Thoughts on mirrorless FF camera with interchangeable lenses in 2013?

[douglasf13]

Other I plan to use the M or hopefully also the X2 when I can get one.

What's the price difference between the X2 and RX1 in Austria? In the US, it's only about $800, so I'd imagine one may as well just go all the way with the RX1, no? That's the beauty of the RX1. It'll have M quality IQ with a price and size closer to the X2.

 

[kit laughlin]

I have to admit I have been rethinking the RX1, too... Even though the 35mm FOV is not my favourite for snaps, it does allow cropping, and it does 'sneaker-zoom' more effectively than 50 (my fave). Hmmmm. I may have to rethink my X-E1 plan. Then again, $2,700, and no finder makes the X-E1 compelling.

 

[Godfrey]

There is no need to factor in opening time.

I still don't know what you mean by that. Please explain. Thx!

 

[pophoto]

I have to admit I have been rethinking the RX1, too... Even though the 35mm FOV is not my favourite for snaps, it does allow cropping, and it does 'sneaker-zoom' more effectively than 50 (my fave). Hmmmm. I may have to rethink my X-E1 plan. Then again, $2,700, and no finder makes the X-E1 compelling.

Wait and skip out 2013 and everything you want will be here

 

[Godfrey]

What's the price difference between the X2 and RX1 in Austria? In the US, it's only about $800, so I'd imagine one may as well just go all the way with the RX1, no? That's the beauty of the RX1. It'll have M quality IQ with a price and size closer to the X2.

There's no proof yet that there's any actual "way" to be gone for your additional $800. The X2 already delivers image quality quite on par with an M9 in many ways, and since we also don't know how much better the new M is over the M9, what you're saying is very speculative.

 

[Shashin]

I still don't know what you mean by that. Please explain. Thx!

Shutter speed for a leaf shutter is about how fast the blades can clear the aperture. That takes time. You need time for the blades to open and time for them to close. If you can have the exposure start with the sensor, then you do not need to open the shutter and exposure starts instantly. Then you simply close the blades to end the exposure. The opening time is removed. That makes for a faster leaf shutter. You also don't have to worry about the transition from the opening and closing action.

 

[pophoto]

There's no proof yet that there's any actual "way" to be gone for your additional $800. The X2 already delivers image quality quite on par with an M9 in many ways, and since we also don't know how much better the new M is over the M9, what you're saying is very speculative.

Godfrey, don't forget you are comparing fixed lens cropped sensor to a IL full frame! The X2 performs excellently with sharpness and through the ISO range, processing and handling is an improvement over the X1, but that's about it.

The M9 will always give you the more accurate focal length angle of view over the X2, it will also give you the correct DOF, being more narrow wide open, and then you have the choice of any 35mm lens allowing you to go wider in apertures. As far as I can tell with the new M it will very likely give you better higher ISO performance, being newer and CMOS.

Traits shared of being full frame shared with the RX1 at f/2. Speculative, but arguable.

 

[Shashin]

There's no proof yet that there's any actual "way" to be gone for your additional $800. The X2 already delivers image quality quite on par with an M9 in many ways, and since we also don't know how much better the new M is over the M9, what you're saying is very speculative.

??? Well, we know what sensor size does with image quality. You are not going to have a smaller sensor behave like a larger one. Resolution is clearly going to be different. So is the choice over ISO and aperture.

I don't think think the comments were out of the ball park. I don't think assuming larger sensors are going to have IQ benefits over smaller ones is very speculative.

Also, DoX scores don't really show the X2 sensor on par with modern 24MP FF sensors.

 

[Shashin]

I have to admit I have been rethinking the RX1, too... Even though the 35mm FOV is not my favourite for snaps, it does allow cropping, and it does 'sneaker-zoom' more effectively than 50 (my fave). Hmmmm. I may have to rethink my X-E1 plan. Then again, $2,700, and no finder makes the X-E1 compelling.

Are you thinking this is your only camera? I would get the RX1 to complement my first camera. I think there are few folks where this could be the only camera, but it makes more sense as the second body.

I look at this a low-light inconspicuous camera. It also gives a different way of shooting from my main gear as well as being a carry-everywhere camera. But unlike compacts, it can give me image quality to match my main system so, in a body of work, the images will blend in. I like traveling light and this makes a nice backup body that can slip into my bag without taking up much room or adding much weight.

I am used to shooting with single focal lengths so the fixed lens is not really an issue for me and I can be happy with the 35mm FoV. It is also one less sensor to clean dust off.

That is just the way the RX1 fits into my work. YMMV.

 

[pophoto]

I will say this though, if Leica were to release a full frame fixed lens, with body similar to the X2, improve the processor inside and LCD screen, even charge upto double for pricing, I think ...."think" a lot of people would be game. Then again, my ideal lens is still 50mm on full frame.

The x2, is simply beautiful, I had the silver one, but the black one is also nice and I can see why a lot people would go for that one. The grip on the silver has a wonderful feel both in quality and grippy feel, something I feel Leica had a winner in choice of materials.

The Sony RX1 on the other hand with its simplicity and modern approach doesn't feel like it be any good to hold with its smooth surface finish. At least not without some sort of Frankenstein add on to bulk it up. I dunno, it is something I care about, the x2 build quality and weight were also very nice. Something I hope the RX1 can resonate from!

 

[ptomsu]

What's the price difference between the X2 and RX1 in Austria? In the US, it's only about $800, so I'd imagine one may as well just go all the way with the RX1, no? That's the beauty of the RX1. It'll have M quality IQ with a price and size closer to the X2.

I agree to all of that!

Only I am getting tired of looking for a camera providing similar or same quality than Leica. Even if the price is considerably smaller. And what the RX1 for sure does not offer is the simplicity and feeling of a Leica (X2). Finally having seen some great high ISO shots of the X2 I am sure meanwhile I can 100% live with that quality.

WRT M, well there is nothing comparable from Sony so far, but also if it were available, then it would also be compared always to the Leica M - and then what I said before becomes true - I am tired of choosing something which is maybe equally good, if I can get the original.

Maybe I am out of this game

 

[Shashin]

And what the RX1 for sure does not offer is the simplicity and feeling of a Leica (X2).

???? How is that aperture ring on the X2 lens? A manual focus ring on the lens? And the thumb wheel to change the shutter speed (rather than for manual focus)? Exposure compensation dial? A single dial to set it to P, S, A, or M. The RX1 may not be for you, but to say that somehow the RX1 is not a simple as the X2 is a bit of a stretch. As for simplicity of design, I don't see one camera more adorned than the other. Both are fashioned from very traditional forms.

Now, whether one form appeals to you over another is fine. But that is now talking about weather an IPA is better than a larger.

 

[Steen]

(...) the RX1 is for me a sign what to come. (...)

So close to and yet so far from an up to date and full featured, high-end mirrorless system.

There is always something missing, either autofocus, or a built-in viewfinder, or interchangeable lenses, or a full 24x36mm sensor ...

 

[Godfrey]

Godfrey, don't forget you are comparing fixed lens cropped sensor to a IL full frame! The X2 performs excellently with sharpness and through the ISO range, processing and handling is an improvement over the X1, but that's about it.

The M9 will always give you the more accurate focal length angle of view over the X2, it will also give you the correct DOF, being more narrow wide open, and then you have the choice of any 35mm lens allowing you to go wider in apertures. As far as I can tell with the new M it will very likely give you better higher ISO performance, being newer and CMOS.

Traits shared of being full frame shared with the RX1 at f/2. Speculative, but arguable.

LOL!

I have no idea what you mean by "the M9 will always give you a more accurate focal length angle of view". The field of view is the field of view. Pick an M9 lens which produces the same field of view as the X2's lens. Individual lenses do vary in actual focal length too.

I'm comparing the RESULTS of a test shoot with the M9 fitted with Color Skopar 35mm f/2.5 lens against the RESULTS of a the same test shoot using the X2 and its 24mm f/2.8 lens. Both are being exposed with camera on a sturdy tripod, focused accurately and set to a close to optimal lens opening (f/5.6 for the X2, f/8 for the M9) that also produces virtually identical depth of field.

- The field of view is virtually identical.
- Depth of Field is also virtually identical.
- Image resolution is also virtually identical.

That's the basis of my statement. Since I don't have an RX1 to test with, I can't say for sure whether it does anything better than the X2 or M9, but since both of these are perfectly satisfactory and very acceptable, who cares?

The result of the smaller format in this instance is that I can get a little more depth of field with the X2 at a stop greater light, netting it pretty darn good low light capabilities, since my testing shows that it produces satisfactorily clean raw files even at ISO 12500. If the RX1 sensor is as clean, it would have about a 1 stop advantage due to being f/2 rather than f/2.8, but to me that is insignificant given that I almost never need f/2.8 @ ISO 12500 anyway.

 

[Michiel Schierbeek]

So close to and yet so far from an up to date and full featured, high-end mirrorless system.

There is always something missing, either autofocus, or a built-in viewfinder, or interchangeable lenses, or a full 24x36mm sensor ...

You are so right! Or a tilting LCD, or focus peaking, or it has an AA filter, or the interface is childish, or......

Why can't they just for one time put all the right things in and leave the wrong things out, in a FF mirrorlens camera.....oh, I forget Leica just did €€€€€€€

The M9 will be here in the first month's of 2013. The guy in the Leica booth told me it will be januari...
Within 6 month there should be an alternative to take marketshare, so time is scarse....

Michiel

 

[Godfrey]

???? How is that aperture ring on the X2 lens? A manual focus ring on the lens? And the thumb wheel to change the shutter speed (rather than for manual focus)? Exposure compensation dial? A single dial to set it to P, S, A, or M. The RX1 may not be for you, but to say that somehow the RX1 is not a simple as the X2 is a bit of a stretch. As for simplicity of design, I don't see one camera more adorned than the other. Both are fashioned from very traditional forms. ...

The X2 controls are different but neither more nor less obvious and simple than the RX1. Both are focus by wire and do not have distance markings on the lens, so whether I turn a ring on the lens or on the dial is irrelevant. I would prefer the ring on the lens, truthfully, but since I can't see distance markings without looking at the LCD with either (and I'm not sure I can there with the RX1 either) I'll take the X2's adjustments.

With the X2, I can look down at the camera and see what my shutter speed and aperture are set to without having to turn the camera and look at the display, even with the camera off. I can't do that with the RX1, which is a minus. The converse is true of the exposure compensation setting.

What you see as a boon I see as more complication. With the X2, I don't need a mode selector ... where I set the aperture and shutter control selectors gives me the mode I want. Since I almost always use aperture priority or manual modes, I can set them by touch without even looking on the X2. On the RX1 I must look at the selector to be sure I have it on the right setting, then I must look at the screen and the lens to see my aperture and shutter settings.

They're different in many subtle ways.

 

[Godfrey]

Shutter speed for a leaf shutter is about how fast the blades can clear the aperture. That takes time. You need time for the blades to open and time for them to close. If you can have the exposure start with the sensor, then you do not need to open the shutter and exposure starts instantly. Then you simply close the blades to end the exposure. The opening time is removed. That makes for a faster leaf shutter. You also don't have to worry about the transition from the opening and closing action.

Thanks for clarifying. Well, checking all three of the leaf shutter digital cameras I have at present, the X2 operates the way you suggest.

Not sure it changes the total exposure time at all. That seems entirely dependent upon how fast the shutter blades can close the aperture, without consideration of the opening cycle, particularly at small lens openings, because for a leaf shutter to operate the shutter blades must full open with every cycle.

 

[jonoslack]

What's the price difference between the X2 and RX1 in Austria? In the US, it's only about $800, so I'd imagine one may as well just go all the way with the RX1, no? That's the beauty of the RX1. It'll have M quality IQ with a price and size closer to the X2.

don't know about Austria, but in the UK the RX1 (at £2800) is just a tad less than twice the price of an X2 (£1500)

 

[Steen]

(...) Why can't they just for one time put all the right things in and leave the wrong things out, in a FF mirrorlens camera.....oh, I forget Leica just did €€€€€€€ (...)

Hmm, yeah Michiel, only ... in these modern times I personally also regard autofocus as one of the indispensable, basic and mandatory technologies for a true, up to date, high-end mirrorless system.

So until now there is always some essential element missing.

Who will get there first ?

 

[dhsimmonds]

don't know about Austria, but in the UK the RX1 (at £2800) is just a tad less than twice the price of an X2 (£1500)

Both use Sony sensors, the X1 is full frame. You pays your money and takes your choice!