Sony RX1 thread

I've just read that same 'Part 1' review and am working out how I could get some of my organs on ebay to get my own RX1! I like Steve Huff's honest reviews as they generally get straight to the point.

Cheers
Steve
 
Personally I can't live with or get any enjoyment from using a serious camera with no VF.

I loved my GF1 until I realised that and then it had to go and although I own an LX5 I really don't like using it and hardly ever do.
 
woof woof said:
Personally I can't live with or get any enjoyment from using a serious camera with no VF.

I loved my GF1 until I realised that and then it had to go and although I own an LX5 I really don't like using it and hardly ever do.
Click to expand...

There's an OVF and EVF for the RX1. In the image showing all the accessories - the two objects on the cameras left.
 
Steve Huff and Puff - whatever camera he reviews is always "amazing" - he says he doesn't review cameras he doesn't like and he moderates comments on his posts and only publishes the positive ones. :)
 
Micehorns said:
There's an OVF and EVF for the RX1. In the image showing all the accessories - the two objects on the cameras left.
Click to expand...

OK. I can't live with a camera that doesn't have an integral VF. Fitting and removing it would have me drop kicking it over a hedge and leaving it on all the time wouldn't be an option as sooner or later it'd break.
 
Last edited:
I had a play with one at Calumet a couple of weeks ago and if I had the money, I'd buy one in a heartbeat. Lovely, quality feel. Good to hold and use. Responsive. Detail and sharpness were impressive on the screen but there's only so much you can tell from that. High ISO seemed very clean. It wasn't on final firmware so they wouldn't let me pop a card in unfortunately.

Without the OVF it was great; with the OVF it was great. I've always lusted after an M9 but not any more.
 
Last edited:
applemint said:
Steve Huff and Puff - whatever camera he reviews is always "amazing" - he says he doesn't review cameras he doesn't like and he moderates comments on his posts and only publishes the positive ones. :)
Click to expand...

Got to say I agree that review had me feeling sick before I'd read half of it. Could it contain anymore hyperbole and fluff if it tried. The camera maybe great, indeed it looks brilliant but his review reads more like Sony marketing bung. I'd rather read ken and that's saying something!
 
applemint said:
Steve Huff and Puff - whatever camera he reviews is always "amazing" - he says he doesn't review cameras he doesn't like and he moderates comments on his posts and only publishes the positive ones. :)
Click to expand...

I REALLY don't like the way he RANDOMLY capitalises words since it makes me feel like I'm reading an OVERBEARING salesman's pitch.

As for the RX1, it looks pretty awesome. The lack of an OVF doesn't bother me at all actually, I shot the whole of yesterday mostly using the external OVF on my GRDIII, the LCD comes in handy for those more awkward shots too. The only downside is that they can be quite easy to lose, which is why I have mine duct taped to the top plate!
 
Really like the concept of the RX1, if it had been an interchangeable version I would have been all over it like a cheap suit. But as a fixed lens camera I find it hard to justify the cost.
 
I like Steve Huff. He takes nice pictures.

But isn't this basically an amped up Fuji X100 with a trick viewfinder?

I'll wait for Sony's amped up X-Pro 1 ;)
 
Anyone think Sony will bring out a similar version, with less MP?

24 would slow my equipment down and eat up my storage, something terrible...
 
JonathanRyan said:
I like Steve Huff. He takes nice pictures.
Click to expand...

He does that. But his reviews are a little nauseating. For the reasons others have mentioned above. A long winded review isn't always a good thing, to me he comes across like a hyper teen blogger.

Lovely camera though.
 
drb5 said:
Anyone think Sony will bring out a similar version, with less MP?

24 would slow my equipment down and eat up my storage, something terrible...
Click to expand...

I wouldnt hold my breath waiting for it.

There is an obvious gap in the naming/numbering convention for an Rx10, though. My guess is it'll be an APS-C, with a fixed prime or perhaps a zoom with a modest range.

I do like the idea of the Rx1,though. If they could bring the price down a touch I can see a market for a whole series of them (ie with different length primes from 24mm to 85mm or more).
 
Cagey75 said:
He does that. But his reviews are a little nauseating.
Click to expand...

That's kind of what I meant. I really like his pictures :D.

drb5 said:
Anyone think Sony will bring out a similar version, with less MP?
Click to expand...

Nope. Sony seem to have a bunch of sensors kicking around with 20MP upwards. Haven't read into this but it wouldn't surprise me if this sensor is a close relative of the one in the D600.
 
JonathanRyan said:
Nope. Sony seem to have a bunch of sensors kicking around with 20MP upwards. Haven't read into this but it wouldn't surprise me if this sensor is a close relative of the one in the D600.
Click to expand...

Johnd2000 said:
I wouldnt hold my breath waiting for it.

There is an obvious gap in the naming/numbering convention for an Rx10, though. My guess is it'll be an APS-C, with a fixed prime or perhaps a zoom with a modest range.

I do like the idea of the Rx1,though. If they could bring the price down a touch I can see a market for a whole series of them (ie with different length primes from 24mm to 85mm or more).
Click to expand...

Shame as it's near perfect in my eyes.

I suppose if it's as good at JPEG's as it appears, then storage size and transfer time shouldn't be bad(like i experienced with the 5D2), but then a camera like the RX1 shouldn't really be wasted in JPEG only...
 
Johnd2000 said:
I do like the idea of the Rx1,though. If they could bring the price down a touch I can see a market for a whole series of them (ie with different length primes from 24mm to 85mm or more).
Click to expand...

The price does seem like a bit of a missed opportunity to me, granted most new releases seem to launch at a prenium these days but to me it looks like Sony maybe limating the market in what maybe a brief window before rivals release FF mirrorless cameras.

I'd say that a short f/4 zoom, say something like 24-40mm or 28-50mm mioght be worth considering.
 
Steve Huff does resort to hyperbole a bit too often, but he's worth a read. I'd wait 6 months to see how much the price came down on the RX1, the early adopters will get gouged. If they make an RX2 where the lenses can be changed for other high quality Zeiss lenses I'd give it a serious look.
 
I had an M9 with a Zeiss 2/50 which was amazing, but I couldn't afford any more lenses for it so I was essentially using it as a fixed lens camera. Just makes you think a bit more - that's all.

The RX1 looks like a good alternative to the mega-money Leica if you can live with one (very nice) lens.
 
Willo said:
Really like the concept of the RX1, if it had been an interchangeable version I would have been all over it like a cheap suit. But as a fixed lens camera I find it hard to justify the cost.
Click to expand...

Totally agree with you, all that money for a 35mm fixed lens.
 
Far to expensive for now,if you ad the EVF a case and some battery, you will spend more then 3000 pound.
you can get a lot of camera for that money.Also steve review is not all good and low light seem to be a problem a it and miss.
It will be cheaper in the usa for sure.
 
Very interested in this, downside being the price. The fixed 35mm isn't a problem as my walkaround lens is a 24 or 35mm anyway, the size is a massive plus, and I'm utterly indifferent to OVF/EVF/rear screen, provided the implementation lets me frame my shot and focuses quickly in both AF and MF. It's the cheapest way to get a modern FF sensor + fast 35mm Zeiss lens, and it does so in a package smaller than the body alone for all the other alternatives. If it had a 24 1.4 on it my D800 would be looking mighty vulnerable at the moment.
 
ausemmao said:
Very interested in this, downside being the price. The fixed 35mm isn't a problem as my walkaround lens is a 24 or 35mm anyway, the size is a massive plus,...
Click to expand...

It does look to be a very interesting camera and many of us could live with just that lens.

Thinking about it I'm not too sure that the price is really that extreme. It looks to be a nice FF camera with a nice lens and without looking at DSLR price lists too much I'm pretty sure that a DSLR + similarly nice lens would cost pretty much the same?

PS. Actually, I've just looked at the cost of a 5DII+35mm L lens and although a DSLR may have advantages so may a small camera.... so all in all I actually think the cost of the Sony isn't that extreme at all. Not when you remember that apart from Leica no one else makes a small form FF camera and lens system.
 
Last edited:
Well I've stuck myself on the list at Park Cameras and I'll take a look at it when it finally starts arriving on these shores. It does look delightful and I'll be interested to see how it performs versus my OM-D and 20 1.7, and my 1DIV and 24 1.4 (nice combo!!).
 
It looks a lovely bit of kit, but it takes someone with deep pockets to commit to this one I feel. There's bound to be others by competitors around the corner, not to mention interchangeable lens version at some point.
 
Again, I'm not too sure about this camera being all that expensive...

It's full frame and you get what is by all the write ups I've read a very nice lens with it. If you price up a Canon FF DSLR and a 35mm L I think the cost is actually more? But maybe the Sony edges into the lead once you add a VF? Anyway, I think that the price is actually ok if you're happy with just the one fixed lens and its focal length.

My ideal ever since going digital was to have a direct replacement for my 35mm SLR which I still don't have as my 5D+lens probably weighs four times as much and doesn't have a flash, and a digital quality compact camera to replace the quality compact 35mm / rangefinders I had years ago - which I'm still waiting for. I doubt very much that I'll buy this Sony as it doesn't have a built in VF and I really don't want an add on one but it is tempting and the price is ok-ish IMVHO considering it's really the first of its type and therefore has the FF "compact" market to itself at the moment, AFAIK.

In the years to come we may have a FF Nex and a FF Fuji but at the moment this Sony seems to be the only offering if you discount the manual focus only rangfinder Leica's which I personally would as I want the ability to AF and RF's bring focusing issues. Been down the RF route and I'd rather not go back, lovely things though they are they're my past and not my future.
 
If you really need what the RX1 offers it might be considered "good value" but a D600 and Sigma 35mm 1.4 would only set you back about £2200, add in the EVF and the hood and your talking several hundred pounds more for the RX1 with a worse AF system, fewer controls, worse battery life and a lens thats a full stop slower.

You could buy a proper macro lens for the D600 aswell and still have kept to a lower budget.
 
Last edited:
but those won't fit in your pocket like an RX1 ...
I'm sure that Sony knew that it wouldn't be for every one when they were designing it & were happy with that. It's a niche/halo product.
 
woof woof said:
It does look to be a very interesting camera and many of us could live with just that lens.

Thinking about it I'm not too sure that the price is really that extreme. It looks to be a nice FF camera with a nice lens and without looking at DSLR price lists too much I'm pretty sure that a DSLR + similarly nice lens would cost pretty much the same?

PS. Actually, I've just looked at the cost of a 5DII+35mm L lens and although a DSLR may have advantages so may a small camera.... so all in all I actually think the cost of the Sony isn't that extreme at all. Not when you remember that apart from Leica no one else makes a small form FF camera and lens system.
Click to expand...

Indeed - as I said, the nearest competitors (D600/D800/A99/5D3/6D with 35mm zeiss lenses) are all around the same price or more expensive, and far bulkier. When I said downside was price I should have been clearer; I meant I don't have the cash to buy one without selling the D800 and 24. So it is obviously too expensive. :LOL:

As a younger shooter I don't care about the lack of an "press camera to face EVF". The LCD screen is bigger, I can hold the camera six inches from my face and still maintain proper eye contact with my subject while shooting.
 
Last edited:
heidfirst said:
but those won't fit in your pocket like an RX1 ...
I'm sure that Sony knew that it wouldn't be for every one when they were designing it & were happy with that. It's a niche/halo product.
Click to expand...

That was really my point, your paying for the size not the specs unless the Ziess lens turns out to be exceptionally good.

To me it seems like it has the potential to be something more than a niche product, a fixed 35mm did well for the X100 afterall.
 
Most of my photographic life has been spent with either fixed lens cameras or with just one lens. Even when I got my first SLR I only ever had one lens and I used it for decades.

I have been thinking about slimming down my little DSLR lens collection and I could deffo live with a DSLR set up and a small form quality camera with just one good quality fast lens, fixed or not.
 
Agree. I used a prime lens as only lens for a while but recently put on a cheap 18-55 and have to admit to preferring it! So a 18-55 ish 2.8 would do for me and that is what I will get and still just have one lens all the time.

I do however like to use a viewfinder, guess that must be because I am old or something :)
 
Moreorless said:
That was really my point, your paying for the size not the specs unless the Ziess lens turns out to be exceptionally good.
Click to expand...
well, the initial reviews do look very good but I tend to think more that you are paying for the low volumes as apparently the lens is unique rather than a design ported over.

According to Thom Hogan an FF sensor is at least 10x the cost of an APS-C one.
 
Picked it up today. Very nice quality machine. Had a quick play and confirmed that the Max flash sync speed is 1/2000th using Pocket Wizards which will be useful.

More later
 
While researching for which new compact to buy I came across the RX1. It looked interesting but I nearly fell off my seat when I saw the price. I'm getting acquainted with my new RX100, would be interested in hearing how you find its big brother Tobers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top