-P. The SL3 is perhaps the better choice if you’re primarily a landscape, studio or portrait photographer, but the SL3-P gives you greater flexibility if your shooting is more ad hoc and less prescribed.

Sample gallery

Please do not reproduce any of these images on a website or any newsletter/magazine without prior permission (see our copyright page ). We make the originals available for private users to download to their own machines for personal examination or printing (in conjunction with this review); we do so in good faith, so please don’t abuse it.

“I just wish someone would make a proper 6×7 digital camera.” It’s the logical endpoint of every discussion in which someone loftily dictates that modern digital medium format is somehow not “real” because it doesn’t follow the conventions of film photography. And I have to say, I just don’t understand it.

Is it nostalgia for a camera regretfully parted with, or a yearning for something we never got to have? That waist-level viewfinder experience that looked so cool when David Hemmings stood in for every ’60s British (male) celebrity photographer in Blow Up. Or, instead, memories of that family member with a lovingly assembled collection of Bronica or Hasselblad 6×6 gear?

I have to assume that it’s something like this, because it doesn’t make sense in reality. Unless a radically different (and much cheaper) sensor technology suddenly arrives, no one is going to make a new 6×7 system. Or 6×6. Or even 645.

The reason is twofold. The first is that it would be utterly unfeasible, economically. The second is that it would be completely unnecessary.

The economics don’t work, not even nearly

Film scales much more readily than semiconductor size: the cost of doubling the size of a piece of film is within the realms of double or triple. A single-digit multiple, anyway. Doubling the size of a sensor more than doubles the production cost. Doubling it again starts to look exponential. You can’t just pick an arbitrary size that film cameras used to use and say, “I want it that big.”

Phase One

The only modern 645 camera is the Phase 1 IQ4 150MP digital back. It costs around $50,000. Sony has just announced a movie camera with a similarly-sized chip. Its price hasn’t been made public, but it’s primarily going to be rented for use in productions with budgets that start with nine digits.

And that’s before you consider the fact that there aren’t huge caches of medium-format lenses that would shine under the scrutiny of high megapixel sensors, much less any financial motivation for any surviving company to support them. So on top of the fabulous cost of the sensor, you’d also need to fund the development of a whole new camera and lens system, to be amortized between an infinitesimal audience.

But beyond the economic impracticality, there’s a question of what you’d gain.

How much better do you need?

Yes, larger sensors can generally tolerate more light, per whole image, and hence deliver higher signal-to-noise ratios, meaning cleaner images with improved tonal quality. And, in principle, it should be easier to design a lens that resolves the higher resolution that a larger sensor could bring. These are exactly the reasons that medium-format film cameras continued to be valued after the arrival of the smaller “35mm” film format.

Richard Butler

But it’s worth recognizing that modern digital sensors outperform film by almost every metric. There’s a difference in the handling of highlights, but modern sensors deliver more detailed images with better tonal quality, even if you only consider shooting in good light. And they do so to the point that they challenge the quality of film at least one format larger. You can rival 645 film performance with a modern full-frame digital camera, if you expose it well, and if there’s any question about that, you can always move up to a 44x33mm digital camera.

The quality you can get from a 44×33 medium-format sensor is sensational, which rapidly diminishes the applications that require anything more. Which just makes the overwhelming additional costs that come with it much harder to justify.

If you need the very best image quality available, you can spend that $50,000 and buy a Phase One IQ4. And a bit more on lenses.

But until you’ve bitten that particular bullet and found the results lacking, it’s hard to argue that any company should sensibly try to embark on digital 6×7 for you. Because, seriously, what is it you’re really hoping to achieve?

The Japanese Patent Office has declared one of Red’s key Raw video patents as invalid, following a challenge by Panasonic.

The court determined that many of the claims made in the patent, first filed in the US in 2008, would have been obvious to someone skilled in the subject area and familiar with existing developments.

The news, first reported by Thom Hogan, put Nikon’s video subsidiary in the position of trying to defend a patent that Nikon had previously argued was invalid.

The patent itself describes a high-resolution video camera that compresses its Raw data, and appears to correspond to the patent at the center of historic claims against Sony and Apple and the almost inevitable counter-suits from those companies. We reported on many of these challenges, as well as Nikon’s, over the years. 

Nikon famously resolved the dispute by buying the company. Some of Red’s cinema camera and Raw knowledge has subsequently been applied to recent Nikon models.

It’s difficult to know what the impact the rejection of this patent will be, given Canon, Panasonic, Sony and Blackmagic Design all now produce cameras with internal Raw video capture. One possibility the abolition of the license fees reportedly due to Red from users of Apple’s ProRes RAW codec. But given Red went from being privately held to being absorbed into Nikon, it’s difficult to get a sense for how significant these might be. And, of course, we shouldn’t assume even a minor cost reduction would necessarily get passed on to consumers.

Leica’s product manager for the SL series cameras, Gerrit Gissel describes them as the company’s “technology lighthouse:” the thing that acts as a guide for all the company’s other efforts.

We spoke to Gissel about the SL3-P, who it’s for, how it fits into the lineup, and the challenges of creating a product with more direct rivals than most of the company’s other offerings.

“We see there’s a big potential out there of photographers who just want to have the best technology available, and for us the SL system is the answer to that demand,” he says: “But there are more layers to that.” 

“There’s also an internal perspective where we use the SL system to develop new technologies to see how far we can push certain things, that we then later benefit from in other product lines. Especially in the Q series we see many similarities, but then also in other compact cameras. So the SL is the camera where we develop that, where we invest a lot in, then we can benefit from later on.”

The user interface is an example, he says: “I think we have a quite recent example for that with the SL3 generation. We have for the first time implemented our new user interface that now, last December, was also integrated into Q-Series because we got the feedback from our customers and we carefully listened to them that they liked it a lot. They think it’s very well thought through and also cameras like the Q series could benefit from that.”

Setting the SL3 series apart

We asked whether the company has to approach the SL series differently, given it has more direct competition than the Q or M cameras.

“Well of course we do lots of benchmarking. We know, especially in reviews etc, that we are compared with each other so, whether we want that or not, we will be compared.” says Gissel: “So that’s why we focus on finding our own our own position in that competition out there. We find our our own language, that I think we found quite well with the SL system: being user intuitive, user friendly, not overloaded with features, and just allowing the photographer or videographer to focus on his or her work. This is a bit like the credo that we are following. And of course every decision; feature versus added complexity, is discussed having this in mind.”

This focus on operability, as well as build quality, emerge as two of the things that can set the SL apart, beyond hardware specifications: 

“So the obvious thing is the operation. You will see that immediately once you’re touching the SL, and I think that makes your job so hard because you have to write about it, you can show some pictures, but to really understand that you have to have to touch the camera and feel it.”

But there’s another critical factor, he says:  “of course what is probably the thing we invest the most in is defining and refining our image quality. So if you see the results at the end, then you can understand what the Leica SL system is, compared to the other ones out there. So the way you create and the result in the end, neither thing is particularly visible when looking at a technical data sheet.”

Gissel’s comfort with the SL3-P not necessarily having every possible feature that its hardware would allow, seems in part to come from the confidence that Leica understands its customers well. “It always depends on whom you are designing for. When you try to please everyone, of course you have the tendency to bring all the features in there. I think we have a bit of a clearer mind to our customers. We know our customers maybe a bit better than others and that’s why we can design our solutions a bit more specific maybe and probably it’s easier for us to sometimes say ‘we don’t need that’ because we know that the majority of our customers would be more confused by that than it would be actually helpful.”

This understanding comes from two sources, he says. “one is the, let’s say, the old fashioned, but still very important, way: we just travel around, we visit our stores. I mean we have the big advantage that we have our own store network with people that are in daily interactions with our customers and our salespeople there, and sometimes also when we meet customers there they give us very valuable one-to-one feedback. So we try to do this as much as possible and this always brings value.”

“And then we have a more systematic approach. We have a database, we have a strong customer care department, and capture every feedback and feature request. Also some complaints. They are all tracked in that system, they are tagged to which system they apply so that we really systematically sometimes can say ‘okay this and this feature was asked for by so many people’ so we prioritised this over another one.”

Looking beyond existing customers

But what about the people who aren’t current customers, we asked. “We have one mechanism I didn’t already mention: we do customer research where we not only ask our own customers about their current thoughts and their future wishes but also try to get in touch with people who have cameras from other manufacturers,” he says: “but also even people who are not into photography yet or who are smartphone users that just have a certain tendency. We try to get in touch with these people too we then have professional support to do these surveys, and this is part of our of our work too.”

The importance of this comes through as we discuss our experiences of learning how the camera works: “I think getting this right is important” he says: “I think this camera is very attractive for people who haven’t considered a Leica to switch to us.”

Technology and tradition

The SL3-P came about as much through technology making it possible, as through customer feedback, he suggests. “The bigger portion [of SL buyers] is always the non-S, high resolution variant, so the SL2 and later the SL3. And we just saw that we could, compared to these two cameras, massively improve the autofocus capability. The SL3-P is a bit of a specialty in that customers didn’t know that we were thinking about bringing a third variant in one generation. So this is kind of a of a novelty, right? And that’s why here the decision also came from we saw what will be possible technology wise and we added that to the customer feedback.”

That possibility comes primarily from the fast, high-resolution sensor becoming available, he says. “It’s always the combination [of sensor and processor], so neither of both parts is powerful alone. But if we compare the main difference between SL-3, SL3-S, SL3-P, it is this time the sensor because they all share the same processor platform.”

But creating a new model entails a lot more than just simply changing which sensor sits in the camera, he says: “both in the hardware and software, many things have to be rethought.” 

“You think you would only swap the sensor, but in fact you have to re-think every component of the camera once again. ‘Does that still match?’ ‘Does that still make sense?’ And ‘is this, for the use case we intend this camera for, still the right fit?’

“I have a good example for that for the SL3-P in in a software solution that we came up during a running project.” he says: “So we knew if we integrate this sensor, we knew that we will get a more complex and powerful video setting possibilities. And we ended up with one hundred and fifty seven video options. We then decided we need a more intuitive, dynamic way to select these video settings because otherwise our consumers could be overloaded. And that’s why we came up with the new video setting selector, which was very well received by everyone who’s was testing it. But that was a result out of the decision to go for that new sensor.”

With all this in mind, we circled back to one of our original questions: what does Leica do to ensure the SL offers something distinctive in a crowded, competitive market?

“It consists of, I would, say two elements that if you hear them, at first not are really logic with each other,” says Gissel: “The first is keeping the the heritage of both Leica and what we have achieved with the SL system over the past ten years. So excellent haptics, superior image quality, of course, things like our very strong viewfinder, IP54 rating, so everything the system was known for.” he says: “And then on the other hand, innovation. I’ve learned from my colleagues who have been here much longer than me that innovating and reinventing is also part of the Leica DNA, so that’s why it’s maybe not a contradiciton to combine these two things with each other.”

For example: “the improvements we’ve made with the autofocus in the in the past years, they are just like a reinvention,” he says: “it’s such a big improvement we considered whether it should sit apart from the existing SL3 models.”

Sony has announced the FE 100-400mm F5.6-8.0 OSS, a comparatively small, comparatively affordable long tele for E-mount cameras.

Unlike its immediate peers or faster but heavier third-party rivals, the FE 100-400mm F5.6-8.0 is compatible with Sony’s teleconverters, meaning it can be converted into a 140-560mm F8.0-11 or a 200-800mm F11-16, if you need the extra reach and have sufficient light to play with.

Like Canon’s similarly-specced RF 100-400mm IS USM lens, it’s appreciably smaller and lighter than Tamron’s 50-400mm F4.5-6.3 or Sigma’s 100-400mm F5.0-6.3. At 645g (23.1oz) it’s around half the weight of either of those options, though also a fair bit slower, especially as you zoom.

The optical formula consists of fifteen elements arranged in ten groups. These include two extra-low dispersion (ED) elements and two aspheric elements. Focus is powered by a pair of linear motors (though not Sony’s smoother, more powerful ‘XD’ ones). The company says the lens is compatible with the 120fps shooting mode on its a9 III camera.

When retracted the lens is 165mm long and 78mm in diameter (6.5 x 3.1″). It accepts a relatively affordable 67mm diameter filter. It’s designed to be dust and moisture resistant and comes bundled with a lens hood.

Mitchell Clark

Although designed for full-frame cameras, it can also be used on APS-C models, giving a 150-600mm equivalent range, though its relatively slow aperture at the long end is likely to limit you to bright light working, even before you consider adding a teleconverter.

Sony tells us the FE 100-400mm F5.6-8.0 OSS is designed to offer a sub-$1000 entry point to its camera users who want to try their hands at wildlife photography or some sports shooting. Despite this entry-level position in the lineup, the lens has pair of focus hold buttons, positioned so they can be reached in portrait or landscape orientation. It also has a zoom lock switch and a focus limiter switch, that means the autofocus only focuses between 3m and infinity: preventing close-range hunting when you’re shooting distant subjects.

With the switch set to full range, the lens will focus down to 1.13m (3.7′) at the short end of its range and 0.86m (2.8′) at the long end. This gives a maximum magnification of 0.41x.

The lens will be available in September, with a recommended price of $850.

Sample gallery

Please do not reproduce any of these images on a website or any newsletter/magazine without prior permission (see our copyright page ). We make the originals available for private users to download to their own machines for personal examination or printing (in conjunction with this review); we do so in good faith, so please don’t abuse it.

Reports are emerging that Nikon has had one of its Z-mount patents invalidated in China, opening the door a little further to third-party access.

Nikon Rumors reports that one of Nikon’s fundamental patents relating to the Z-mount has been invalidated in China, having been challenged by Viltrox’s parent company.

The report, based on AI translations of court documents, suggests that the patent in question is one that sets out the basic physical description and behavior of the mount, constructed in a way that tries to make well-established features, such as the design to prevent incorrect mounting of the lens and a method for preventing damage to the electrical contacts sound original and novel. Patents are only supposed to protect original inventions that would not be obvious to someone working in that field.

Nikon took Viltrox to court in China earlier this year in a separate case, ostensibly to recover license fees but also, we suspect, in the hope that a Chinese court would establish a precedent of its patents being enforceable. As Professor Robert Newman explained in Amateur Photographer magazine at the time, there are at least 13 patents covering various aspects of the Z-mount’s design and operation, including one he described as relating to “a detail of the physical design of the mount, and I would be surprised if that would withstand court scrutiny.”

This description corresponds well with the details being reported by Nikon Rumors, right down to Prof. Newman’s assessment of its likely fate.

The invalidation of this patent doesn’t, in itself, clear the way to third parties being able to produce Z-mount lenses, as there are multiple other patents that describe the communication methods used by the Z-mount. Those would not be affected by this specific patent being invalidated.

It’s notable, though, that Viltrox has added to its range of autofocus Z-mount lenses since the original court case was meant to be heard. Other third-party makers, such as Meike, which briefly removed reference to Z-mount lenses from its website, also have a range of Z-mount options available again.

If, as seems to be the case, non-licensed third-party makers are feeling emboldened to produce AF Z-mount lenses, it puts Nikon in an awkward position with the companies that have been formally licensed to make lenses for the system. Those companies are presumably paying license fees and have to seek approval on a lens-by-lens basis, while their competitors undercut them without any such restrictions.

We have approached Nikon for a statement on this story.

Want to stay up to date on the latest product news and releases? Add DPReview as a preferred source to ensure our independent journalism makes it to the top of your Google search results.

As we push on with our Leica SL3-P review, we’ve run it through our standard studio tests. To a large extent, we already have a pretty good idea what to expect, given we’ve seen this sensor / processor combination before. But it’s always worth testing these things, just to be certain.

Studio test scene

Our test scene is designed to simulate a variety of textures, colors, and detail types you’ll encounter in the real world. It also has two illumination modes, full even light and low directional light, to see the effect of different lighting conditions.

As you might expect, there’s no meaningful difference between the Leica and the Panasonic in terms of detail capture (the very slight difference shows how good the comparison tool is at highlighting the smallest of differences in focus), or for that matter, the Nikon Z8. However, the 66MP Sony a7R VI clearly captures finer detail than its rivals.

A quick check in JPEG mode shows that the default color rendering of the SL3-P is distinct from that of the Panasonic, though, with differences appearing in the blues and caucasian skintone patch, in particular.

Beyond this, there aren’t any real surprises: noise performance is solid in Raw, very closely matching the performance of its peers. JPEG noise reduction looks similar to that of the Panasonic, with what appears to be more sharpening added, by default, to pull out detail. The Auto white balance also looks to be working harder to neutralize the tungsten light used for our low-light mode.

The term ISO invariance is being used increasingly widely in camera technology circles, but the comments we’ve seen suggest it’s often misused and misunderstood.

This is partly our fault: ISO invariance is the term we chose to describe a phenomenon that was already being discussed, and our usage and tests have helped popularize the term. So we thought it made sense to make clear what it is, what it isn’t, and why it matters.

Sensor performance, not camera behavior

ISO invariance is an assessment of how much or little improvement in noise you get by increasing gain.

It’s an assessment of a sensor‘s performance, not a description of how a camera delivers its ISO settings.

Why add gain?

The best way to understand it is probably to take a look at why gain / amplification is used in cameras in the first place. If you take a photo in low light, your sensor has less light to work with and will generate a smaller signal from your exposure. Amplifying this signal before it’s digitized has two potential benefits:

• It helps match the signal voltage to voltage range that your analog to digital converter (ADC) is designed to digitize. (In other words, you make sure that the signal is captured using lots of your available Raw values)
• It reduces the impact of any noise that might be introduced after amplification (if you double the scale of the signal, then any noise introduced later has half the impact).

It also has a major cost:

• If you take the signal coming off the sensor and amplify it 2x (ie: add one stop of gain), then the brightest stop of highlights will be represented by a voltage that’s too great for your ADC, and those values will be recorded as its maximum value: they’ll be clipped.

In the early days of digital cameras, cameras would add more amplification every time you increased the ISO setting. This link between ISO and gain is no longer as rigid as it was, but in very broad terms, it’s still usually the case that most cameras typically apply more gain when you increase the ISO setting. How’s that for definitive?

Modern sensors are excellent

Photons-to-photos

However, in recent years, sensor and electronics designs have improved to the point that there isn’t much post-amplification electronic noise to overcome. And, after a certain point, it’s worth questioning how much of a shadow improvement am I getting in return for the highlight information I’m throwing away?

And that’s what ISO invariance assesses: are there circumstances in which it would be better to keep the ISO down, and save the highlights, if there’s not much improvement in noise performance?

Mitchell Clark

We opted to call this ISO invariance because the existing term “ISO less” sounded like an binary: something sensors either were or weren’t. We hoped the term “invariance” would make it clearer that sensors would have a degree of variance or, as it turns out, ranges over which they are less or more ISO variant.

In hindsight, ISO invariance isn’t the best possible term for this phenomenon, not least because it’s an assessment of the impact of analog gain, and ISO doesn’t necessarily depend on analog gain. But also because it got interpreted by some people as a binary position anyway.

ISO invariance does not tell you how a camera delivers its ISO settings

Another common misunderstanding of the term is that it means the camera doesn’t change gain when you change ISO. This is not the case

Delivering multiple ISO from the same gain level would be a method of exploiting a sensor’s high degree of ISO invariance, but it’s extremely unusual for a camera to do this. There are lots of cameras that deliver some of their ISO settings without changing gain, or have modes that change ISO value without changing gain, but the majority of cameras do change gain when you change the ISO setting.

It doesn’t mean you don’t have to worry about what ISO setting you use

ISO invariance also doesn’t mean it no longer matters which ISO setting you use on your camera. If you’re in a mode with any degree of automation (Program, Shutter Priority or Aperture Priority), your ISO setting will change the exposure your camera tries to achieve. Setting ISO higher than you need will result in capturing less light than you might others, and this reduction in light leaves the image looking noisier.

But also, because most cameras increase gain as you increase ISO, some amount of highlight information is pushed to clipping unnecessarily and this can’t be recovered, later.

Why don’t cameras exploit this?

Richard Butler

So far, we’ve not encountered a stills camera that exploits ISO invariance performance by separating exposure and image lightness from gain. There are modes that take some advantage of it, though: many cameras’ DR modes work by intentionally giving lower-than-normal exposure to a given gain level so that the camera captures and retains an extra stop or two of highlight information, then apply a different tone curve that accommodates these extra highlights.

But generally, though, exploiting an ISO invariant sensor is a bit messy: you have to set an appropriate exposure in a low light scene and then lower your ISO setting without changing this exposure, to prevent the highlights in that scene from being amplified into clipping. This usually results in preview that’s multiple stops darker than you want the final image to be. Or, if you turn off exposure preview, fewer cues for assessing exposure. It’s a pretty clumsy, Raw-only way of working.

There is hope, though

Mitchell Clark

Interestingly, it’s becoming more common on the video side of things. Sony’s FX series cameras (many of which share their core hardware with Alpha models), offer an ‘Exposure Index’ mode, where the camera always operates at the low or high conversion gain states of its sensor, then records ‘ISO’ as a metadata tag that’s interpreted when editing. Increasing the ISO setting doen’t increase gain, so you don’t lose highlight data.

Similarly, the biggest distinction between NRaw and R3D raw video modes on the Nikon ZR is the way ISO is handled. NRaw works like stills mode: adding gain each time you increase the ISO setting, but in R3D mode it sticks to the two native conversion gain states of its sensor. This means that you don’t push data to clipping when you increase ISO, you just change a metadata tag indicating how light or dark the footage should be rendered. This is what makes it possible to adjust the apparent “ISO” after the fact in editing software.

But, for now, we’ve seen no such mode in a stills camera. In part this is because it would require a fundamental rethinking of how exposure, gain and image lightness should be handled. And, for now at least, the industry seems happier to tinker with the increasingly strained-looking ‘it’s just like film speed’ metaphor that is ISO, than to think about how best to make use of modern sensor performance.

Want to stay up to date on the latest product news and releases? Add DPReview as a preferred source to ensure our independent journalism makes it to the top of your Google search results.

Compact cameras used to dominate the market. Every manufacturer made tens of new models each year, typically differentiated by pixel count, zoom range and screen size. Plus, usually, a single model with a tunnel viewfinder for the “no viewfinder, no sale” faction, which almost nobody bought.

They were a huge part of the camera market: twenty years ago, compact cameras made up 88% of Canon’s unit sales.

You might have noticed that this is no longer the case. Smartphones obliterated the mass-market compact camera, initially through convenience and then increasingly by combining multiple exposures to surpass small-sensor compacts in terms of image quality, too.

But there’s been an unexpected consequence of the death of the mainstream compact: the remaining models are the ones that aren’t compact.

Mitchell Clark

This has left us in an awkward position. We always used the term ‘compact’ to mean any camera on which you couldn’t change lenses because, with very few exceptions, they were the small ones. But, now that the mainstream compact has died, we’re instead left with the more ambitious models, the ones whose larger sensors and longer lenses continue to offer things that smartphones don’t. The Panasonic L10 isn’t especially compact, the Sony RX10 V won’t fit in most pockets, the Fujifilm X100 series is almost as large as the rangefinder cameras it mimics and then there’s the Fujifilm GFX100RF.

All of them ‘compacts’ by our standard. None of them particularly compact.

We can’t call them point-and-shoots, because the models that survived are precisely the ones that you do more than simply frame and click with. We can’t call them fixed-lens cameras, partly because it’s just not a phrase we’ve ever heard anybody use, and also because it can be misunderstood as meaning ‘camera with a fixed focal-length lens.’

So what do we do? Is it really worth trying to come up with a new term, to describe what it ultimately a handful of niche products? For now I think we just have to accept that progress has caught us out again, and that most attempts to arrange cameras (or the world) are imperfect, and prone to their original meaning being outpaced by history.

Want to stay up to date on the latest product news and releases? Add DPReview as a preferred source to ensure our independent journalism makes it to the top of your Google search results.

The Sony DSC-RX10 V appears just as prices of the remaining RX10 IV started to get silly. Nearly nine years have elapsed since the launch of the Mark IV but despite first appearances, almost everything has changed in the new camera.

Basic hardware

Both cameras are based around the same fundamental specs: a 24-600mm equivalent F2.4-4.0 zoom and 20MP Type 1 (116mm²) stacked CMOS sensors.

Sony says the lens is the same, despite reporting the focal lengths differently on the side of the barrel. Our understanding is the RX10 IV reports the effective focal length with corrections applied, whereas the RX10 V lists the literal focal lengths.

We were briefed that the sensor has been “updated” but without any specifics about what those changes are. The new camera has significantly more powerful processors and updated AF algorithms, so it’s hard to be sure which, if any, of the spec changes can be ascribed to sensor differences. It seems notable, though, that Sony no longer mentions DRAM, which it did in its description of the previous version.

Ergonomics

The RX10 V’s ergonomics have been reworked, mostly for the best. It has a more comfortable grip, more prominent command dials on its shoulder and one of the large, easy-to-position AF joysticks we’ve seen on the last few generations of Alpha cameras. It loses its top-plate LCD and its focus drive mode switch on the front of the camera, instead getting an AF/MF switch on the side of the lens.

The net effect is a definite positive: the RX10 V feels a lot more like one of the more recent Alpha models, rather than a box full of goodies that you constantly feel you need a tin-opener to get at. It’s disappointing that all three of the camera’s dials (if you include the awkward little dial on the rear face) need to be controlled with the thumb: a front dial would have been a further boost, but overall it feels much nicer to control. And that’s before you get to the menus which, if nothing else, are much more sensibly arranged, with related options much more logically grouped and labeled.

AF and performance

The new camera has Sony’s latest AF system, which is a surprisingly large step forward. The RX10 IV was the first in the series to gain phase detection AF: delivering a big leap forward over previous models, and early instances of Eye detection and animal eye detection autofocus. In video it fell back on the older, clunkier ‘Center Lock-On AF’ system that required a degree of button-pressing and missed focus that seems unthinkable by modern standards.

The RX10 V illustrates just how far things have come in the meantime. The clutter of AF area modes persists, but it’s now backed up by a subject recognition system that can cope with a wider range of subjects, works more effectively and is available in video. The near decade-long lull in enthusiast compact cameras happens to have coincided with one of the most sustained periods of improvement in AF performance and ease-of-use,

Viewfinder and screen

Richard Butler

Both the viewfinder and rear screen have been upgraded, compared with the RX10 IV. We wouldn’t be at all surprised to find some of this is down to old components no longer being available, but if it results in a better viewfinder, we’ll take it.

The RX10 V has a 3.69M dot EVF, meaning 1280 x 960px resolution, rather than the 1024 x 768px view of its predecessor. It’s a physically larger panel, too, with updated finder optics boosting the magnification from 0.7x to 0.78x.

The rear screen gets a more modest boost: 1.62M dots (900 x 600px) in a 3:2 aspect ratio that matches the camera’s sensor, rather than the 4:3 screen on the RX10 IV, which had 800 x 600px resolution, of which 800 x 533px would be devoted to previewing images. In both instances, the screens tilt up or down, but don’t hinge or tilt sideways.

Movies

For the most-part, the RX10 V’s movie capabilities are greatly enhanced: it can shoot 4K at up to 60p from the full width of its sensor (vs 30p on the old model), or 120p with a crop. The AF tracking is vastly improved, it gains Sony’s Auto Framing system that crops in and follows a subject around, to give movement to otherwise static shots, and it adds the ‘Active’ Steadshot stabilization mode. Above all, though, it gains the ability to capture 10-bit footage, making its Log files much more flexibile than before, particularly S-Log3. It also lets you shoot in S-Cinetone, and attractive, ready-to-go profile we’ve liked on other cameras.

Somewhat contraversially, the RX10 V doesn’t offer the 1000fps (960fps in NTSC mode) 1080 video capture of its predecessor. Whether this is a consequence of a lack of DRAM to buffer all that information, or because Sony has just refocused its attention on more mainstream video needs is unclear. The footage was never particularly good (not least because each frame of a 1000fps burst is made up from very little light), but it was a feature that wasn’t really available elsewhere.

Storage / communication

Richard Butler

As you might hope, the RX10 V now accepts UHS-II SD memory cards, letting it write and read data much faster than the older model, which had a UHS-I interface. UHS-II had started to appear in cameras nearly three years prior to the Mark IV, so this isn’t really a case of bringing the new camera up-to-date, and more of reaching the point the IV could have been at, nine years ago. The industry looks unlikely to ever use the newer UHS-III format and may even skip SDExpress, which is based on the same technology as the CF express cards Sony uses elsewhere in its range.

The Mark V does at least gain a modern USB connector, though. It can communicate at up to 10Gbps and can be used for charging the camera. It retains the Micro-B USB socket that the IV had, so that it’s compatible with the same accessories, but this port can no longer be used for charging.

Battery

Richard Butler

Finally, there’s the battery. The RX10 V makes room for the much larger NP-FZ100 battery, which has over twice the capacity of the NP-FW50 used in the Mark IV. This doesn’t result in double the battery life, perhaps because of the additional processing power and higher resolution viewinder, but still sees the battery life rating jump by more than 50%. Ratings of 570 shots per charge via the viewfinder and 630 shots per charge using the rear screen are well into the territory that it’s unlikely you’ll ever have to worry about battery life, as a stills shooter. As usual, we’d expect most people to get around double this number of shots, and still more if you shoot bursts.

Overall

It’s easy to look at the RX10 V, see that the lens and pixel count is the same and conclude it’s a minor update. In practice, just about every aspect of the camera has been improved. The RX10 V looks much more expensive, but a lot of that is because inflation – or, to put it another way, the devaluing of the money in your pocket – in the intervening nine years exaggerates the difference.

As always, it’s up to each individual to decide whether they think a product is worth the cost, but in terms of usability, performance and capability, the RX10 V is a big step forward.

Want to stay up to date on the latest product news and releases? Add DPReview as a preferred source to ensure our independent journalism makes it to the top of your Google search results.

The Sony FX5 is a compact cinema camera capable of up to 4.5K120 and Raw video capture, aimed at independent videographers and small productions. It builds on the legacy of the FX3, adding a host of features we’ve not previously seen from Sony.

Key features

• 16.6MP Full-Frame stacked CMOS sensor
• 4K/60 from 5K capture
• 4K/120 from 4.5K crop
• 4K/240 capability via firmware due in late 2027
• Open gate shooting
• Combined dual gain mode for increased DR
• Three “base” ISO steps
• Internal Raw capture
• Subject recognition autofocus
• 32-bit float audio compatibility
• Large 16:9 rear LCD
• Waveform display
• Optional EVF

The FX5 will be available, body-only, for $4899, or $5499 with the XLR top-handle, which allows 32-bit float audio capture. Other optional accessories include a removable, tiltable viewfinder and a USB-C-to-BNC timecode cable. It will be available from August.

What’s new

The FX5 is a surprisingly significant upgrade compared to the FX3, suggesting Sony is still working out what this type of camera needs to offer, and iterating. It nominally sits above the FX3 but looks like it’s trying to do what the FX3 did, plus a lot more, making it most directly comparable to the likes of Canon’s C50 cinema camera.

The most visible addition is its ability to capture Raw footage, but that’s just the most dramatic departure from the existing camera. There are also a host of features and UI changes that have come down directly from the company’s pro cinema products, to the degree that it represents not just a major upgrade but will also present an appreciable learning curve for existing FX3 users.

Don’t call it Raw

Interestingly, Sony doesn’t refer to the camera’s Raw mode in those terms, instead settling on the snappy X-OCN, which I’m sure we can agree is clearer. They tell us it’s a 16-bit linear Raw format, which is a lot more detail than we’re typically given about the other Raw video codecs. Linear encoding is a rather inefficient way of doing things but, in theory at least, gives the maximum flexibility in terms of highlight editing and reconstruction.

This “EXtended tonal range Orginal Camera Negative” gives you more flexibility in terms of correcting white balance, applying noise reduction, highlight and tonal adjustment and color grading. It’s a version of the format already used by the Burano and Venice cameras, so should be compatible with DaVinci Resolve, Adobe Premiere Pro, Avid Media Composer and Baselight software.

The FX5 uses the X-OCN LT (Light) version of the codec, used on the Burano cinema camera (and that’s even an option on the company’s flagship Venice 2 model).

New sensor

James Tirado

The FX5 is based around a new stacked CMOS sensor. Sony quotes the pixel count as 16.6MP which, given the FX3 turned out to have a 48MP behind a 12MP color filter array, should make us wonder how similar it is to the 66.8MP sensor in the recent a7R VI.

Sony wouldn’t be specific about any differences, but the significantly higher output speeds make us assume that there’s DRAM or more complex readout circuitry built into the back of the sensor. We know that the a7R VI’s 4K video comes from combining quartets of pixels, so placing that same pixel architecture behind oversized color filters that extend across sets of four pixels would make a lot of sense. Even if you’re not that interested in video, this ability to produce variations of a sensor with different capabilities might still offer an interesting insight into the products we’ll see in the coming years.

In practice, the FX5 is faster at reading out a comparable region of its sensor (around 5.5ms in full-width, 16:9 5K modes, around 24% quicker than the 7.2ms that the a7R VI takes in its ‘5K sampled’ 16:9 modes). Open gate mode read out the full height of the sensor in 8.3ms (1/120 sec).

Sony says the camera has a “Dual Gain” mode that boosts dynamic range by combining the low gain and high-gain signals being read off the sensor. It is available in the camera’s lowest native gain mode (ISO 800) and the modes derived from it (ie up to EI 3200). It can be used at up to 60p in most resolutions or up to 30p in open gate mode.

We’re told it may operate differently from the combined dual gain mode the a7R IV offers in video, though. We were briefed that the image is analysed and the high gain (low noise) data is only utilized in the shadow regions of the image, making the process faster than combining both gain settings for all pixels. Engaging the Dual Gain mode (via the ISO menu) increases the readout time by a factor of 2.1x, which is very similar to the proportion of increase we measured on the a7R VI.

Three “base” ISO settings

Interestingly, Sony also says the FX5 has three “base ISO” settings: 800, 4000, 12,800. To make sense of this, it’s worth noting that there isn’t a fixed or universally shared definition of what ‘base ISO’ means. What it doesn’t directly refer to is conversion gain steps at the sensor level. So, for instance, the FX3 and a7S III had dual conversion gain sensors, but Sony says it does not consider them to be cameras with dual base ISO.*

James Tirado

Instead, Sony tells us its definition of base ISO relates to modes that offer the same dynamic range distribution between highlights and shadows, and have a near-identical noise floor, allowing footage to be intercut between the modes. This makes most sense when working in the camera’s Cinema EI mode, where the camera is locked to one of these “base” states and then delivers ISO settings up to two stops higher or lower by essentially under- or over-exposing the ‘base’ state, then including a metadata tag saying how light or dark the footage is meant to be rendered. This really comes into its own in a Raw workflow, as this is how it’s possible to adjust the “ISO” of footage, after the fact.

The decision of Sony to offer three “base ISO” states shouldn’t lead you to conclude that there are three distinct gain steps at the hardware level, nor should it be confused with the camera’s optional “Dual Gain” mode that combines the output of different hardware states.

*Just to make clear how slippery the concept is, the FX3’s firmware V2 added Cinema EI, including a setting called Base ISO, which has two settings. We are told the higher of these is officially considered a High Sensitivity mode, not a second base ISO.

New UI, wider range of features

Beyond these, the most radical change is to the user interface, with the FX5 gaining an all-in-one settings display borrowed almost directly from the Burano (and closely mimicking the displays that Panasonic borrowed from Arri, etc, etc). Its menus have also been re-worked to make them look more like Sony’s pro cinema models, which will add a bit of a learning curve for existing FX users but brings it closer into line with other production cameras.

The company says it will be adding a vertical version of the UI in firmware 2.0.

James Tirado

Also added are a host of tools that other brands have started offering but that have been absent from previous Sonys at this point in the market. So, in addition to options like the focus map, that highlights blocks of the image that are in and out of focus, the FX5 offers a false color display and waveforms for helping to judge exposure, and a vectorscope display for assessing color distribution. These come on top of tools such as zebras, focus peaking and a histogram, that were already available.

James Tirado

The camera is based around Sony’s latest Bionz XR2 processor, so gains all the subject recognition AF modes that we’ve become used to on the stills side of things, boosting autofocus dependability for run-and-gun shooting.

Body and handling

James Tirado

At first glance, the FX5 looks a lot like the FX3, but the changes reveal themselves, the closer you look. It’s a fraction larger, for a start, having grown a couple of mm in each direction but significantly the body of the camera itself is deeper, within those boundaries, so it feels bulkier. It’s also a fraction heavier, though Sony says it’s a less than 5% increase.

The layout of the camera’s six programmable buttons has been reworked and relabeled to better match what you’d find on the company’s higher-end cinema cameras. It also gains the multi-function dial from the Sony Burano, which can be used to navigate through menus, and make quick changes from the live view screen.

James Tirado

The FX5, like the recent Alpha cameras, gains a second USB-C socket. This can be used for a range of things, from tethering, powering the camera, data transfer or for accepting a timecode signal. As with other recent Sony cameras, the second USB-C socket is actually a USB 2.0 (480Mbps) socket, so can only be used for power and less data-intensive tasks.

The camera’s connectivity is further updated with an upgrade to Wi-Fi 6E, and the addition of an Ethernet port, which will likely find use in many houses of worship.

Display

Sony has upgraded the rear tilting/articulating display to a 3.5″ model with a video-friendly 16:9 aspect ratio. Sony says the latter change makes it a much bigger upgrade to the 3″ display on the FX3 than it appears at first glance, as that screen’s 4:3 aspect ratio meant you were looking at a video that was really only 2.5″. Now, it can fill the entire screen, provided you’re not using an open gate or DCI (“17:9”) recording mode.

James Tirado

The FX5 has two slots, each of which take either CFexpress Type A cards or the slower UHS-II SD cards. The two card types don’t connect to the same connectors: one socket it essentially sited within the other.

Battery

James Tirado

The FX5 becomes the second camera to adopt Sony’s new 20.9 Wh NP-SA100 battery, following the a7R VI. This not only provides higher voltage and capacity than the NP-FZ100 batteries the FX3 used, but should allow for slightly longer record times. Sony says it can shoot for 130 minutes at 4K/60, while the FX3 caped out at 113. Of course, this change means that those with a large collection of batteries will need to spend quite a bit to rebuild it (provided they were running off an internal unit, rather than powering their cameras via an external V or Gold mount battery).

Despite the increased battery capacity, and smaller tweaks to the body like the addition of a second 1/4-20″ socket on the bottom plate to reduce the risk of rotating, Sony says the new camera is close to the FX3’s weight, coming in at 734g (25.9oz), versus 715g (25.2oz)

Accessories

While the camera doesn’t have an integrated EVF – likely a concession to keeping its body as protrusion-free, and therefore gimbal-friendly as possible – Sony is making a removable one as an optional accessory. It features a 3.68M-dot panel that can reach up to 2500 nits peak brightness, and supports a wide color gamut to provide a more accurate preview. It’ll plug into a new port right above the multi-interface shoe, meaning you can’t have it attached if you’re also using the shoe. However, Sony says it’s working with a third-party to create an extension cable for it that will let you place it in more ergonomic position. The EVF, named the DVF-EL1, costs $698.

Another accessory is the XLR handle which, like the ones released for Sony Alpha-series cameras, will enable both the use of professional microphones as well as 32-bit float audio recording. The latter feature will an exciting addition for documentary and event shooters, as its different method for storing data essentially eliminates the risk of clipping, no matter what your gain levels are set to (though your microphone can still be overwhelmed). The handle can be purchased in a bundle with the FX5, or separately for $798

Video modes

Like most of Sony’s previous cameras, the FX5 delivers all its compressed footage in output-ready 4K resolutions: with in the 16:9 UHD or ~17:9 DCI formats. However, in a detail borrowed from cameras like the Venice and Burano they are named in terms of the pixel region used to capture them. So, although the camera has “Imager Mode” options called 5K 16:9, the output is still the standard 3840 x 2160 UHD footage.

James Tirado

The Raw footage, by contrast, arrives in your editor in the resolution in which it was captured. So 5K means 5K.

One of these Raw modes is a 3:2 open gate mode, capturing the full area of the sensor to make it easier to output both landscape and vertical cuts from the same clip (if you can find a composition that’s sensible for both, that is). The camera can also apply a real-time desqueeze correction for anyone using anamorphic lenses, with 1.3x, 1.5x, 1.6x, 1.8x and 2.0x squeeze factors being supported.

Raw recording

When recording to its internal Raw X-OCN codec, the FX5 can shoot at roughly 5K in 3:2, ∼17:9 and 16:9, at up to 60p. There are three levels of compression for the codec, with the standard being “LT,” and C1 and C2 recording at increasingly lower bitrates to reduce file sizes. Sony says C1 will be around 25% smaller than LT.

The company says it plans to release a firmware update sometime in 2027 that will allow for recording 4K/240 footage in Raw, though it hasn’t provided any details on whether the mode will have a crop.

The camera needs to reboot in order to switch into or out of Raw mode. As we’ve seen on other cameras, it also needs to reboot to switch between 24p, PAL and NTSC modes, as the system clock needs to reset to work in multiples of 24, 25 and 29.97 frames per second. Because there’s no separation of Raw/Compressed or 24p/PAL/NTSC, it’s very easy to accidentally prompt the camera to reboot if you select the wrong shooting mode.

Likewise, the camera will only playback footage if it’s in the right system clock mode, and will only show you the Raw clips if you’re in Raw mode and only your compressed clips when in compressed mode.

Compressed footage modes

The FX5 names its video modes by the areas that are sampled, rather than their output resolution. The camera’s “17:9” modes (5K and 4.5K) are output as DCI 4K (4096 x 2160), while the 16:9 modes (5K, 4.5K and 3.2K) are output as 3840 x 2160 UHD.

The DCI modes can only be shot in XAVC S-I (All-I H.264), whereas moving to 16:9 adds the option to shoot XAVC H (H.265) or XAVC S (H.264) with a choice of 4:2:2 or 4:2:0 chroma sub-sampling.

Sony says the FX5 will gain support for shooting 3:2 open gate in XAVC S-I will come as part of firmware 2.0, due in around October 2027.

Super35

The FX5 also provides an option of cropping in to an APS-C-sized region of the sensor, providing compatibility with lenses designed for Super35 cameras. While the FX3’s APS-C mode was sampled from an 1080p region of the sensor, the FX5’s higher-resolution sensor means it can capture a 3.2K (3264 x 1836) region in 16:9. However, this is still output as 1080p when shooting in compressed modes.

Support tools

The FX5 gains a whole host of video-specific tools meant to make it easier to get proper exposure and focus. It has a waveform monitor for clearer and more accurate exposure monitoring, a false color overlay that makes it easy to see at a glance whether your subject is properly exposed and whether any of your highlights and shadows are clipping, a vector scope for more information about your colors and a focus map overlay to assist with focus.

The company has also added more options for desqueezing the preview when shooting with anamorphic lenses, providing several options between a 1.3 and 2.0x ratio.

Initial impressions

James Tirado

The FX5 is an evolution of the FX3 concept that tries to accommodate a wider range of users, and we doubt any one user will want or need the full range of its capabilities. Where the FX3 was essentially an a7S III in a more video-friendly format (or, perhaps, the camera the a7S III should have been, in the first place), the FX5 is a much more capable machine that tries to address multiple different workflows.

Small scale cinematographers can adopt its Raw workflow, while others might choose to shoot open gate and some users will output H.265 UHD files in S-Cinetone. Some people will build it into a rig, others will mount it on a gimble, while others will leave it on ‘sticks.’ The fact that the XLR handle and EVF module are optional suggests that these are option that some people will find essential while others would resent the bulk and cost of something they don’t want. Then there’s the Ethernet port, which allows the camera to be mounted and operated remotely, for applications such as churches, we’re told.

In doing so, though, Sony has made the camera a fraction larger, but probably not to the point that it would alienate many of the run-and-gun shooters who came to love the FX3.

However, the major changes to the user interface, including its frequent decision to reboot, if you accidentally select the wrong frame rate, while changing settings, are likely to make the camera seem surprisingly daunting to existing FX3 users.

James Tirado

Sony talked about adding features and capabilities that have been requested by users, but it also feels like the FX5 is much more a product of the cinema department, like the FX6, rather than having evolved from an Alpha model, as the FX3 appeared to. A lot of the features (not least Raw) might have trickled down from the Burano, but an awful lot of the interface and operational logic has done, too, which is likely to be something of a shock to anyone primarily familiar with the FX3 or 2.

James Tirado

It its favor, it’s stayed in the relatively compact body that has made the FX3 a success, but this means there isn’t room for the variable ND filter system that slides in filters from below the sensor on the bigger camera, that a lot of users were hoping for. Additional options like a USB timecode sync cable aren’t necessarily going to excite a lot of independent FX3 users, but they broaden the camera’s appeal.

It’ll be interesting to see whether Sony decides that the FX5 (or, rather, the existence of both the FX5 and FX2) means that it doesn’t need to create a direct replacement for the FX3.

I’m not completely shocked that Sony updated the RX10: the existing model was clearly out of production and increasingly silly second-hand prices suggested there was pent-up demand. And now the work of integrating more modern components with a Type 1 sensor has been done, surely an updated RX100 will be next?

I found myself thinking about what that might look like, and the more I do, the more I suspect it won’t be what I want.

Two years ago I made the argument that there is a market for enthusiast compacts: small cameras with decent image quality and sufficient direct control to give a satisfying photographic experience. I proposed an RX100-style camera with a less-expensive sensor and the original 24-70mm equiv F1.8-2.8 lens. Sadly, that’s not what I’m expecting Sony to make, at all.

Sony is a technology company. A technology company that makes some very good cameras, but ultimately a company that believes that their cameras will always be made better by throwing more and newer technology into them.

So instead of the stripped-back camera with direct controls and a (relatively) accessible price tag that I’d love someone to make, I suspect we’ll get a camera with, at the very least, all the bells and whistles of the RX10 V. I’m going to guess it’ll have the rangier but slower 24-200mm equiv lens, the ability to shoot at framerates around double the speed of a pro-targeted DSLR and a list price of at least the $1500 that the VII’s launch price would equate to, today.

And thinking about this made me remember how frustrated I’ve always been with the RX100 cameras. Because, with their introduction of the Type 1 (13.2 x 8.8) sensor to the compact market, they represented a huge step forward in terms of how much image quality you could fit in your pocket. The JPEG color on the first one was perhaps a little wonky but that 116mm² sensor was nearly three times the size of the Type 1/1.7 (43mm²) chip that had dominated the space up until then, and that’s the kind of difference you could see in every photo.

Richard Butler

But despite the appearance, price and that short, bright lens, the RX100 never felt like an enthusiast compact. Compared to the likes of the Olympus XZ models or Canon’s G and S-series cameras, the Sony sorely lacked engaging control points. Typically I’ll use an enthusiast compact in Aperture Priority mode, so would want to be able to control the aperture value and exposure compensation: both of them settings that adjust in fixed, stepped intervals. The RX100 doesn’t have a well-placed clicking control point, meaning you have to change most settings via the vague, free-rotating ring around the lens. There’s a lag before it recognizes that your input is intentional and there’s no tactile feedback that you’ve changed anything.

The result, even before you visited the old, rather chaotic menus, was a user experience that left you feeling detached from the photo taking process: the precise opposite of what I believe a standalone camera needs to offer. The RX100 series have always been products whose engineering I admired, rather than cameras I enjoyed.

I remember being advised “stop trying to make it do what you want, and just use it as a point-and-shoot,” and finding that helped. But if I wanted to just take snaps, I’d probably use a smartphone, because the phone makers know their devices aren’t about taking control, so they’re happy to shoot and combine multiple images with every shot, letting them rival or exceed the image quality of a Type 1 camera taking single photos.

I could be wrong, of course. Sony might significantly rework the RX100 to make it fun to take control of. Or it might not make one at all. And, even if it does, I’m not going to assume that the things I, personally, want are the things that the market as a whole wants: Sony will have a much better idea of what sells and what doesn’t, and of what would-be customers are asking for.

But, while the whole thing remains hypothetical, you can’t blame me for hoping.

Want to stay up to date on the latest product news and releases? Add DPReview as a preferred source to ensure our independent journalism makes it to the top of your Google search results.

Tamron’s 12-20mm F2.8 adds a fast, ultra-wide option for Sony and Nikon shooters. It goes wider than its rival zooms on the Z-mount and is smaller and lighter than its closest competitor on E-mount, making it an interesting addition to both systems.

We had a chance to use it, prior to launch, with Mitchell taking it with him on his vacation out beyond Eastern Washington. He’s been sending back samples, to broaden the range of the gallery. Have a look to see how this compact ultra-wide performs.

Want to stay up to date on the latest product news and releases? Add DPReview as a preferred source to ensure our independent journalism makes it to the top of your Google search results.

I’ve always liked enthusiast compacts: relatively small cameras with built-in lenses and a decent level of direct control. A camera I can travel with but still enjoy using. But, following a halcyon period in the early 2010s, the available options dwindled to the point that it became almost impossible to buy one.

However, things seem to have moved on since CP+ 2025, when we received relatively little enthusiasm from the manufacturers we asked about the prospects of a compact camera revival. The first flicker had already come the year before, from a slightly unexpected quarter, when Leica announced the D-Lux 8, a refreshed version of the enthusiast model last updated 6 years prior.

Richard Butler

Then, perhaps even more unexpectedly, in mid 2025 Sony updated its full-frame, prime lens compact, the RX1, a decade after the previous version had been released. It was not a camera I expected to ever see, as I thought its job as a signifier that Sony ‘gets’ photography had been served, now that its full-frame Alpha cameras have received such widespread uptake. But, while some reviewers insisted it should have been more ambitious, I found the camera that actually existed to be one that addressed almost all the shortcomings of its predecessor, and added up to an excellent (albeit determinedly niche) photographers’ compact.

Signs of life

By 2026, the tone of many manufacturers has changed when asked about the market for compacts, and these past few months have seen the release of two major updates of well-liked, but seemingly abandoned models.

The Panasonic L10 is a substantial reworking of the LX100 series, eight years after the last model. It brought a larger body and the same, rather laggy zoom, but, like the RX1R III, it directly addressed the biggest criticisms we’d had with the previous versions. So again, while it’s easy for armchair R&Ders to demand more, the thing that you can buy is rather good.

And now we have the Sony RX10 V, which brings the latest autofocus and video performance levels along with a bigger battery, better viewfinder to a (comparatively) large-sensor superzoom, bringing into sharp relief the degree to which camera performance has continued to improve in the 9+ years since the last version. Even if image quality appears to have plateaued (or even peaked?) for now.

Richard Butler

All four models have been met by derision from some quarters, not helped by the cumulative effect of inflation driving the prices up, in money terms at least. Others have criticized the degree to which these new cameras depend on existing parts for some of their key components (in all four cases, the lens designs date back around a decade, to the often less-demanding pixel counts of that time). And it’s true that none of these makers have shown the faith in the enthusiast photo sector that Canon and Sony did in the vlogging market, when they spent the money to develop new optics for the likes of the PowerShot V1 and ZV-1 II. But most of them got redesigned bodies and accommodate different batteries to their predecessors, so there’s more than just parts-bin diving going on.

Another criticism we’ve seen is that you can buy an ILC more cheaply. And this is sometimes true, even if you exclude second-hand and end-of-life bargains that no new camera can ever compete with. But, even in the (very) few instances where you can closely match the spec of these enthusiast compacts, while maintaining a similar level of hands-on, direct control and competing on size, it usually turns out that the person making the criticism simply doesn’t like the concept of fixed lens cameras, which can lead to the whole point of such cameras being dramatically missed.

Richard Butler

There are times when you want the near-endless flexibility of an ILC (or ‘system camera’ if you prefer). But sometimes, some of us want a smaller camera, or a self-contained one. One that does the thing it’s designed to do, without constantly inviting the cost of additional lenses or forcing you to ponder which combination to pack.

I’m not, at this point anyway, suggesting we’re entering another golden age of enthusiast compacts. It’s clear that the cameras we’ve seen so far are updates of existing models (and not necessarily upgrades, to the extent you might hope). Sadly, I don’t think anybody is about to put the effort into delivering a larger-sensor successor to the Olympus XZ-2, which to me remains the high watermark for enthusiast compacts, in many regards. But at least, for whatever concerns we might each have about pricing or increased size, there are, after all this time, options.

Want to stay up to date on the latest product news and releases? Add DPReview as a preferred source to ensure our independent journalism makes it to the top of your Google search results.

Fujifilm has released updated firmware for its GFX Eterna 55 medium format cinema camera, and set out a roadmap of additional updates that will follow over the next year.

Firmware v1.1 promises improved stability and usability but future updates include support for desqueezed previews of additional anamorphic lens ratios, improved SDI and HMDI latency, with LANC control and variable electronic ND arriving later.

Want to stay up to date on the latest product news and releases? Add DPReview as a preferred source to ensure our independent journalism makes it to the top of your Google search results.

The Godox iT32 is a pocketable, $80 flash. And it essentially sweeps away all the hurdles that stood in the way of me using flash.

I suspect I’m not alone in having found the cost of flash systems off-putting, when I first started photography. I’d scrabbled together enough money for a camera body with a nice kit zoom and immediately turned my attention to additional lenses. Flash was always the next thing on my list. And, two decades later, it still is.

You learn early on that flashes are most effective, creatively when they’re positioned away from the camera, but this invokes all the costs of remote triggers and off-board flashes, or being limited by the length of cables, because I’d bought an entry-level DSLR that couldn’t act as a flash commander, and I didn’t feel confident enough to start with manual, rather than TTL-controlled flash.

Mitchell Clark

The iT32 solves that off-camera problem because it connects to your camera via a small, hotshoe-mounted radio-frequency controller. The cost of this controller? between $20 and $34, depending on which brand of camera you use.

The X5 controller slots into your camera’s hotshoe and the iT32 attaches magnetically to the controller. Or you can disconnect the flash and fire it remotely. The flash itself communicates using Godox’s own communication protocol and can pair with any X5 controller, providing TTL compatibility whatever brand camera you own. It also means that you can buy a single iT32 and make it work even if you have cameras from more than one brand.

Richard Butler

*Godox says Canon cameras with multi-interface hotshoes should use an adapter to mount the X5 C. It makes a “X5 Cm” version for these newer cameras but has limited its sales to China.

The X5 can only control flashes operating in a single group, so you can’t use it as the basis of a complex multi-group setup, but the iT32 itself can operate in different groups, so will still be usable, if you decide to expand your setup, later.

So far, I’ve just been using the X5 and iT32 combination and have found it to be a really low-risk place to start experimenting with flash. It’s a genuinely small unit, that makes it easy to keep with me. It has a guide number of 18m, so it’s not especially powerful, but it’s enough of a step up from any camera’s built-in flash that, especially combined with the ability to use off-camera, is enough to make it worth carrying around.

In-use

Mitchel Clark

For such a small unit, the iT32 has a surprising number of control points. There’s a power/flash test button, a Set button and a Menu button, along with a dial on the side, used for quick control. But the iT32’s small rear screen is also touch-sensitive, so it’s really quick to operate, rather than requiring odd combinations of button pressing and dial turns.

To turn the unit on you hold the power/test button for two seconds then scroll the control dial upwards to confirm that it’s not just pressed against something in your bag.

You can access the menu by pressing the Menu button or swiping down on the screen. In the menu you’ll find options for controlling the modelling lamp on the front of the flash, a control for switching between TTL, Manual and multi-flash (strobe) modes, as well as deciding whether the flash is in on-camera mode, sender or receiver.

Mitchel Clark

The iT32 automatically switches to receiver mode when you detach it from the on-camera X5, so you don’t need to give most of this much thought.

In use you can set exposure compensation by turning the dial on the side of the flash, by swiping left or right on the touchscreen or, when the iT32 is working remotely away from the base, by pressing the small + and – buttons on the back of the X5 controller.

If you have a pair of iT32s you can your their controls to set them to different manual flash values (or flash exposure comp values if in TTL mode). You can still use the X5 to increase and decrease these values remotely, but any increase or decrease will be applied to both flashes, so you can’t remotely adjust them independently, as you would in a proper system of grouped flashes.

Mitchel Clark

When working handheld, I found the touchscreen to be very sensitive and the control dial very easy to jog, so tended to make use of the ‘Lock’ function in the menu, to stop myself accidentally changing the flash settings. Once lock is engaged, you need to hold ‘Set’ for two seconds to re-activate the controls.

The iT32 has its own, built-in battery, so you don’t need to hunt around for a fresh set of AAs all the time. It recharges over its USB-C socket, which is also used for updating firmware for both the flash and the X5. The X5 unit has its own battery, which charges up when connected to the iT32. You can check the battery level on the menu of the flash, when it’s connected, or long-press the – button, where it will communicate its charge level with between zero and four flashes of its tiny red LED.

Richard Butler

Generally, getting started with the iT32 is simplicity itself. The two units pair with one another when physically connected, switching the flash to the correct camera brand’s protocol, and then auto switches between on- and off-camera operation. It’s only two swipes on the touchscreen to manually engage receiver mode, if you power the flash on again later and don’t want to have to physically re-connect them each time.

As you use the setup more, it’s worth scanning through the manual, as there are some differences between camera brands about how to access modes such as high-speed sync and rear curtain flash sync, but there’s nothing that a complete novice should find off-putting at all.

Overall, though, I found the X5 / iT32 pairing to be a remarkably cost-effective way to access the world of flash photography. And, significantly, the realm of off-board flash. This simple, sub-$100 set overcame pretty much all of my previous concerns about cost, about compatibility and around batteries, leaving me with no excuse.

Want to stay up to date on the latest product news and releases? Add DPReview as a preferred source to ensure our independent journalism makes it to the top of your Google search results.

The Sony RX10 V arrived just before a trip I had planned to San Francisco, giving me some more interesting / less familiar shooting opportunities, the chance to play with an extremely long lens, and a lesson in how hard it is to re-create Todd Walker’s famous 1964 photo of California Street.

I made sure to grab some low-light photos as well as some trams, sunshine and marine-layer gloom.

Want to stay up to date on the latest product news and releases? Add DPReview as a preferred source to ensure our independent journalism makes it to the top of your Google search results.

The Sony RX10 V is an update to the company’s long-zoom large-sensor compact. It’s built around a 20MP stacked Type 1 (116mm²) sensor and a 24-600mm equiv, F2.4-4.0 stabilized zoom.

It’s a long-zoom ‘compact’ whose newfound processing power means it can shoot a range of subjects from landscapes to wildlife and maybe even a little sport. We’d be tempted to make the comparison to a Swiss Army knife, only the RX10 is far from pocketable.

Key specifications

• 20MP Type-1 (116mm²) stacked CMOS sensor
• 24-600mm equiv. F2.4-4.0 lens
• Up to 30fps shooting
• 4K up to 120p with crop (60p full width) in 10-bit
• 3.68M dot EVF
• 1.62M dot tilting rear LCD
• UHS-II SD card slot
• 630 shot/charge battery life rating

The RX10 V will be available in early August with a recommended price of $2,300. This is exactly in line with the US consumer price index inflation rate applied to the $1700 launch price of the RX10 IV, nine years ago. To use a different benchmark, it’s cheaper, relative to the a7 V and that camera’s peers, than the Mark IV was, relative to its contemporary a7 model.

Index

• What’s new
• Body and handling
• In use
• Initial impressions
• Autofocus
• Image quality
• Video
• Conclusion
• Sample gallery
• Specifications
• Press release

What’s new

It’s been eight years since the RX10 IV and Sony has made big steps forward in both technology and ergonomics in the meantime: the RX10 V benefits from both.

On the technology side, the RX10 V gains the Bionz XR processor and “AI processing unit” from the previous generation of Alpha cameras. This brings the full range of subject recognition modes, including birds, animals, cars, planes and the “human pose estimation” system that is designed to recognise people-shaped things in the scene, even when the face or eyes aren’t visible, to help the camera continue to track the same subject.

The added processing power allows the RX10 V to shoot at up to 30 frames per second with a blackout free viewfinder. You also gain the Speed boost function that lets you temporarily engage a faster (or slower) shooting mode, when you hold a customized button down, but you don’t gain the pre-capture function.

Autofocus has come a long way in the nine years since the previous RX10 was released, and the new model feels like a thoroughly modern camera. The other area of significant improvement over the same period is video, and the RX10 V is a bit step forward in that regard, too, with a host of Sony’s latest options including, significantly, the ability to capture 10-bit and H.265 footage, both of which make it more pleasant to work with.

Sony says it’s the same lens as on the RX10 IV but CIPA standards for reporting focal length have apparently changed in the meantime, meaning it’s quoted as a 9.1-210mm zoom, rather than the 8.8-220mm figures printed on the side of the previous two models. We suspect the figures now quoted are the literal focal lengths, rather than the effective focal lengths after corrections has been applied. The end result is the same, though: a 24-600mm equiv range with an F2.4-4.0 maximum aperture and in-lens stabilization.

It’s hard to get your head round just how much flexibility a 24-600mm lens gives you until you use it. There are cameras that offer even more range, but all of them are based on much smaller sensors, so you pay a price in terms of image quality, if any survives the heat haze.

The lens has a built-in shutter which can go as fast as 1/1000th of a second at wide apertures, and 1/2000 sec at F8 and slower. This is great for flash, as you can sync up to those maximum speeds but quickly becomes limiting in bright light. You can switch the camera to e-shutter mode which, with a rolling shutter rate of 15.7ms (1/64sec) is still pretty fast, but this requires you to switch to the lossy compressed Raw format. There’s no auto mode to let you use mechanical shutter up to its limit, then e-shutter beyond that.

Body and handling

Richard Butler

The RX10 V is a substantial camera but that’s to be expected for something trying to deliver a 24-600mm equivalent zoom range. It’s been a long time since we handled an RX10 IV but the grip shape seems improved, offering a sturdy grip on the dense, polycarbonate body.

There’s no front dial, the logic presumably being that you’ll use your index finger for operating the zoom rocker. This means the two command dials on the rear shoulder are both operated with your thumb. There’s also a rather fiddly dial on the rear plate of the camera but thankfully, with the provision of two customizable command dials and an aperture ring, there’s rarely need to use it (it’s not used in photo mode, by default).

Richard Butler

Unlike recent Sony cameras, the RX10 V has a 10Gbps USB-C socket for fast data transfer but then retains the USB Micro B ‘Multi’ socket for attaching external accessories. This can no longer be used for charging the camera, reducing its usefulness to being an accessory port.

The RX10 V still uses a single SD card but the interface now uses the slightly newer UHS-II standard, rather than the UHS-I slot on the previous model. This is quick enough to accommodate the 600Mbps (75MB/s) data rate required for 4K/60 video capture with All-I compression.

Viewfinder

Richard Butler

The viewfinder gets an upgrade to 3.68M dots (1280 x 960px), which is a decent step up from its predecessor. The resolution drops a little if you engage the high refresh rate mode, and battery life drops, too, but whichever mode you choose, the resolution is maintained, even when using C-AF, so you don’t get the potentially distracting drop in detail when you half-press the shutter.

Screen

The screen is also refreshed, with the Mark V using a 1.62M dot (900 x 600px) screen that matches the sensor’s aspect ratio, rather than the 4:3, 800 x 600px panel on the previous model. The screen is still mounted on a tilt up/down cradle, which gives a decent level of flexibility but isn’t well suited to portrait orientation shooting.

Battery

Richard Butler

Other than the improved autofocus, perhaps the biggest change on the Mark V is the move to the much larger NP-FZ100 battery. This is the 16.4Wh battery that has powered the various a7 models for the past nine years. It has a capacity more than twice that of the FW50 battery used in previous RX10 cameras, giving much better battery life in a way that seems appropriate for a camera so likely to be used for travel and long shoots outdoors.

In use

When you first start up the camera, you’re confronted with a very simple, compact-camera display, with five large touchscreen buttons arrayed down both sides of the screen. This ends up feeling somewhat nostalgic, having not encountered a mainstream point-and-shoot for some time, and rather at odds with the more Alpha-styled controls and main menu.

Anyone not wanting to use touchscreen buttons, or wanting a less cluttered display can remove them (the option to do so is under Touch Operation / Touch Panel Settings, rather than with the display options in Operation Customize).

With this done, the RX10 V feels a lot like an Alpha-series camera, with the new menus representing a big improvement over the ones in the previous models. It’s not without its foibles but for the most part it’s well grouped and organized, and with a little customization of the Fn menu and custom buttons, you can minimize your need to visit it.

The RX10 V has the same issue as other Sony cameras in terms of a couple of incompatible settings: you’ll need to disengage Raw and switch to HEIF format before you can engage the camera’s HLG Stills mode to shoot true HDR images, and you’ll have to switch your Raw format if you want to engage the electronic shutter mode. All of which leaves the risk that you forget to switch back.

Richard Butler

Also, somewhat disappointingly for such a travel-friendly camera, Sony remains the only major brand not to offer some kind of in-camera Raw conversion. So if you take a nice shot but want to tweak the white balance, color mode or DRO level before sharing it, tough luck, you’ll just have to messily hack the JPEG around on your phone.

There’s a lot to like, though. The dials and joystick give a good sense of direct control, letting you feel you have direct command over the camera’s really rather impressive capabilities. It has its limits, though: it will try to keep focusing if you zoom with the ring around the lens (you can’t use the zoom rocker), but it definitely struggles, which can limit some sports or action shooting. But the ability to quicky zoom with the rocker under your index finger and fine-tune the framing with the lens ring helps keep the power zoom feeling pretty engaging.

While the RX10 V’s interface is borrowed directly from the Alpha series, its wide range of features and capabilities means it somehow manages to be even more cluttered than on those cameras. So, in addition to the settings and icons that surround all four edges of the screen, there’s a Stabilization indicator that shows up in the main preview, along with warnings about the AF illuminator and a huge “FULL” icon, towards the middle of the display. This has nothing to do with you running out of card space, though; it’s just reporting the essential information that the focus range limiter isn’t engaged.

Initial impressions

Richard Butler

It’s been nine years since the last RX10 model was released and, although things have been pretty quiet on the compact front, the rest of camera technology and performance have continued to make advances. Much like watching a young relative you rarely get to see grow up through a series of infrequent visits, the prolonged gap really makes you notice how much has changed in the meantime.

The RX10 V is a dramatically more advanced camera than its predecessor: faster to focus and much more dependable at subject tracking. The menus and ergonomics have come a long way, too, and its video capabilities are leagues ahead of where the RX10 IV had brought us to.

I’m not generally a fan of long-zoom cameras, as I’d usually prioritize compactness over that additional reach that I rarely find myself wanting to use. But the enhanced AF performance and speed capture add a lot to what was already a camera with a strong following. They vastly expand what the RX10 V can do, and the changes to the controls and battery are significant benefits, too.

Unlike the recent L10, that doubling of battery capacity hasn’t led to much of a change in body size, and it wouldn’t have made much difference anyway, on a body so dominated by that vast lens.

There can be a few delays, here and there, waiting for the lens to initialize, and it was disappointing to have to swap shutter modes (and Raw filetype) or stop down when hitting the 1/1000 sec limit of the mechanical shutter. But overall I’ve found the RX10 V to be a pleasant travel companion whose lens constantly challenged me to think of photos that I couldn’t otherwise take.

Whether that makes it worth $2300 is for each individual to decide, but it’s striking to get to see what nearly a decade’s worth of improvements, delivered all in one go, look like.

Autofocus

The RX10’s autofocus interface resembles that of Sony’s Alpha series ILCs, meaning you get a choice of 11 different AF area modes, which are supplemented with tracking version of each area mode, when you switch to AF-C mode. There’s no longer a switch to select AF-C on the front of the camera (just an AF/MF switch on the lens), but for the vast majority of subjects, you can comfortably leave the camera in AF-C all the time.

In addition to the area modes the camera has its subject recognition system, trained to recognize six different subject types. There’s also an Auto subject mode that will hunt through all its subject recognition modes to see if it can identify your subject. On top of this, there’s the option to select which subject types are included in this Auto mode, to boost both speed and accuracy.

The RX10 V’s autofocus is a big step forward from its predecessor. Faster processing and subject recognition algorithms mean the RX10 V can recognize and track subjects very reliably, and these capabilities extend across to video, in a way they didn’t, before.

However the system isn’t completely flawless: when asked to react quickly with a distant subject, aircraft detection mode didn’t find the planes in the following picture, instead focusing on the Space Needle. Overall, it’s beyond what we’ve previously seen from a compact camera, though.

The fact that it’s awkward to zoom while you’re shooting bursts (the lens ring continues to work but the zoom rocker doesn’t) and the camera isn’t able to maintain focus while zooming puts an upper limit on what you can expect the RX10 V to achieve, in fast-moving situations, but it’s still one of the most sports-capable fixed-lens cameras we’ve ever used.

Image quality

Studio test scene

Our test scene is designed to simulate a variety of textures, colors, and detail types you’ll encounter in the real world. It also has two illumination modes, full even light and low directional light, to see the effect of different lighting conditions.

Unsurprisingly, the RX10 V performs very similarly to the RX10 IV when looking at its Raw images at base ISO, which is a good thing. It captures a good amount of detail, and at 88mm equiv., its lens actually holds up quite well compared to other cameras with Type 1 sensors and lenses with much less ambitious focal lengths. It also provides more detail with less noise than the Nikon P1000, which offers much more reach but uses a lower-res and much smaller 16MP 1/2.3″ (28mm²) sensor.

The RX10 V’s JPEGs are where the decade of progress becomes apparent. The colors are much more pleasing than those of the IV, with more natural skin tones, and the vibrancy of colors turned up where they were lacking, and turned down where they were overbearing. We also found this to be the case in the sample photos we shot with the V. Sony’s progress on this front has been slow and steady, but with so much time between the two models, it’s much more noticeable.

This class of cameras has never been the best pick for low light photography, the RX10 V’s Raws again look as we’d expect. Switch over to JPEG and it’s clear that Sony has upgraded the camera’s noise reduction to some extent, but in higher-contrast, more detailed areas, we’d be hard-pressed to tell its performance apart from its predecessor’s. However, it does outperform Panasonic’s similarly-specced (and now discontinued) FZ-1000 II from 2020 in this regard, and is significantly better at low light than the P1000.

The camera’s reasonably fast F2.4-4.0 maximum aperture means it can maintain good image quality when there’s plenty of light, but it doesn’t take much for the light levels to start chipping into the image quality, as you can see here, where the

Video

The previous RX10 V’s video topped-out at 4K/30, despite the use of a fast, stacked CMOS sensor. The Mark V pushes way beyond this, with the option to shoot 4K/120 with a significant 1.38x crop or oversampled 4K/60 from the full width of the sensor. As you’d expect from a modern camera, this can all be done in 10-bit, making Log, and in particular, the more ambitious S-Log3 curve, much more usable.

Richard Butler

But video improvements over the past nearly decade go further than speed. The RX10 V lets you shoot in the attractive, S-Cinetone color mode and it lets you upload LUTs for previewing your preferred color grade, or to burn directly into the footage. It has Sony’s Auto Framing mode that identifies a subject, punches in and follows them around, upscaling the footage and giving a camera operator dynamism to what are actually locked-off shots. There’s also the Active Mode IS that corrects a wider range of movement, available at up to 4K/60.

Then, on the audio side of things, the RX10 V can capture up to four-channel audio, if you attach an accessory to its multi-interface connectors in the hotshoe. A 72mm filter thread allows you to attach ND filters as needed.

Above all of this, though, the RX10 V’s video also benefits from its improved autofocus system, which is much more tenacious and dependable in terms of subject tracking, especially if your subject is of a type the camera has been trained to recognize.

Conclusion

The RX10 V is an extremely capable all-in-one camera whose extreme flexibility, paradoxically, risks limiting its appeal to a relatively small audience.

It’s a huge step forward from its predecessor, with its updated autofocus in both stills and video, and the addition of an Alpha-style joystick makes it more engaging and usable.

Richard Butler

The AF improvements widen the range of circumstances in which the camera will confidently deliver, expanding its wildlife capabilities and also making sports shooting much more plausible than its predecessor. And this is a case of broadening the horizons of a camera that, with its huge lens range, could already do a lot.

There are some odd quirks, though: it feels strange that Sony didn’t bring its pre-capture mode that would boost its action-capturing abilities. And the lack of a mode that auto-switches shutter mode when the camera hits the upper limit of its mechanical shutter is frustrating (even if it’d mean being stuck in or switching to the lossy Raw mode used for E-shutter).

Some existing RX10 users are likely to miss the top-plate settings display, whereas our bigger concern was that all its command dials are positioned to be controlled with your thumb, rather than thumb and forefinger. But the addition of the joystick and larger battery make for a net improvement, we felt.

The RX10 V’s self-contained nature is very much part of its appeal. You never have to think about which lens to buy or bring with you: you already have a combination that extends from wide-angle to super telephoto. However, to achieve this range means the camera has a moderately sized sensor which, combined with its modest aperture range, puts an upper limit on image quality.

If you need the full breadth of the RX10 V’s features in a single package, it’s genuinely excellent, and it’s hard to think of a more responsive, engaging ‘compact.’ However, if you only need a subset of what the RX10 can do, you may well be able to find a different combination that offers better image quality or an even greater aptitude for sports at a comparable price.

What you won’t find is a camera that offers the RX10 V’s combination of range, capability and size, for the same price. If your shooting needs everything that the RX10 V offers, it’s the only game in town, so for those users, it’s a Gold.

Scoring

Scoring is relative only to the other cameras in the same category. Click here to learn about what these numbers mean.

8.0 out of 10

8.5 out of 10

8.8 out of 10

8.8 out of 10

8.5 out of 10

8.1 out of 10

8.5 out of 10

8.5 out of 10

9.2 out of 10

8.8 out of 10

9.5 out of 10

8.5 out of 10

5.0 out of 10

Show All Scores

Overall Score

85%

Scores reflect competition at the time of release; cross-year comparisons may be misleading

Expert Summary

The RX10 V is a hugely capable self-contained package that can lend itself to a remarkable range of photography. You probably have to need everything it offers to make its price make sense, but it's perhaps the most flexible 'compact' camera we've ever seen.

Good For:

A bit of (almost) everything

Not So Good For:

Sports, Maximal image quality

Reviewed on August 24, 2026

Read In-Depth Review

Sample gallery

Please do not reproduce any of these images on a website or any newsletter/magazine without prior permission (see our copyright page ). We make the originals available for private users to download to their own machines for personal examination or printing (in conjunction with this review); we do so in good faith, so please don’t abuse it.

Sony DSC-RX10 V specifications