The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Rx1r2

Godfrey

Well-known member
...IMO we can compare notes about a yet-to-be-seen camera best if we consider features and changes that might affect our work, without having to justify or refute what will turn out to be personal needs/preferences.
Thank you, Kirk, for a rational and interesting response.

It sounds like the A7rII had the technical mojo to do what you were looking for, and I'm happiest to read such specifics ... that's real information, not necessarily what I might have chosen an A7rII for but useful, solid information that I can keep in mind if ever I feel like looking at an A7rII. I dislike speaking in broad swipes of "it's just going to be so great!" terms. Blech.

Moving to the M-P and picking up a D750 were on a similar basis for me, as was buying the SLR670a I mentioned. Each one of these cameras has specific, technical characteristics which made an improvement in my photo work ...

  • The M-P's excellent responsiveness and improved ISO capability over the M9 meant my people photos are less hampered by constraints of the M9. Its live view capability allows much greater accuracy when setting focus, when that is needed for ultra fast or ultra wide or ultra long lenses.
  • The D750 allows me to use the same Nikkor lenses I was enjoying with my F and F6 film cameras seamlessly on a digital body for when I need that capability and workflow. So much better than adapting F (or R) lenses to the Sony A7 and having it not do what I wanted so much of the time.
  • The SLR670a allows me to use film that is 4x faster, greatly improving sharpness and hand-holdability when light levels are dropping, and being refurbished/overhauled means it operates more consistently, reliably than my other Polaroids, making more of the game understanding film and exposure while working the subject, and less working around the vagaries of the equipment.

You see? These are concrete, useful things that are decision points for my purchasing these upgraded pieces of equipment. Whether others might find them useful or not depends on what they do, but they're not just "Oh goody, the RX1r2 has so much more stuff than the RX1r that I just KNOW I'll get much better photos with all the new opportunities!" Listening to that kind of nonsense all day makes me a little sick to my stomach.

When I talk about my excitement over a new piece of equipment, it's the specifics that matter and how I'll take advantage of them, not generically whether they have a gigabazillion pixels, or eye point AF, or a hundred other trademarked and patented feature credits.

G
 

lambert

New member
Guy, It is an ever shrinking market.

The RX1 (new because not many bought them) can now be bought for 1400 Euros instead of the 3500 at its debut.

RX2R1 will be ~2000 in a few months.
Have you checked the price of used M9's lately? Downunder, they were $9500 new. Now, $3500. All digital cameras depreciate. Believe it or not, this phenomena is not unique to Sony.
 

philip_pj

New member
Kimio Maki (Sony's head of Digital Imaging) on the reason the RX1 (old and new) exists, and why mundane discussions re AF speed and buttons don't really matter, and you may as well compare it to MFD instead of Ps and Qs, even those made by Leica:

"This is the second phase of the RX1 series and we checked the customer demand, especially from professional photographers. Lots of photographers are using the RX1 series camera to achieve preciseness and produce high resolution images. Then they said, what is next? We asked them. More resolution, raise the resolution they said, therefore we’ve tried it.
The lens has got very good preciseness. The resolution at the corners is the same as the resolution in the centre. A camera like this has never existed before. This product has the number one resolution."
 

Lucille

New member
Oh Goody Goody!

The Rx1r mII has so much more stuff, I know I'll get a much better photo.


I can hardly wait though, because the Rx1r mIII and even the IV will put me over the top...



 

algrove

Well-known member
Can you speak in more specific terms about what those changes were with the A7r II?

G


I think people feel you're asking them to explain their needs or preferences in terms that make sense or would apply to you, and that puts them on the defensive. The reasons are necessarily specific to the person and his or her style.

If you just want an answer to your specific question from one person, then the A7rII does something I needed. I take/make/create BW landscapes and had been using a Monochrom camera, because I wanted to emulate something like a 'classic' BW landscape style while focusing on a different aspect of 'nature.' (The catchword for this is 'repurposing.') I needed the resolution offered by the the MM (without Bayer array), but would also have liked to be able to use color-to-BW conversion sliders to control tonal balance and contrast. I didn't want to use an A7r for this because most of my exposures fall into the range where it tended to generate shutter shake. The A7rII solves this problem: no more shutter issues, and apparently because of the new sensor, the image quality of its color files, when converted to BW, closely matches the IQ of MM files made without a Bayer array. It may even do better in separating highlight values. Compared to MM, the A7rII offers the advantage of live view, which was important because with MM and the wide lenses I usually use, I was limited to the rough approximation offered by external viewfinders. I'd been limited by a kind of post-visualization, where I had to take the picture first to see what was actually going to be in the frame.

I don't expect these choice-parameters to apply to you, nor to most other folks; it's a 'fit' between a certain piece of equipment and a style that interested me. I've spelled it all out because I don't think it makes much sense for folks to try to justify specific technical choices to others, except in the broadest terms and through constructive suggestions. Otherwise the interrogation can go on forever: Someone might come back and say 'Why don't you use a digital back or a technical camera?', and I'd have to reply that I have a bad knee and need light equipment. We could go on and on trying to justify our personal needs or preferences to one another, but it really doesn't lead anywhere. It's just the main features that people have mentioned – better AF for some, smaller size for others; file compatibility; presence/absence of EVF or LV, viewfinder lines, etc., that matter to individuals.

IMO we can compare notes about a yet-to-be-seen camera best if we consider features and changes that might affect our work, without having to justify or refute what will turn out to be personal needs/preferences.

Kirk
That's a good post. You are clear. Just one comment in that the M246 that I own does have LV for wide angle lens framing and FP for when I want precise focus. I know, the Sony can do all that for less than half the price of the M246. Some even say they prefer converting color images to B&W. If in fact the new a7RII is so very close to the even new 24MP M246 (I know you did not suggest that), then a switch can perhaps be justified. Interesting and thought provoking.
 

lambert

New member
Thank you, Kirk, for a rational and interesting response.

It sounds like the A7rII had the technical mojo to do what you were looking for, and I'm happiest to read such specifics ... that's real information, not necessarily what I might have chosen an A7rII for but useful, solid information that I can keep in mind if ever I feel like looking at an A7rII. I dislike speaking in broad swipes of "it's just going to be so great!" terms. Blech.

Moving to the M-P and picking up a D750 were on a similar basis for me, as was buying the SLR670a I mentioned. Each one of these cameras has specific, technical characteristics which made an improvement in my photo work ...

  • The M-P's excellent responsiveness and improved ISO capability over the M9 meant my people photos are less hampered by constraints of the M9. Its live view capability allows much greater accuracy when setting focus, when that is needed for ultra fast or ultra wide or ultra long lenses.
  • The D750 allows me to use the same Nikkor lenses I was enjoying with my F and F6 film cameras seamlessly on a digital body for when I need that capability and workflow. So much better than adapting F (or R) lenses to the Sony A7 and having it not do what I wanted so much of the time.
  • The SLR670a allows me to use film that is 4x faster, greatly improving sharpness and hand-holdability when light levels are dropping, and being refurbished/overhauled means it operates more consistently, reliably than my other Polaroids, making more of the game understanding film and exposure while working the subject, and less working around the vagaries of the equipment.

You see? These are concrete, useful things that are decision points for my purchasing these upgraded pieces of equipment. Whether others might find them useful or not depends on what they do, but they're not just "Oh goody, the RX1r2 has so much more stuff than the RX1r that I just KNOW I'll get much better photos with all the new opportunities!" Listening to that kind of nonsense all day makes me a little sick to my stomach.

When I talk about my excitement over a new piece of equipment, it's the specifics that matter and how I'll take advantage of them, not generically whether they have a gigabazillion pixels, or eye point AF, or a hundred other trademarked and patented feature credits.

G
So ... I guess you won't be buying the M-P Herme's edition :)
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Have you checked the price of used M9's lately? Downunder, they were $9500 new. Now, $3500. All digital cameras depreciate. Believe it or not, this phenomena is not unique to Sony.
You are comparing old used Leica product prices with the new, unused Sony Rx1 prices.

Yes all digicams depreciate but it is a fact that Sony cams are listed at unrealistic prices as evidenced by the dramatic drops within a few months.

I am not interested in what one would get for an used gear but am looking at what I pay for a new one.
 

Lucille

New member
Lucille the Hepkitty when she heard the Sony Rx1r II will make her photo's better (notice she is holding the plain ol normal Rx1)





Oh Happy day.......
 

ohnri

New member
Godfrey;663x887 said:
Can you speak in more specific terms about what those changes were with the A7r II?

G
IBIS

4K video

Eye Detect AF

Better files

Que Showtime music ...

And Many More ....

-Bill
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
There's hundreds of posts on the A7rII on this forum alone never mind the Internet. All you have do is look, every detail has been discussed, chewed , spit out and eatin again. All one has to do is look and read. I'm not going to go into every freaking detail because someone choices not to read. Frankly the questions are just trolling around and I have participated in every discussion.

I'll shelf the rest of my comments because it's the same old repeating stuff I been reading for years and is extremely boring. I'll stop there before I ban myself.
 

dandrewk

New member
There's hundreds of posts on the A7rII on this forum alone never mind the Internet. All you have do is look, every detail has been discussed, chewed , spit out and eatin again. All one has to do is look and read. I'm not going to go into every freaking detail because someone choices not to read. Frankly the questions are just trolling around and I have participated in every discussion.

I'll shelf the rest of my comments because it's the same old repeating stuff I been reading for years and is extremely boring. I'll stop there before I ban myself.
Guy, it's the same with Apple products. Folks seemed to be threatened and/or offended by new technologies and discount anybody who seeks to profit from such technologies.

But I agree, when they start demeaning the so-called "saps" who fall for the latest gadgets, it gets boring. I guess we are mindless lemmings being led by nefarious entities intent on destroying photography.

I am an early adopter. I not only accept it, I EMBRACE it. If that makes me a "sap", then I will wear that badge with pride and honor.
 

Lucille

New member
There's hundreds of posts on the A7rII on this forum alone never mind the Internet. All you have do is look, every detail has been discussed, chewed , spit out and eatin again. All one has to do is look and read. I'm not going to go into every freaking detail because someone choices not to read. Frankly the questions are just trolling around and I have participated in every discussion.

I'll shelf the rest of my comments because it's the same old repeating stuff I been reading for years and is extremely boring. I'll stop there before I ban myself.

You can't ban yourself until you share with us the difference between the Zeiss Batis 25mm and the Zeiss Loxia 21mm, then after that, ban yourself.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
There's hundreds of posts on the A7rII on this forum alone never mind the Internet. All you have do is look, every detail has been discussed, chewed , spit out and eatin again. All one has to do is look and read. I'm not going to go into every freaking detail because someone choices not to read. Frankly the questions are just trolling around and I have participated in every discussion.

I'll shelf the rest of my comments because it's the same old repeating stuff I been reading for years and is extremely boring. I'll stop there before I ban myself.
But why are these features important to you? What were the decision points that made buying the camera important to you?
I'm not interested in boring lists of features and hundreds of blah blah blah posts. I'm interest in understanding the motivations
of credible people who choose again and again to upgrade to the next model seemingly without an eye blink.

Jeez, I'm just asking for some information. Isn't that what the notion of a discussion forum is all about? Sorry to bore you.
If that's how you see the process of discussion, I think I'll go do something exciting and interesting, like reading a book. It will be more fun.

G
 

Tim

Active member
Sony is just replacing their own products, over and over again, on too short a cycle.
The RX1 came into the wild over three years ago, that's a long while in this game.
Also, There is a smaller time gap between the Leica X1 and X2 so that comment does not compute in this case.


Me, the RX1rII has every addition I lamented on the RX1. I'd prefer the OVF to not be a pop-up but that is getting picky.
I've been a long time Sigma DP2 and DP2 Merrill user and am used to both the focal length and enjoyed the elegant simplicity and the no holds barred superb IQ from a fixed sensor/lens combo. Like others here team it with the Ricoh GR in the bag and a great kit.
It would round out if it had a Sony 21mm adapted lens available.

For those like me who don't have to pander to any client or audience other than myself who is looking for minimalist high quality lightweight camera when out on the trail the RX1rII is ideal. Its pretty much medium format in your palm. Consider what 42 Megapixel cost and looked like in MF years ago and this is strongly becoming a bargain for camera and lens. Its on my radar. Either this or a close out RX1r.

PS: Lucille I have loved seeing your RX1 images on seriouscompacts.
 

lambert

New member
You are comparing old used Leica product prices with the new, unused Sony Rx1 prices.

Yes all digicams depreciate but it is a fact that Sony cams are listed at unrealistic prices as evidenced by the dramatic drops within a few months.

I am not interested in what one would get for an used gear but am looking at what I pay for a new one.
I paid $9500 for a brand new M9 and they're now flipping for $3500 on the used market. You need to take off your Herme's tinted glasses. Leica digital depreciates as much, if not more, than the brands for the common folk.
 

Tim

Active member
I am not interested in what one would get for an used gear but am looking at what I pay for a new one.
I have to equate both as usually the sale of the old one has to bolster the cost price of the new.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I paid $9500 for a brand new M9 and they're now flipping for $3500 on the used market. You need to take off your Herme's tinted glasses. Leica digital depreciates as much, if not more, than the brands for the common folk.
:ROTFL: :cry: :facesmack:

Not sure what to make of your posts. I do know that I am not that "smart" to pay $3500 for an exfoliating sensor.
 
Top