fotomeow
name under my name
Many of us are drooling for a camera like this, even a fixed lens, fast 35mm FF.
I would pay $3k for it, but its got to have a built in OVF.
Step in the right direction, but wish they would have skipped this step
and gone straight for the OVF.
I would pay $3k for it, but its got to have a built in OVF.
Step in the right direction, but wish they would have skipped this step
and gone straight for the OVF.
v_roma
Well-known
Not that I can afford it but I agree with this though I'm also aware that many who don't, so maybe Sony do know what they're doing. I'm guessing the decision to leave out the VF was to keep costs under control and capitalize on their existing external EVF technology. It also makes the camera smaller, of course.
back alley
IMAGES
as rf users, many here want an internal finder...but with so many growing up with digital and maybe having never used a rf...i wonder if the finder is missed by the general 'shooting' public?
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I was initially very interested in the RX1. It's sort of my one camera - one lens dream. Problem is that it's almost the same as the Leica X2 ... same field of view, same one camera-one lens dream ... and I already have the X2. I like the X2 control layout more than the Sony. My primary reservation though: I wondered just how much better the RX1's image qualities might be, I'm pretty happy with what I'm getting out of the X2.
However, now that I see the new Leica M, I know for a fact that I'll not be buying the RX1. I'll stick with the X2 as my compact camera, and put the money I'd have put into the RX1 into the M. That's about half the cost of the body ... and I've already got all the lenses I need for it.
Such it is. ;-)
However, now that I see the new Leica M, I know for a fact that I'll not be buying the RX1. I'll stick with the X2 as my compact camera, and put the money I'd have put into the RX1 into the M. That's about half the cost of the body ... and I've already got all the lenses I need for it.
Such it is. ;-)
back alley
IMAGES
i'm still interested in this...but torn between it and the xp-1...
GaryLH
Mentor
Really gets down to a couple of ideas in terms of rx1
- are u a one lens person
- do u plan to use this camera w/ other cameras like your rd1 or rx100
At one time u had the x100, so in some ways u have already gone thru some of this thinking process.. I am not a one lens person, I original bought the x100 knowing it would be a supplementary camera not a main...
So my main point is -- are u planning to make this your main camera? If not then is it not mainly a what should I buy first question?
Gary
djonesii
Well-known
with a tri-elmar
with a tri-elmar
What I really want .....
A tri-elmar .... 24/35/50 2.8 ( OK, 2.0 would be nice but ...)
built in EVF Put it on a NEX 6 body
24 mpix FF
Focus peaking MF would be OK, but make it AF
For this, I'd gladly pay 5K
Dave
with a tri-elmar
What I really want .....
A tri-elmar .... 24/35/50 2.8 ( OK, 2.0 would be nice but ...)
built in EVF Put it on a NEX 6 body
24 mpix FF
Focus peaking MF would be OK, but make it AF
For this, I'd gladly pay 5K
Dave
Adanac
Well-known
But you have many cameras Godfrey (we've conversed in other fora), so it can only be a dream if you are willing to let go...
back alley
IMAGES
i plan on keeping the rx100...
not sure about the rd1...maybe keeping one body to use my lenses with...
will keep the m4-p for that old time experience...
Adanac
Well-known
Sorry for the novel but some thoughts in response...
Has Sony in recent years released *any* advanced cameras with an OVF? It seems not. EVF is their stated direction and nothing suggests they plan to change this.
I'm ok with this, for a live view compact camera, as long as their is an optional EVF. And for a good autofocus camera an external OVF for framing might really be all I need.
Probably not missed by many. I wonder what percentage of the photo-making public has never put their eye to an on-camera finder? Whatever the number, it gets bigger every year.
But some of us are old curmudgeons -- speaking for myself only, but feel free to add yourselves to the list. And of those, some have made a transition to using cameras in new ways. Ask me three years ago if I'd ever buy a camera without a built-in OVF and I'd have screamed NO!
Yet by 2012, I've owned two such cameras and one of them I use every day.
And, challenged by another photographer to try it, I even find using the rear LCD "finder" can have advantages, more or less like viewing a window on the world. In a way similar to an OVF but different and with its own advantages thanks to the WYSIWYG finder. Like others I've found using a camera in that way can at times be perceived as less threatening and more acceptable. In many situations the act of raising a finder to the eye is immediately a caution to those around "beware, photographer present" but holding out the camera often raises no alarms.
When I need to see beyond the frame to include action I use the rear view finder. This isn't the same as an OVF but it does work and for my needs, works really well.
In some situations I do find an external EVF invaluable. I use one about 50% of the time on the GXR, but mostly because I'm focusing manual RF lenses on that body and don't walk around with my eye glasses in my pockets.
With this camera... which finder to get (if any) is a hard decision. I'll assume the autofocus works well and as such, an OVF could work well. Or the EVF. Or none at all. Or it might be nice to have an OVF and an EVF.
But I think I'd try do to without. Or catch-and-release an EVF if I find I don't really need it.
The camera is said to have in-body cropping (probably called smart zoom or something like that). An APS-C crop leaves you with a ~ 50mm effective field of view with approximately 10.5 megapixel in sensor area in the crop. Not quite as good as today's APS-C based cameras but given the sensor is today's state of the art I'm willing to bet this 50mm "lens" view will be very serviceable.
With a built-in 4/3 crop, you'll have fewer pixels yet but an effective 70mm lens. May yet be serviceable.
My hope is they bring out high quality converters and between those and crop (in camera or in post) a wide gamut of shooting situations can be covered by what is, potentially, the start of an ultra compact full frame "system". But even as it stands today, again potentially, a one-off technology showcase, the RX1 for some photographers will be all they could want or need.
In the meantime I've restricted my personal photography to 25mm on the GXR (an APS-C camera ~ roughly 35mm effective) to see how I get on. I did this last year for a while and one of my biggest issues through that period was the lack of depth of field control I'm used to from a 35mm lens on 35mm film. I tried to vary how I'd frame things and alter distance to subject but in the end missed that control. I use a 35mm on APS-C more than the 25mm just to gain back some DOF control even though I lose some flexibility in composition with the narrower field of view.
In short I miss "full frame" and want back in... but my darkroom is packed, forever. I need to find a good home for it in fact.
Has Sony in recent years released *any* advanced cameras with an OVF? It seems not. EVF is their stated direction and nothing suggests they plan to change this.
I'm ok with this, for a live view compact camera, as long as their is an optional EVF. And for a good autofocus camera an external OVF for framing might really be all I need.
Probably not missed by many. I wonder what percentage of the photo-making public has never put their eye to an on-camera finder? Whatever the number, it gets bigger every year.
But some of us are old curmudgeons -- speaking for myself only, but feel free to add yourselves to the list. And of those, some have made a transition to using cameras in new ways. Ask me three years ago if I'd ever buy a camera without a built-in OVF and I'd have screamed NO!
Yet by 2012, I've owned two such cameras and one of them I use every day.
And, challenged by another photographer to try it, I even find using the rear LCD "finder" can have advantages, more or less like viewing a window on the world. In a way similar to an OVF but different and with its own advantages thanks to the WYSIWYG finder. Like others I've found using a camera in that way can at times be perceived as less threatening and more acceptable. In many situations the act of raising a finder to the eye is immediately a caution to those around "beware, photographer present" but holding out the camera often raises no alarms.
When I need to see beyond the frame to include action I use the rear view finder. This isn't the same as an OVF but it does work and for my needs, works really well.
In some situations I do find an external EVF invaluable. I use one about 50% of the time on the GXR, but mostly because I'm focusing manual RF lenses on that body and don't walk around with my eye glasses in my pockets.
With this camera... which finder to get (if any) is a hard decision. I'll assume the autofocus works well and as such, an OVF could work well. Or the EVF. Or none at all. Or it might be nice to have an OVF and an EVF.
But I think I'd try do to without. Or catch-and-release an EVF if I find I don't really need it.
The camera is said to have in-body cropping (probably called smart zoom or something like that). An APS-C crop leaves you with a ~ 50mm effective field of view with approximately 10.5 megapixel in sensor area in the crop. Not quite as good as today's APS-C based cameras but given the sensor is today's state of the art I'm willing to bet this 50mm "lens" view will be very serviceable.
With a built-in 4/3 crop, you'll have fewer pixels yet but an effective 70mm lens. May yet be serviceable.
My hope is they bring out high quality converters and between those and crop (in camera or in post) a wide gamut of shooting situations can be covered by what is, potentially, the start of an ultra compact full frame "system". But even as it stands today, again potentially, a one-off technology showcase, the RX1 for some photographers will be all they could want or need.
In the meantime I've restricted my personal photography to 25mm on the GXR (an APS-C camera ~ roughly 35mm effective) to see how I get on. I did this last year for a while and one of my biggest issues through that period was the lack of depth of field control I'm used to from a 35mm lens on 35mm film. I tried to vary how I'd frame things and alter distance to subject but in the end missed that control. I use a 35mm on APS-C more than the 25mm just to gain back some DOF control even though I lose some flexibility in composition with the narrower field of view.
In short I miss "full frame" and want back in... but my darkroom is packed, forever. I need to find a good home for it in fact.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
But you have many cameras Godfrey (we've conversed in other fora), so it can only be a dream if you are willing to let go...
Yes, too many. But that's not the point of the "one camera - one lens dream" to me. To me, the point of that dream is when I want to work as simply as possible, or if I could have nothing else. I don't think it's likely that I couldn't have anything else, but I often want to work as simply as possible.
Michael Markey
Mentor
I like my digital camera to be a point and shoot so digital Ms hold little interest for me.
The new Sony is therefore very tempting .
I currently use the first version GRD.
The new Sony is therefore very tempting .
I currently use the first version GRD.
Matus
Well-known
I have to admit that I like the idea of RX1, but I have just checked the price in Germany (pre-order as of now) and it is €3100 (that is about $4000 !!). I am sorry, but that really is way too much. While I would not expect price of Fuji X100, this is 3 times as much ... If this camera sells well (that would mean that Sony priced it properly) than the market must be DESPERATE to get this camera.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
You know, the more I look at this stuff and the more I think about where I'm getting joy from my photography these days, I just might eschew the whole lot of new stuff and buy a Mamiya 6 kit. ;-)
back alley
IMAGES
i had a mamiya 6 kit once and loved it.
those lenses are truly superb.
those lenses are truly superb.
Matus
Well-known
That is a fair question. No - I would not buy it for 1/2 now, but I do not judge 'expensiveness' of a product based on my ability or willingness to pay for it.
I would consider 1/2 the quoted price (or at least under €2000) in Germany reasonable. Just my personal impression. I have of course no idea how much it cost Sony do develop the product - I am not judging them here.
Adanac
Well-known
That is too much. $2,800 USD feels a little too dear to me too, but $4,000 is over the top by at least $900 - $1,000 even if it does include all taxes in.
back alley
IMAGES
$2999. cdn local price...need to sell gear to buy this...is it worth it?
i will wait for some real life users to post but i hope the camera lives up to the hype.
i will wait for some real life users to post but i hope the camera lives up to the hype.
ssmc
Well-known
If it was under 2 grand I'd be all over it fixed lens or no - as it is I would probably prefer 35mm to my usual fave 50mm for a camera like this. But with my credit card still in the ICU after selling my D700 and a couple of lenses at a huge loss (thanks a lot, D800...) and buying a 5DIII, it's just out of the question.
At this price it strikes me as the sort of camera you would buy if you were going on some kind of extreme, once-in-a-lifetime adventure, could only take one camera and were severely weight and space limited (like a ride on a Soyuz to the ISS to use an OTT example). Given that it may well have exceptional image quality thanks to the sensor/lens integration I find the constant references to this as a "dentist's camera" shortsighted in the extreme.
After all it's only slightly more expensive than a used M8 body in "LN-" condition at KEH and you can be sure the 24MP 135-format sensor will annihilate the M8's CCD in terms of detail, DR and high-ISO noise (there would be something terribly wrong if it doesn't). I know the M8 can take the best glass in the world but when you look at it that way the price ain't so bad...
At this price it strikes me as the sort of camera you would buy if you were going on some kind of extreme, once-in-a-lifetime adventure, could only take one camera and were severely weight and space limited (like a ride on a Soyuz to the ISS to use an OTT example). Given that it may well have exceptional image quality thanks to the sensor/lens integration I find the constant references to this as a "dentist's camera" shortsighted in the extreme.
After all it's only slightly more expensive than a used M8 body in "LN-" condition at KEH and you can be sure the 24MP 135-format sensor will annihilate the M8's CCD in terms of detail, DR and high-ISO noise (there would be something terribly wrong if it doesn't). I know the M8 can take the best glass in the world but when you look at it that way the price ain't so bad...
