Sony RX10 IV vs Canon 200D
The Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 IV and the Canon EOS 200D (labelled Canon SL2 in some countries) are two digital cameras that were revealed to the public, respectively, in September 2017 and June 2017. The RX10 IV is a fixed lens compact, while the 200D is a DSLR. The cameras are based on an one-inch (RX10 IV) and an APS-C (200D) sensor. The Sony has a resolution of 20 megapixels, whereas the Canon provides 24 MP. Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their sensors, their features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.
|Sony RX10 IV||Canon 200D|
|Fixed lens compact camera||Digital single lens reflex|
|24-600mm f/2.4-4.0||Canon EF mount lenses|
|20 MP, 1" Sensor||24 MP, APS-C Sensor|
|4K/30p Video||1080/60p Video|
|ISO 100-12800 (64-25600)||ISO 100-25600 (100-51200)|
|Electronic viewfinder (2359k dots)||Optical viewfinder|
|3.0" LCD, 1440k dots||3.0" LCD, 1040k dots|
|Tilting touchscreen||Swivel touchscreen|
|24 shutter flaps per second||5 shutter flaps per second|
|Weathersealed body||Not weather sealed|
|400 shots per battery charge||650 shots per battery charge|
|133 x 94 x 145 mm, 1095 g||122 x 93 x 70 mm, 453 g|
Body comparison: Sony RX10 IV vs Canon 200D
The side-by-side display below illustrates the physical size and weight of the Sony RX10 IV and the Canon 200D. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive views from the front, the top, and the rear side are shown. All size dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter. You can also use the toggle button to switch to a percentage comparison if you prefer that the measures are being expressed in relative terms (in this case, the camera on the left – the RX10 IV – represents the basis or 100 percent across all the size and weight measures).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Canon 200D is notably smaller (9 percent) than the Sony RX10 IV. It is worth mentioning in this context that the RX10 IV is splash and dust resistant, while the 200D does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the RX10 IV has a lens built in, whereas the 200D is an interchangeable lens camera that requires a separate lens. Attaching the latter will add extra weight and bulk to the setup. You can compare the optics available for the 200D and their specifications in the Canon EF Lens Catalog.
The adjacent table lists the principal physical characteristics of the two cameras alongside a wider set of alternatives. If you would like to visualize and compare a different camera combination, just use the right or left arrows in the table to switch to the respective camera. Alternatively, you can also navigate to the CAM-parator app and make your selection from the full list of cameras there.
|Sony RX10 IV»||5.2 in||3.7 in||5.7 in||38.6 oz||400||Y||Sep 2017||1,699||Sony RX10 IV|
|Canon 200D«||4.8 in||3.7 in||2.8 in||16.0 oz||650||n||Jun 2017||549||Canon 200D|
|Canon 2000D« »||5.1 in||4.0 in||3.1 in||16.8 oz||500||n||Feb 2018||449||Canon 2000D|
|Canon 77D« »||5.2 in||3.9 in||3.0 in||19.0 oz||600||n||Feb 2017||899||Canon 77D|
|Canon G1 X Mark III« »||4.5 in||3.1 in||2.0 in||14.1 oz||200||Y||Oct 2017||1,299||Canon G1 X Mark III|
|Canon M100« »||4.3 in||2.6 in||1.4 in||10.7 oz||295||n||Aug 2017||499||Canon M100|
|Canon M5« »||4.6 in||3.5 in||2.4 in||15.1 oz||295||n||Sep 2016||979||Canon M5|
|Canon 100D« »||4.6 in||3.6 in||2.7 in||14.4 oz||380||n||Mar 2013||549||-||Canon 100D|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2« »||5.6 in||3.3 in||1.8 in||17.5 oz||350||Y||Jan 2016||1,699||Fujifilm X-Pro2|
|Panasonic FZ2500« »||5.4 in||4.0 in||5.3 in||32.3 oz||350||n||Sep 2016||1,199||Panasonic FZ2500|
|Sony RX100 VI« »||4.0 in||2.3 in||1.7 in||10.6 oz||240||n||Jun 2018||1,199||Sony RX100 VI|
|Sony A6300« »||4.7 in||2.6 in||1.9 in||14.3 oz||400||Y||Feb 2016||999||-||Sony A6300|
|Sony A6500« »||4.7 in||2.6 in||2.1 in||16.0 oz||350||Y||Oct 2016||1,399||Sony A6500|
|Sony RX10 III« »||5.2 in||3.7 in||5.0 in||37.1 oz||420||Y||Mar 2016||1,499||Sony RX10 III|
|Sony RX100 V« »||4.0 in||2.3 in||1.6 in||10.5 oz||220||n||Oct 2016||999||Sony RX100 V|
|Sony RX10 II« »||5.1 in||3.5 in||4.0 in||28.7 oz||400||Y||Jun 2015||1,299||-||Sony RX10 II|
|Sony RX10« »||5.1 in||3.5 in||4.0 in||28.7 oz||420||Y||Oct 2013||1,299||-||Sony RX10|
Any camera decision will obviously take relative prices into account. The manufacturer’s suggested retail prices give an idea on the placement of the camera in the maker’s lineup and the broader market. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.
Sensor comparison: Sony RX10 IV vs Canon 200D
The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants of image quality. All other things equal, a large sensor will have larger individual pixel-units that offer better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color-depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Furthermore, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more possibilities to use shallow depth-of-field in order to isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be more expensive and lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Sony RX10 IV features an one-inch sensor and the Canon 200D an APS-C sensor. The sensor area in the 200D is 186 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 2.7 and 1.6. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.
With 24MP, the 200D offers a higher resolution than the RX10 IV (20MP), but the 200D nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 3.72μm versus 2.41μm for the RX10 IV) due to its larger sensor. It is noteworthy in this context that the two cameras were released in close succession, so that their sensors are from the same technological generation.
The Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 IV has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 12800, which can be extended to ISO 64-25600. The corresponding ISO settings for the Canon EOS 200D are ISO 100 to ISO 25600, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 100-51200..
For many cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. This service is based on lab testing and assigns an overall score to each camera sensor, as well as ratings for dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), color depth ("DXO Portrait"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"). The adjacent table reports on the physical sensor characteristics and the outcomes of the DXO sensor quality tests for a sample of comparator-cameras.
|Sony RX10 IV»||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Sony RX10 IV|
|Canon 200D«||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||23.6||13.4||1041||79||Canon 200D|
|Canon 2000D« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/30p||22.6||11.9||1009||71||Canon 2000D|
|Canon 77D« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||23.6||13.3||971||78||Canon 77D|
|Canon G1 X Mark III« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||-||-||-||-||Canon G1 X Mark III|
|Canon M100« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||23.5||12.9||1272||78||Canon M100|
|Canon M5« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||23.4||12.4||1262||77||Canon M5|
|Canon 100D« »||APS-C||17.9||5184||3456||1080/30p||21.8||11.3||843||63||Canon 100D|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||-||-||-||-||Fujifilm X-Pro2|
|Panasonic FZ2500« »||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Panasonic FZ2500|
|Sony RX100 VI« »||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Sony RX100 VI|
|Sony A6300« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||4K/30p||24.4||13.7||1437||85||Sony A6300|
|Sony A6500« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||4K/30p||24.5||13.7||1405||85||Sony A6500|
|Sony RX10 III« »||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||23.1||12.6||472||70||Sony RX10 III|
|Sony RX100 V« »||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||22.8||12.4||586||70||Sony RX100 V|
|Sony RX10 II« »||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||23.0||12.6||531||70||Sony RX10 II|
|Sony RX10« »||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||1080/60p||22.9||12.6||474||69||Sony RX10|
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but can also record movies. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the RX10 IV provides a higher video resolution than the 200D. It can shoot video footage at 4K/30p, while the Canon is limited to 1080/60p.
Feature comparison: Sony RX10 IV vs Canon 200D
Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a variety of features. For example, the RX10 IV has an electronic viewfinder (2359k dots), while the 200D has an optical one. Both systems have their advantages, with the electronic viewfinder making it possible to project supplementary shooting information into the framing view, whereas the optical viewfinder offers lag-free viewing and a very clear framing image. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Sony RX10 IV and Canon 200D in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar cameras.
|Sony RX10 IV»||2359||Y||3.0||1440||tilting||Y||2000||24.0||Y||Y||Sony RX10 IV|
|Canon 200D«||optical||n||3.0||1040||swivel||Y||4000||5.0||Y||n||Canon 200D|
|Canon 2000D« »||optical||n||3.0||920||fixed||n||4000||3.0||Y||n||Canon 2000D|
|Canon 77D« »||optical||Y||3.0||1040||swivel||Y||4000||6.0||Y||n||Canon 77D|
|Canon G1 X Mark III« »||2360||n||3.0||1040||swivel||Y||2000||9.0||Y||Y||Canon G1 X Mark III|
|Canon M100« »||-||n||3.0||1040||tilting||Y||4000||6.1||Y||n||Canon M100|
|Canon M5« »||2360||n||3.2||1620||tilting||Y||4000||9.0||Y||n||Canon M5|
|Canon 100D« »||optical||n||3.0||1040||fixed||Y||4000||4.9||Y||n||Canon 100D|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2« »||2360||n||3.0||1620||fixed||n||8000||8.0||n||n||Fujifilm X-Pro2|
|Panasonic FZ2500« »||2360||n||3.0||1040||swivel||Y||4000||12.0||Y||Y||Panasonic FZ2500|
|Sony RX100 VI« »||2359||n||3.0||1229||tilting||Y||2000||24.0||Y||Y||Sony RX100 VI|
|Sony A6300« »||2359||n||3.0||922||tilting||n||4000||11.0||Y||n||Sony A6300|
|Sony A6500« »||2359||n||3.0||922||tilting||Y||4000||11.0||Y||Y||Sony A6500|
|Sony RX10 III« »||2359||Y||3.0||1229||tilting||n||2000||14.0||Y||Y||Sony RX10 III|
|Sony RX100 V« »||2359||n||3.0||1229||tilting||n||2000||24.0||Y||Y||Sony RX100 V|
|Sony RX10 II« »||2359||Y||3.0||1229||tilting||n||3200||14.0||Y||Y||Sony RX10 II|
|Sony RX10« »||1440||Y||3.0||1229||tilting||n||3200||10.0||Y||Y||Sony RX10|
One feature that is present on the RX10 IV, but is missing on the 200D is a top-level LCD. While being, of course, smaller than the rear screen, the control panel conveys some of the essential shooting information and can be convenient for quick and easy settings verification.The 200D has an articulated screen that can be turned to be front-facing. This characteristic will be appreciated by vloggers and photographers who are interested in taking selfies. In contrast, the RX10 IV does not have a selfie-screen.
The reported shutter speed and shutter burst refer to the use of the mechanical shutter. In addition, the RX10 IV features an electronic shutter, which makes completely silent shooting possible. However, this mode is less suitable for photographing moving objects (risk of rolling shutter) or shooting under artificial light sources (risk of flickering).
The RX10 IV writes its imaging data to SDXC or Memory Stick PRO Duo cards, while the 200D uses SDXC cards.
Connectivity comparison: Sony RX10 IV vs Canon 200D
For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 IV and Canon EOS 200D and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.
|Sony RX10 IV»||Y||stereo||mono||Y||Y||micro||2.0||Y||Y||-||Sony RX10 IV|
|Canon 200D«||Y||stereo||mono||Y||-||mini||2.0||Y||Y||Y||Canon 200D|
|Canon 2000D« »||Y||mono||mono||-||-||mini||2.0||Y||Y||-||Canon 2000D|
|Canon 77D« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||-||mini||2.0||Y||Y||Y||Canon 77D|
|Canon G1 X Mark III« »||Y||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||Y||Y||Canon G1 X Mark III|
|Canon M100« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||mini||2.0||Y||Y||Y||Canon M100|
|Canon M5« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||-||mini||2.0||Y||Y||Y||Canon M5|
|Canon 100D« »||Y||mono||mono||Y||-||mini||2.0||-||-||-||Canon 100D|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-||Fujifilm X-Pro2|
|Panasonic FZ2500« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||Y||micro||2.0||Y||-||-||Panasonic FZ2500|
|Sony RX100 VI« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||Y||Y||Sony RX100 VI|
|Sony A6300« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||-||micro||2.0||Y||Y||-||Sony A6300|
|Sony A6500« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||-||micro||2.0||Y||Y||-||Sony A6500|
|Sony RX10 III« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||Y||micro||2.0||Y||Y||-||Sony RX10 III|
|Sony RX100 V« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||Y||-||Sony RX100 V|
|Sony RX10 II« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||Y||micro||2.0||Y||Y||-||Sony RX10 II|
|Sony RX10« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||Y||micro||2.0||Y||Y||-||Sony RX10|
Both the RX10 IV and the 200D are recent models that feature in their makers' current product line-up. The 200D replaced the earlier Canon 100D, while the RX10 IV followed on from the Sony RX10 III.
Review summary: Sony RX10 IV vs Canon 200D
So what conclusions can be drawn? Which of the two cameras – the Sony RX10 IV or the Canon 200D – has the upper hand? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.
Advantages of the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 IV:
- Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 1080/60p).
- Better sound control: Has a headphone port that enables audio monitoring while recording.
- More framing info: Has an electronic viewfinder that displays shooting data.
- Easier setting verification: Features an LCD display on top to control shooting parameters.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1440k vs 1040k dots).
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (24 vs 5 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Less disturbing: Has an electronic shutter option for completely silent shooting.
- Ready to shoot: Comes with a built-in lens, while the 200D requires a separate lens.
- Better sealing: Is weather sealed to enable shooting in dusty or wet environments.
- Sharper images: Has hand-shake reducing image stabilization built-in.
Reasons to prefer the Canon EOS 200D:
- More detail: Has more megapixels (24 vs 20MP), which boosts linear resolution by 10%.
- Better image quality: Features bigger pixels on a larger sensor for higher quality imaging.
- Richer colors: Larger pixels generate images with better, more accurate colors.
- More dynamic range: Capable of capturing a wider spectrum of light and dark details.
- Better low-light sensitivity: Can be used in poorly lit environments and still produce good images.
- Brighter framing: Features an optical viewfinder for clear, lag-free composition.
- More flexible LCD: Has swivel screen for odd-angle shots in portrait or landscape orientation.
- More selfie-friendly: Has an articulated screen that can be turned to be front-facing.
- Faster shutter: Has higher mechanical shutter speed (4000/sec vs 2000/sec) to freeze action.
- More flexible: Makes it possible to change lenses and thus to use specialty optics.
- Longer lasting: Gets more shots (650 versus 400) out of a single battery charge.
- Easier wireless transfer: Supports Bluetooth for image sharing without cables.
If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the 200D emerges as the winner of the match-up (12 : 10 points). However, the relevance of individual strengths will vary across photographers, so that you might want to apply your own weighing scheme to the summary points when reflecting and deciding on a new camera.
In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras is instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the RX10 IV or the 200D handle or perform in practice. At times, user reviews, such as those published at amazon, address these issues in a useful manner, but such feedback is on many occasions incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable.
Expert reviews: Sony RX10 IV vs Canon 200D
This is where reviews by experts come in. The table below summarizes the assessments of some of the best known camera review sites (cameralabs, dpreview, ephotozine, imaging-resource, photographyblog). You can find the full text of the reviews by clicking on the site logo in the table header.
|Sony RX10 IV»||Rec||84/100||4.5/5||-||5/5||Sep 2017||1,699||Sony RX10 IV|
|Canon 200D«||HiRec||78/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Jun 2017||549||Canon 200D|
|Canon 2000D« »||rev||-||3.5/5||-||3.5/5||Feb 2018||449||Canon 2000D|
|Canon 77D« »||-||82/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4/5||Feb 2017||899||Canon 77D|
|Canon G1 X Mark III« »||Rec||79/100||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||Oct 2017||1,299||Canon G1 X Mark III|
|Canon M100« »||Rec||-||4/5||-||3.5/5||Aug 2017||499||Canon M100|
|Canon M5« »||Rec||82/100||4/5||4.5/5||4/5||Sep 2016||979||Canon M5|
|Canon 100D« »||Rec||78/100||4/5||4/5||4/5||Mar 2013||549||-||Canon 100D|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2« »||Rec||83/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Jan 2016||1,699||Fujifilm X-Pro2|
|Panasonic FZ2500« »||Rec||82/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||5/5||Sep 2016||1,199||Panasonic FZ2500|
|Sony RX100 VI« »||HiRec||83/100||4/5||-||4.5/5||Jun 2018||1,199||Sony RX100 VI|
|Sony A6300« »||Rec||85/100||5/5||5/5||5/5||Feb 2016||999||-||Sony A6300|
|Sony A6500« »||HiRec||85/100||4.5/5||5/5||4.5/5||Oct 2016||1,399||Sony A6500|
|Sony RX10 III« »||Rec||84/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Mar 2016||1,499||Sony RX10 III|
|Sony RX100 V« »||HiRec||83/100||4/5||5/5||4.5/5||Oct 2016||999||Sony RX100 V|
|Sony RX10 II« »||HiRec||82/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4/5||Jun 2015||1,299||-||Sony RX10 II|
|Sony RX10« »||Rec||80/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Oct 2013||1,299||-||Sony RX10|
The review scores listed above should be treated with care, though. The ratings are only valid when referring to cameras in the same category and of the same age. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and comparisons of ratings among very different cameras or across long time periods have little meaning. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.
Other camera comparisons
Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? In case you would like to check on the differences and similarities of other camera models, just use the search menu below. An an alternative, you can also directly jump to any one of the listed comparisons that were previously generated by the CAM-parator tool.
- Canon 1000D vs Nikon D750
- Canon 1Ds Mark II vs Leica Q Typ 116
- Canon D30 vs Panasonic FZ2500
- Canon G7 X Mark II vs Leica TL
- Canon SX60 vs Nikon P1000
- Leica M Typ 262 vs Fujifilm X-Pro2
- Leica X Vario vs Fujifilm X-T2
- Nikon D7500 vs Canon 2000D
- Panasonic G1 vs Canon 6D Mark II
- Panasonic GH5s vs Canon 1D X
- Sony A7R III vs Canon 800D
- Sony A7R vs Nikon D750
Specifications: Sony RX10 IV vs Canon 200D
|Camera Model||Sony RX10 IV||Canon 200D|
|Camera Type||Fixed lens compact camera||Digital single lens reflex|
|Camera Lens||24-600mm f/2.4-4.0||Canon EF mount lenses|
|Launch Date||September 2017||June 2017|
|Launch Price||USD 1699||USD 549|
|Sensor Format||1" Sensor||APS-C Sensor|
|Sensor Size||13.2 x 8.8 mm||22.3 x 8.8 mm|
|Sensor Area||116.16 mm2||332.27 mm2|
|Sensor Diagonal||15.9 mm||26.8 mm|
|Sensor Resolution||20 Megapixels||24 Megapixels|
|Image Resolution||5472 x 3648 pixels||6000 x 4000 pixels|
|Pixel Pitch||2.41 μm||3.72 μm|
|Pixel Density||17.18 MP/cm2||7.22 MP/cm2|
|Movie Capability||4K/30p Video||1080/60p Video|
|ISO Setting||100-12800 ISO||100-25600 ISO|
|ISO Boost||64-25600 ISO||100-51200 ISO|
|Image Processor||BIONZ X||DIGIC 7|
|Viewfinder Type||Electronic viewfinder||Optical viewfinder|
|Viewfinder Resolution||2359k dots||n/a|
|Top-Level Screen||Control Panel||no Top Display|
|Rear LCD Size||3.0 inch||3.0 inch|
|LCD Resolution||1440k dots||1040k dots|
|LCD Attachment||Tilting screen||Swivel screen|
|Maximum Shutter Speed||1/2000s||1/4000s|
|Continuous Shooting||24 shutter flaps/s||5 shutter flaps/s|
|Silent Shooting||Electronic Shutter||no E-Shutter|
|Fill Flash||Build-in Flash||Build-in Flash|
|Storage Medium||MS or SDXC cards||SDXC cards|
|USB Connector||USB 2.0||USB 2.0|
|HDMI Port||micro HDMI||mini HDMI|
|Microphone Port||External MIC port||External MIC port|
|Headphone Socket||Headphone port||Headphone port|
|Wifi Support||Wifi built-in||Wifi built-in|
|Near-Field Communication||NFC built-in||NFC built-in|
|Bluetooth Support||no Bluetooth||Bluetooth built-in|
|Environmental Sealing||Weathersealed body||Not weather sealed|
|Battery Type||NP-FW50 power pack||LP-E17 power pack|
|Battery Life (CIPA)||400 shots per charge||650 shots per charge|
133 x 94 x 145 mm
(5.2 x 3.7 x 5.7 in)
122 x 93 x 70 mm
(4.8 x 3.7 x 2.8 in)
|Camera Weight||1095 g (38.6 oz)||453 g (16.0 oz)|
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.