I still feel that if a camera is poor at JPEG’s that camera is just not a good camera. Most cameras have RAW that you can do all the fixing up later. If you can get JPEG’s at the start it IMO speaks to said camera. The one full length shot of the man is just not sharp. The greens of the background are just bad.
I saw the same thing with the Panasonic FZ-1000. My unscientific opinion is a 1″ sensor on a superzoom has its limits. Said FZ-1000 was returned.
Based on the Sony RX 10, I ordered the mark ii the images look better on screen so I hope that is true 1st hand. If so then I stick to my assumption that bridge cameras with a 1″ sensor have limitation where the zoom is too much
This criticism is one for Canon, at $1,000 even the competition has a EVF, it is really needed. What if you need flash, a microphone but you need a finder as well. Their are times when that EVF or any VF for that matter comes in handy.
I think no viewfinder this camera should be at least $150 less or so.
Started out doing photography at the age of 6 using an uncle's old 1940 kodak brownie box camera. At 15 years of age, I decided to buy my very own 1975 Praktica SLR camera. I now shoot with a Nikon D850. I do unpaid TFP and commercial paid work.