Rx1r2

[ohnri]

Sadly, that tells me nothing about the why of your interest. You just listed a bunch of features.

G

- - - Updated - - -

G

You have just confused the heck out of me.

I feel like I am Bruce Lee in the mirror scene of Enter the Dragon and I no longer have any sense of who I am or even if I like photography any longer.

My only hope is to find yet another new camera.

Luckily, the mighty A7s2 is on the way to my doorstep. It also has features.

A unique combination of features.

And, if I ever find my way out of this thread, which I actually started and hoped would be about the Rx1R2 but which I myself helped to sink into pointlessness, I will pick up the A7s2 and use it.

I will make new images with the A7s2 that I could not make with any other camera.

I will put my Noctilux on it and find my way into a dark, dark corner and take crazy photos of my kids that I can look at over and over and be amazed at who they are.

And, if my wonderful wife weren't so happy that she replaced the EVF on my RX1 as a gift last summer, I would buy the Rx1r2.

Because the AF probably won't suck.

And right now, I am going to select one of the unspeakably beautiful shots I took of my son with my A7r2, using Eye Detect, and the Macro/90 at a special family event where I wanted great images but didn't want to be hidden behind a camera and I am going to make a birthday card out of it.

-Bill

 

[Tim]

:ROTFL: :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.

I can't work out your posts. :facesmack::facesmack::facesmack:
Your comment here supports his post even more. He was pointing out that Leica devalues as much as anyone else. Add the sensor issue and you point our here and it seems the Leica M9 should be worth even less.

 

[Vivek]

I can't work out your posts. :facesmack::facesmack::facesmack:
Your comment here supports his post even more. He was pointing out that Leica devalues as much as anyone else. Add the sensor issue and you point our here and it seems the Leica M9 should be worth even less.

Why is that? I was mentioning new (unused, never been sold before units) prices of RX1 and he is talking about what he paid for his m9 and how much people are paying for used ones. I am interested in the R2XR1 and not the m9 or the q hence its (sony) price is of interest to me. I made the msitake of paying full amount for the A7R but that will never be repeated again. My (new units) A7 and A7s were bought for ~50% of the list prices here.

 

[ohnri]

Why is that? I was mentioning new (unused, never been sold before units) prices of RX1 and he is talking about what he paid for his m9 and how much people are paying for used ones. I am interested in the R2XR1 and not the m9 or the q hence its (sony) price is of interest to me. I made the msitake of paying full amount for the A7R but that will never be repeated again. My (new units) A7 and A7s were bought for ~50% of the list prices here.

The Rx1r2 looks amazing to me.

Do you think the AF will be up to street shooting standards?

Or do you generally zone focus?

-Bill

 

[Lucille]

You have just confused the heck out of me.

I feel like I am Bruce Lee in the mirror scene of Enter the Dragon and I no longer have any sense of who I am or even if I like photography any longer.

My only hope is to find yet another new camera.

Luckily, the mighty A7s2 is on the way to my doorstep. It also has features.

A unique combination of features.

And, if I ever find my way out of this thread, which I actually started and hoped would be about the Rx1R2 but which I myself helped to sink into pointlessness, I will pick up the A7s2 and use it.

I will make new images with the A7s2 that I could not make with any other camera.

I will put my Noctilux on it and find my way into a dark, dark corner and take crazy photos of my kids that I can look at over and over and be amazed at who they are.

And, if my wonderful wife weren't so happy that she replaced the EVF on my RX1 as a gift last summer, I would buy the Rx1r2.

Because the AF probably won't suck.

And right now, I am going to select one of the unspeakably beautiful shots I took of my son with my A7r2, using Eye Detect, and the Macro/90 at a special family event where I wanted great images but didn't want to be hidden behind a camera and I am going to make a birthday card out of it.

-Bill

That A7S II is going to rock daddy-o, I have the A7S and the files from that 12mp sensor are really sweet. They are different when I see them in post, they are special. I know that camera was marketed for video folks, but the stills are magical, they have a special look IMO, pair it with the 'mini Otus' 55mm and you get some sweet stuff. You will love the A7S II, you will love it.


A7S & 55mm Zeiss f/3.2

 

[ohnri]

That A7S II is going to rock daddy-o, I have the A7S and the files from that 12mp sensor are really sweet. They are different when I see them in post, they are special. I know that camera was marketed for video folks, but the stills are magical, they have a special look IMO, pair it with the 'mini Otus' 55mm and you get some sweet stuff. You will love the A7S II, you will love it.


A7S & 55mm Zeiss f/3.2

That image is so cool.

I know some cameras have special sauce. The Leica M9 was the last one I owned that I felt that way about.

The files from my A7r2 are so lovely but I have heard others praise the A7s as special. I am really excited to try it myself. Thanks for posting that image.

-Bill

 

[Vivek]

The Rx1r2 looks amazing to me.

Do you think the AF will be up to street shooting standards?

Or do you generally zone focus?

-Bill

Bill, I don't know about any standards. It sure has all the things I wanted in the original RX1.

The day i use AF seriously, I might as well start looking up Polaroid and ultrasound focusing, or skip that altogether and go straight to daguerro type to be truly artistic. :ROTFL:

 

[iiiNelson]

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

I don't get why you feel the need to question the buying habits of others or why you feel they should pander to you. Several people have mentioned features as reasons why they bought the camera but apparently that wasn't good enough for you.

To answer the question- yes some shots could be taken with other cameras but people choose to upgrade to newer and improved models. No one forces anyone to upgrade and I've been using my A7 and A7R for nearly two years now. I would probably already have an A7R2 had my wedding not gone severely over budget but that's another issue.

The truth is Sony, Leica, Nikon, Canon, etc all make great cameras but we choose a brand/model to use simply because it's what one likes. Some like the new features of Sony and that makes them enthusiastic to go out, shoot, and make pictures so how exactly is Sony destroying photography as an art? By providing tools and technology that excites people?

Obviously from your comments you're looking to press some sort of subconscious vibes of your own superior choices by thinking people have to justify their choice to you... Get the F over yourself with your smugness. There... It needed to be said... Oh and have a nice weekend with you book, Polaroid, and happy healing. No hard or harsh feelings from me but life's too short to beat around the bush when the elephant is already in the damn room.

 

[Tim]

Why is that? I was mentioning new (unused, never been sold before units) prices of RX1 and he is talking about what he paid for his m9 and how much people are paying for used ones. I am interested in the R2XR1 and not the m9 or the q hence its (sony) price is of interest to me. I made the msitake of paying full amount for the A7R but that will never be repeated again. My (new units) A7 and A7s were bought for ~50% of the list prices here.

I have purchased both an A7 and A7II NEW and in both cases made a small profit on selling them USED.
In the case of the A7 there was a short term cashback deal where I picked one up. Sold a few weeks later after the deal ended - profit.
With the A7II there was a cashback deal AND a free adapter. I picked the most expensive (Metabone EOS IV) and sold that new unused.
Even factoring evilBay fees and postage I came out on top. A first for me.

I tried them both out and found they were not keepers at the time. What I really wanted is the A7s or II but was only funding one lens. Hence this is my interest in the RX1 line.

 

[ohnri]

Bill, I don't know about any standards. It sure has all the things I wanted in the original RX1.

The day i use AF seriously, I might as well start looking up Polaroid and ultrasound focusing, or skip that altogether and go straight to daguerro type to be truly artistic. :ROTFL:

I looove AF

And MF

Both

-Bill

 

[Vivek]

Tim, We are quite different.

 

[Lucille]

Tim, We are quite different.

We are all quite different...

But we partake in the same thing, the love of being behind a lens and capturing moments in time, and we all have something to offer. I love the art of making images, I loved it in the days of film, I loved it with my rangefinders, my Canons, my Olympus, and now my Sony's.

But I do hate that Medium Format thread bouncing around here....... Sony, make me a Rx3 50mp Medium Format fixed lens camera......Please, oh, and if your not to busy make me a polaroid also.

 

[Tim]

Tim, We are quite different.

thats ok, but we both love making images so I enjoy your posts and images nonetheless.
These discussions here are just banter. In the end I think any of us could use most cameras but when you have choice we like to talk.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

I'll try to stay out of the Sony vs. The World discussion for a change. Sony seems to have addressed the most important issues of the RX1(add extension here), and I'm sure it's a fine camera which will find many happy users.

However, the way they have solved the, in my view, most important challenge; adding a viewfinder, puzzles me. When I tried an RX100(add extension here) a year or two ago, thinking it could be a nice carry-everywhere camera for me, with the pop-up viewfinder thingy and all, the Jack-in-the-box solution was what quickly made me change my mind. To start with, the shop had to go through three copies to find one that worked properly (one showed the image upside down, straight out of the factory sealed box and one didn't seem to lock properly in place).

A friend of mine later bought the gadget, but soon found the viewfinder too fiddly for his Scandinavian man-hands, and resorted to use the LCD before shelving the device permanently (I believe one of his daughters use it now as a kind of designer jewelry that can also take photos).

Hopefully, the R2D2 has a viewfinder that is more solidly built than it's smaller sibling. However, if it's dropped and lands upside down with the viewfinder extended, it's hard to see how a trip to Mother Sony can be avoided, a trip that I understand can take time, as the company's ambitions with regards to repair turnaround times seem to be limited.

Bearing in mind that there are several cameras available that are tiny and feature a built-in viewfinder that can take a beating (Canon G5 X, Panasonic GM5 and Nikon V1/V2 to mention a few), it's tempting to see this as a way for Sony to create a more sophisticated solution than was strictly necessary, simply to add yet another bragging factor. If I were in the market for such a camera (which I'm clearly not, for financial and other reasons), I would see the viewfinder solution as a big minus compared to the Leica Q, big enough probably to go for the German solution.

Stuff that can break, will. It's only a matter of time.

 

[ohnri]

I'll try to stay out of the Sony vs. The World discussion for a change. Sony seems to have addressed the most important issues of the RX1(add extension here), and I'm sure it's a fine camera which will find many happy users.

However, the way they have solved the, in my view, most important challenge; adding a viewfinder, puzzles me. When I tried an RX100(add extension here) a year or two ago, thinking it could be a nice carry-everywhere camera for me, with the pop-up viewfinder thingy and all, the Jack-in-the-box solution was what quickly made me change my mind. To start with, the shop had to go through three copies to find one that worked properly (one showed the image upside down, straight out of the factory sealed box and one didn't seem to lock properly in place).

A friend of mine later bought the gadget, but soon found the viewfinder too fiddly for his Scandinavian man-hands, and resorted to use the LCD before shelving the device permanently (I believe one of his daughters use it now as a kind of designer jewelry that can also take photos).

Hopefully, the R2D2 has a viewfinder that is more solidly built than it's smaller sibling. However, if it's dropped and lands upside down with the viewfinder extended, it's hard to see how a trip to Mother Sony can be avoided, a trip that I understand can take time, as the company's ambitions with regards to repair turnaround times seem to be limited.

Bearing in mind that there are several cameras available that are tiny and feature a built-in viewfinder that can take a beating (Canon G5 X, Panasonic GM5 and Nikon V1/V2 to mention a few), it's tempting to see this as a way for Sony to create a more sophisticated solution than was strictly necessary, simply to add yet another bragging factor. If I were in the market for such a camera (which I'm clearly not, for financial and other reasons), I would see the viewfinder solution as a big minus compared to the Leica Q, big enough probably to go for the German solution.

Stuff that can break, will. It's only a matter of time.

I have a Nikon AW1 which is supposed to survive a six foot fall.

I expect any other camera I own would not.

Except maybe my iPhone in a rugged case.

I would imagine any of the cameras you list to be quite the dilettante when it comes to leaping off a shelf onto the floor.

It may indeed be too fiddly for some. Having not actually seen one and not really expecting to since every Sony Store on the West Coast has evaporated, I will await the opinion of others.

I certainly feel my RX1 is as rugged as any garden variety non-rugged camera. Hopefully, Sony at least makes the pop up feel strong as this is the only criteria most people will actually use when gauging how tough it actually is.

Except for those that have already made that judgement without seeing one, touching one or asking someone that has.

-Bill

 

[Godfrey]

My, you Sonyista are a sensitive bunch!

I have no agenda and no issues with all of you enjoying the livin' crap out of the RX1r II when you get it. I hope it inspires you to make stunning photographs, works of such delicacy and emotion as to bring a person to tears or laughter, whichever is your intent.

I hope Sony achieves the gains in market share you wish them to, and maybe a little profit along the way, to fund the next one (RX1r III OR BUST!).

I will enjoy sitting on the sidelines and watching you thrill to the crisp new feel of your Sonys whilst I putter about with the various junk I use. And I promise not to question why any further.

At least until the next upgrade... ]'-)

G

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

I certainly feel my RX1 is as rugged as any garden variety non-rugged camera. Hopefully, Sony at least makes the pop up feel strong as this is the only criteria most people will actually use when gauging how tough it actually is.

Except for those that have already made that judgement without seeing one, touching one or asking someone that has.

-Bill

Exactly. I see the original RX1/R as relatively rugged cameras, which is why I hope that the viewfinder is stronger than the one of the RX100 Mark Something. However, there is a limit as to how strong it can be built without becoming too large, and the weight of the camera is substantial at more than 500g, giving it considerable momentum during a free fall. There can be no doubt that any viewfinder in a permanent metal housing would be much stronger.

 

[olegkin]

There are other cameras with a similar design of viewfinders or flashes. I imagine this design works. Camera is all metal, viewfinder or not I imagine it will have some visible damage if it falls. In my experience plastic outer shell takes much more everyday abuse than metal.

I'll try to stay out of the Sony vs. The World discussion for a change. Sony seems to have addressed the most important issues of the RX1(add extension here), and I'm sure it's a fine camera which will find many happy users.

However, the way they have solved the, in my view, most important challenge; adding a viewfinder, puzzles me. When I tried an RX100(add extension here) a year or two ago, thinking it could be a nice carry-everywhere camera for me, with the pop-up viewfinder thingy and all, the Jack-in-the-box solution was what quickly made me change my mind. To start with, the shop had to go through three copies to find one that worked properly (one showed the image upside down, straight out of the factory sealed box and one didn't seem to lock properly in place).

A friend of mine later bought the gadget, but soon found the viewfinder too fiddly for his Scandinavian man-hands, and resorted to use the LCD before shelving the device permanently (I believe one of his daughters use it now as a kind of designer jewelry that can also take photos).

Hopefully, the R2D2 has a viewfinder that is more solidly built than it's smaller sibling. However, if it's dropped and lands upside down with the viewfinder extended, it's hard to see how a trip to Mother Sony can be avoided, a trip that I understand can take time, as the company's ambitions with regards to repair turnaround times seem to be limited.

Bearing in mind that there are several cameras available that are tiny and feature a built-in viewfinder that can take a beating (Canon G5 X, Panasonic GM5 and Nikon V1/V2 to mention a few), it's tempting to see this as a way for Sony to create a more sophisticated solution than was strictly necessary, simply to add yet another bragging factor. If I were in the market for such a camera (which I'm clearly not, for financial and other reasons), I would see the viewfinder solution as a big minus compared to the Leica Q, big enough probably to go for the German solution.

Stuff that can break, will. It's only a matter of time.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

There are other cameras with a similar design of viewfinders or flashes. I imagine this design works. Camera is all metal, viewfinder or not I imagine it will have some visible damage if it falls. In my experience plastic outer shell takes much more everyday abuse than metal.

Plastic cracks, metal gets dents. A camera with dents mostly works perfectly fine. One with cracks doesn't.

 

[ohnri]

Exactly. I see the original RX1/R as relatively rugged cameras, which is why I hope that the viewfinder is stronger than the one of the RX100 Mark Something. However, there is a limit as to how strong it can be built without becoming too large, and the weight of the camera is substantial at more than 500g, giving it considerable momentum during a free fall. There can be no doubt that any viewfinder in a permanent metal housing would be much stronger.

Not a Leica M viewfinder, which will go out of whack with any bump, dump, free fall or just the passage of time.

Among EVF's it would certainly seem that a non-moving part would be more reliable as well as sturdier.

I hope it is not a step back as this is one of the features I wanted in my RX1.

-Bill