Sony RX1 announced.

[Laudrup]

I'd argue that Fuji had sucess with the X100 because they held back from exploiting there first to market status and priced it at a level that made it affordable to the wider market. They could probabley have sold it for £1500 at launch and it would have done decent business but I'm guessing overall profits and interest generated would have been less.

Sony's tactics with the RX1 seem more similar to Leica's with the X1 to me, looking to exploit a first to market advanatge by charging a prenium and so arguebley squardering there position.

An RX1 with either a better speced body or a lower price could potentially have been a great sucess for Sony IMHO.

The chatter about the X100 was that it was too expensive at £1,000, I didn't see anyone say that they would pay £1,500 for it. Fuji would find it very difficult for a number of reasons to price a fixed lens crop at Leica prices. The body looks pretty well speced and the full frame Sony sensors are offering excellent results and with Zeiss designs you couldn't ask for a much better marriage.

 

[rjbell]

I don't believe thats a fair compairson, the D600 while it maybe Nikons cheapest FF DSLR at the moment is obviously much higher spec than an entry level crop DSLR, something like the D300 seems a much better equivilent to me.

Plus of course with the X100 you got a built in OVF/EVF that was arguebley its biggest selling point where as with the RX1 your probabley looking at another £300-500 for an OVF or an EVF.

A d300 is around 5 yrs old hardly very fair either.

 

[Moreorless]

The chatter about the X100 was that it was too expensive at £1,000, I didn't see anyone say that they would pay £1,500 for it. Fuji would find it very difficult for a number of reasons to price a fixed lens crop at Leica prices. The body looks pretty well speced and the full frame Sony sensors are offering excellent results and with Zeiss designs you couldn't ask for a much better marriage.

It was around £900 at release wasnt it? there will always be talk of anything new and desireble being overpriced but specs wise I'd say it was much less so than the RX1 and sold very well as a result.

A d300 is around 5 yrs old hardly very fair either.

The D300 having been around for several years to be discounted is surely "unfair" to the X100 rather than the RX1 which is being compaired to a brand new DSLR.

My point is that with the D600/RX1 your giving up far more for the latter than you are with an entry level DSLR for the X100.

 

[woof woof]

I'm not interested in this camera as back screen shooting isn't for me. I had a brief honeymoon period with a GF1 and I won't be going back to back screen only shooting.

I may be interested in a FF Nex or Fuji but I've been giving a lot of thought to this recently and I'm beginning to think that MFT or APS-C may actually be a better choice for me as they offer a camera and lens package which will be smaller than a similar FF package and the newer MFT and APS-C models will give good results, possibly almost indistinguishable from FF, at screen size or even up to A3 prints and they will allow hand held shots at faster shutter speeds / lower ISO's.

One thing that I have noticed when flitting between MFT and a 5D is that with the 5D and a 50 or 85mm lens I'm fighting aperture / shutter speed and ISO in some situations.

So, after lusting after a FF compact for years I might just stick with MFT or go for an APS-C Nex/Fuji.

 

[Laudrup]

It's got an OVF & EVF option.