And of course you're right . . but, but, these discussions do have a place, and if it wasn't for people anguishing about digital vs film 10 years ago (in much more pointless and vitriolic arguments), then maybe instagram wouldn't exist.
I have it quite clear in my head - there is photography, and then there is Gear Talk. They aren't mutually exclusive, and I'm sure that everybody around here is out taking photos at every possible opportunity.
Just this guy you know
8 Member(s) liked this post
OK, people. To my great surpise, when I walked in to my favorite camera shop today, what did I find? He had received one of the first 10 to hit the sheves of French retail barely 30 mn before. He let me play with it only long enough for me to get 5 lousy shots, and I wrote it up Dear Susan, | Blog franglais about la photo
I am hoping to do more tomorrow, including a comparison with my NEX 7 with Leica Elmar 24mm.
Actually, after just couple days using A99, I sold my M9. Not that I will stop using Leica, but the sensor, picture quality is such big step up from the M9.
I agree, at the end of the, what matter most is the output.
You wrote: Why 5D II? Because it was the first DSLR that could do video.
Not really, that was the Nikon D90 but the 5D2 was the first real usable video DSLR.
Editor&Owner of Digital Outback Photo
Interesting debate on an interesting thread. Here's another viewpoint. Just fuel for more debate. (Oddly enough this review surprised me with their IQ rating of 18 out of 20--the same rating they gave the Lumix LX7. So you might have to take this review with a grain of NaCl.)
Sony Cyber-shot RX1 review | Compact camera reviews | tests and specs | What Digital Camera
Life is an infinite series of moments called..."now".
My job is to capture them.
with all respect to preview - the comparison images are a joke IMO.
Who is interested how plastic looks in artificial light at 1m?
What would 1 image say about a camera or lens?
The RX1 is not for me for certain reasons but I can see that for someone who is compfortable with 35mm for, wants to shoot a lot in low light or likes shallow DOF the RX1 is very appealing.
I have now done some comparisons between to comparable systems: RX1 and NEX 7 + Leica Elmar 24mm f:3.8. For the comparison to be truly apples-to-apples is just impossible, nor for just one, but for a number of reasons, so that this comparison is more of a "what one system dones, with the other as a yardstick" than a true shoot-out IMHO.
Just this guy you know
DxOmark has the opposite problem, where it is trying to present quantitative results, but those are much harder because spatial information has been removed from the equation and I don't think people find it easy separate the spacial component from photography--it is important after all.
But none of these test will tell you want is good, but rather points to limitations within a particular system. And they certainly don't point to winners and losers--the M9 does not do well at high ISO, but that does not mean you cannot get rich images out of the thing.
What I find funny is those that want really interesting test shots--those award winning type of images. Those really reflect the photographer more than the machine. I find the boring shot more illuminating as they are under more typical lighting and the type we have more experience with.
But no test is definitive. They simply suggest different qualities in a system. I am glad DPreview, Imaging Resource, and DxOmarks do what they do. It is really a good baseline to judge these cameras. Of course, the hard work comes by actually using the darn thing to take good pictures and no firmware updates is going to achieve that. At some point the customer has to step up to the plate...
Well - thank you for the well thought out response - I was being rather flippant, and I agree that the dpreview comparisons are much more useful than many reviewers who take interesting shots. (criticising them is quite good fun though )
I quite agree that looking at a number of different comparisons, including dpreview and DxO is useful.
To be honest, the bottom line always seems to be that if it's a 'fair' comparison then you may as well toss a coin (eg one APSc sensor to another). If it's an 'unfair' comparison (e.g. Sony RX100 to RX1) then the distinctions are rather obvious.
Generally speaking the subjective suitability of the camera is usually much more important. . I like shooting rangefinders, I understand about the poor high ISO of the M9, but I can get around it with fast lenses and a steady hand.
The reason I'm not yet planning on an RX1 (even though I really like my obviously inferior RX100) is that I can't see it as the solution to any of my (limited) needs. For Instance I can't see when it'll be better for me than an M9 and a 35 FLE. . . but of course, I do HAVE an M9 and a 35 FLE!
all the best
Just this guy you know
1 Member(s) liked this post
As insipid as it may sound, I didn't become interested in a Leica rangefinder because some lab rat said it was good ... or put off one because their data charts said something was better. I got one because I was inspired by HCB and Chim, and that whole pack of rangefinder photographers.
I poured over the specs and data on the A99 until I could recite them in my sleep, and read with interest the tecno-junkies claims of the second coming ... and how so "yesterday" the A900 is ... yet, where's the beef? I've been sucked into this sort of grift too many times now ... I'll wait to see some great shots with one, then think about it. However, by then, the A99 will be so "yesterday" ...
1 Member(s) liked this post
Jono, thanks for your kind words. Much appreciated!
Uwe, you are right of course. But which camera "mattered" in kick-starting video from DSLRs, the D90 or the 5D II?
Here is the second instalment of my RX1 review, with more shots.
#131 The new (and exciting) Sony RX1 V2.0 | Dear Susan,
1 Member(s) liked this post
Thanks philber for the reviews on your blog. Very interesting! Hope to pick my RX1 up at the end of this week.
Thanks, Jay Emm, and have fun!
I red your blog about the RX1 with interest, Philber, although I knew it would not be a camera for me for a number of reasons.
No interchangable lenses and size being the main ones.
You confirmed the point about the size. I think there is a certain limit to making cameras smaller and smaller (and lighter) unless you want to become a spy,
which seems to be a rather outdated profession these days.
I even made my NEX-7 bigger and heavyer with the Gariz case which makes it feel a whole lot better to my hands.
But it was an interesting read! It will make a difference to the size and weight of your wallet!
(BTW I wondered what you, being so focused on sheer image quality, think of the Sigma DP1m. Besides IQ I know its limitations of course, but it is a point and shoot!)
Best regards, Michiel
Interesting thread - and I learned something from this thread about those DPReview camera comparison images - definitely take those with a huge grain of salt!
I guess I'm a little surprised by some of the heated negative comments directed at Sony and this camera. Personally, I applaud Sony for pushing the envelop, and being one of the most innovative companies in the industry at this time (along with Fuji and Sigma).
Yes, this first iteration (RX1) is not perfect, but it's a really a major technical breakthrough that should open the door for further R&D efforts down this path, leading to more complete and refined offerings in the future. It should also be a kick in the *** to Canon and Nikon, who have been far too stagnant with regard to R&D and innovation. Nikon has been reaping the rewards of Sony's CMOS innovations, and Canon has been milking their existing technology for a long time, without any sort of breakthrough in quite some time.
OK, off my soap-box - here's how I personally view this camera...
I have an a99 for my DSLR use, and I'm very happy with it. Best IQ I've ever had in a camera, and that includes my M9 (which I no longer own). The a99 / Z24-70 combo is really impressive for IQ and video. Sony's latest generation of AF logic works very well, and I'm now using the a99 / 70-400G combo for shooting soccer (something that my former a77 struggled to do).
But, I absolutely HATE traveling with a DSLR. There's nothing worse than lugging a huge camera bag all day when traveling, or schlepping it through airports.
I picked up the RX100 for travel, and I'm extremely happy with it. So happy in fact, that I've decided to sell off my NEX-7 system, as it hardly gets used any more. The RX100 with the magfilter CPL gives me a great tiny travel kit.
But there are times when I want to take a critical shot when traveling - something that I want to have very thin DOF, beautiful bokeh, or print really large. In those moments, I always wish I had my a99/Z24-70 with me.
This is where the RX1 will fit in for me. As a travel kit, I'll bring the RX1 & RX100. The RX1 for critical work or where 35mm focal length works. The RX100 for zoom and as back-up camera.
To me, the RX1 is well worth the price - I view it as a miniature a99/Z35 fixed combo that I can take anywhere and stick in my coat pocket. I wish there was a built in viewfinder, but even without one, it's still worth the price to me.
So my new kit will be the a99 (Z24-70, 70-400G, Z135-f1.8), RX1, and RX100. The a99 for all my local work / sports shooting, and the RX1/RX100 combo for travel or walk-abouts.
I really hope Sony gets plenty of kudos and sales for this RX1, and continues to invest in this R&D path, as I'm sure an RX2 or RX3 would check off several more important boxes (features) for the pro/enthusiast and also hopefully drive more innovation from the other sleeping giants as well.
Sony A99, RX1, RX1001 Member(s) liked this post
I know it is very fashionable to slam "faceless" corporations and those that work with the technology, but the truth of the matter is there are real, competent people there. You can find one of those faces in the current self-portrait thread in the Leica forum.
Last edited by Shashin; 2nd December 2012 at 07:22.
FWIW, "HBC" in some technoid circles is an abbreviation for "Hexabenzocoronene", a Graphene unit which may replace silicon in displays and other applications quite soon (Samsung are really going full speed with it).
HCB, OTOH, refers to a French photographer who used Leica cameras.
I am even surprised that there is so much discussion about the dpreview images.
I have no doubt at all that the IQ of the RX1 is top rate.
I understand that it also has 2 f-stops advantage over a Leica x2 regarding shallow DOF. (One caused by the larger sensor, one by the faster lens.
I think the question is more if the rx1 is small enough (for those who want a small camera) or big enough (for those who want to use it as main camera) and flexible enough for spending 3000 $.
Of course it depends on your needs.
The images at dpreview would be the least important factor if I had to make a decision about buying the RX1.
2 Member(s) liked this post
Any question I had about the RX1 image quality was resolvd as soon as I saw a large ~40"x60" print from one the camera at PhotoPlus. The printed image was the photo of the colorful string balls that Sony is using in the literature for the RX1. The image quality in the print was excellent.
Last edited by Mark Gowin; 2nd December 2012 at 12:06. Reason: Corrected iPad typos
Yes Mark, I admired that print too, at Photokina. They had 3, 4 prints from the very first series, shot in Japan. All prints looked very good indeed.
Still, I think I'm not going to buy because
- high price, especially in Europe
- no articulating LCD
- no EVF
- 35 mm is not my favorite focal length
I do think the RX1 is a very interesting, highly desirable camera! Ahhh, money..! That's the biggest problem.
I've been pretty happy with 35mm digital IQ since I bought the A900 four years ago. At this point, I have to wonder how relatively incremental IQ improvements are going to tangibly improve my photography...especially since I find myself adding grain to my photos quite often, and I rarely print over 13x19.
I'm sure the RX1's IQ will be fantastic, in the same ballpark as new Nikons and Canons, and won't hold anyone's photography back.
For me, choosing a camera over the last few years has been based primarily on handling, and, to a certain extent, size. The RX1 looks great in the size department, but I've come to realize that I'm a guy that prefers more traditional cameras in terms of usability, and leaving off the tilt LCD and EVF of the NEX6/7 in the RX1 would be a further step backwards for me from NEX cameras, so I'm not interested. Unfortunately for me, the step forward in usability has been the M9, which was a more costly endeavor.
p.s. the above is why I'm not currently interested in upgrading my M9 to the M 240, either.
Last edited by douglasf13; 3rd December 2012 at 16:02.
2 Member(s) liked this post
My RX1 is supposed to ship tomorrow and be on its way overnight for Thursday delivery. The EVF should arrive today so I will soon see if it is worth the price of admission or not. I hope it is as good as Steve H. seems to believe. As far as high ISO goes, I find 3200 is sufficient for most uses so if it does 3200 well and 6400 is only good, that would meet my needs. I'm more concerned about how well it auto focuses, especially in low light situations. It seems the EM-5 is the benchmark. I had the EM-5 and sold it because as douglasf13 states handling is very important. I could not get comfortable with the handling and carrying so it wasn't with me as often as it should have been. I am debating adding an RX100 as an even more carry around camera due to its small size and larger sensor than typical P&S cameras. The AF on the RX100 was perfectly usable so if the RX1 is close to that it would meet my needs.
I would love to buy this camera because of :
-image quality (I have no doubt on this)
-non interchangeable lens, so no dust problem AND the 50 /75 crop seems quite good while for jpeg only a future firmware could address it for raw as well. Another option could have been a short zoom 24-80 but it is never as good as a fix focal lenght, and this one seems quite doing it.
But I won't because of the price... like most of the cameras today the prices are ludicrous.... common it's all electronics[/B][/I] and it's made to fail sooner than later!
I buy a camera after long thoughts because I do not intend to change every year or two like many here whose hobby seems more buying cameras than using them. Nothing wrong with that by the way but it's a big NO WAY for me !
But I guess with the crisis hitting, all this buying non stop is going to an end very soon.
Anyway well done Sony, you made a very interesting move but check your prices.
1 Member(s) liked this post
no offence to Mr H, but I'm more interested in your opinion... especially in comparison to the E-M5, which is a heck of a lot of camera for the price.
All the best
I am interested in the prof's experience as well. Huff appears to be waxing poetry while mysteriously getting all the stuff before they have are on sale anywhere. The latest video Haiku is on how two metal screws make up the metal lens cap.
Also, I would be interested to see any comparisons between the Rx1 and the Dp1M as Michiel queried above.
Well, my R1 is still going strong
I have some comparison test shots taken with DP2M that I can post once I have the RX1 I will try and duplicate. I returned the DP2M despite its incredible IQ because I prefer live subjects to landscape and it is just too difficult to focus in too many cases where even the X100 would focus before the firmware improvements. I may still buy one because of the stunning crispness of the images and color under good lighting.
V/r John1 Member(s) liked this post
If there is a successor to the Rx-1, i would expect one with a built in EVF, hotshoe and/or a separate flash sync port.
Remember that these are the folks who tried to sell an OVF (also recall its price) with the NEX-5 and the 16/2.8. They are not very farsighted to say the least, especially when they also tried to sell a WA and fisheye converter for the 16/2.8.
Everybody: Good read - Tim Ashley Photography | Sony RX1repare to be a lot amazed and a little annoyed
I enjoyed your write-up and the results were interesting. I was on the RX1 bandwagon and then fell off. I simply couldn’t rationalize the cost-to-benefit gains to my photography. These days whenever I get the gear-head fever I try to look at items that are more universal and not tied to a specific platform like’ tripod gear, software, etc. Then again I could just buy another Zeiss lens for what I already have.
Last edited by Dan Ortego; 12th December 2012 at 06:51.
Fine and balanced write up and easy read, Tim.
There seems to be mixed opinions about the AF speeds!
Wow read this thread with interest. I had an accident a couple of weeks ago and managed to drop my M9 and 28 summicron in the harbour. Luckily insurance paid out and I spent two weeks deciding whether I re-up on new M240 or go back to DSLR style and take opportunity to cash out of my M9. Well after much thought I thought I would get A99 + RX1 plus a couple of lenses but reading this thread and thinking of my old X100 makes me realise the RX1 with 35mm FL really just isn't me and I decided against it. Have to applaud Sony though for pushing the envelope and if a 50mm version comes out anytime soon I doubt I would be able to resist. Well off to the gym to strengthen my back now I am carrying the Sony kit around
Man-O-man. The first part of your post had me feeling your pain. Glad to hear that insurance paid for it. I still miss my M8 and four super primes. With a series-1 tripod it was hard not to get fantastic shots. Handheld was an entirely different story. I’m in the market for ‘something’ but I’m not sure what. My big old Sony kahuna still amazes me whereas most everything new has sloppy production and quality control issues. I sure do wish that Sony had developed an A950 …oh well.
Yeah Dan I was really upset at the time but have been really happy so far with A99 + 24-70. Have 85/1.4 on order and also a pre-order on the soon to be released 50/1.4. Have picked up an old Minolta 50/1.8 as a walk around when I want to go light. RX1 is tempting but 35mm and me don't play well together.
With that all and said, a built in EVF, and a matter of preference of FOV, or zoom lens, is what really separates those who are interested. I am impressed with what Tim Ashley had wrote on his blog about the amount of recovery, something no APS-C sensor could achieve, and the DOF really does matter to me, because I enjoy the look when taking pictures of people and certain still life for isolation!
I just received my A1 Sigma 35mm lens and looks absolutely stunning, Sigma has a real winner, but its hefty on any canon DSLR that I own, but not unmanageable, but certainly not a travel or vacation with kids camera system. Again, the RX1 certainly delivers, I am heavily tempted, but a 50mm would have certainly pushed me over! Right now I've been finding more excuses to NOT buy this camera than any I have lusted over, and eventually owned!
Nice update Tim!
Another thing I am keen on, I often use a small flash to keep weight down, for bounce fill, which works a treat on my DSLRs, however, I know this isn't something explored very often and the RX1 is definitely very new on the market! Although I have researched the options, there just simply no options available without making the RX1 a monster!