GaryLH
Veteran
I am not sure if the rx1 has steady shot. I would assume it does. I have the rx100 and I wished it had an evf, but to get a truly pocket camera, I am ok w/o it. The rx1 is not a pocket camera by any stretch of imagination unless u are wearing some really baggy pants. Which puts it in xe1 or nex6 territory.
As I get older need faster shutter speeds
Gary
As I get older need faster shutter speeds
Gary
Last edited:
fotomeow
name under my name
agreed. I can see paying $500 for an external digital VF for a camera costing $1000. But on top of the $3k price tag? and no faster than f2?
forget it.
aizan
Veteran
here's a crazy idea: make the rear LCD smaller to make room for an EVF in the corner. does it really need to be that big? i'd be ok with a 2'' screen.
thegman
Veteran
I expect they could have put one in if they had wanted to, but profit margin goes down, and they lose the ability to sell you a clip one. It also becomes trickier to think of must-have features for the RX2.
It's clearly not in Sony's or any other camera maker's interests to make the RX1 perfect right off the bat. It's probably not even in most buyer's interests either as the early adopters, and frequent upgraders fund price cuts for the rest of us and keep the used market stocked with nice gear.
btgc
Veteran
I know quality optical devices aren't cheap but when finder costs 1/3-1/2 of camera something has to be done....like raising price of camera to get proportion looking more reasonable
p.s. I'm aware rx1 isn't exactly cameraphone and I'm not complaining FF-sensor and Zeiss prime together cost more than typical P&S. I just think built-in finder is the thing to have in serious cameras. External finders are tech from mid of XX century, they tend to engage with clothings, straps and rest of the world. Just do it right and we say amen.
mugent
Well-known
I don't really get it as a camera, it's full frame but on a fixed lens camera, it's kind of irrelevant as there is no 'crop factor'. Obviously some people will always want ff for the of depth of field, but in this case it's a marketing decision, not a technical one.
The merrill is a fraction of the price, if you want incredible resolution in a small form factor, it's still the best one IMO.
The merrill is a fraction of the price, if you want incredible resolution in a small form factor, it's still the best one IMO.
Paddy C
Unused film collector
Except the merrill doesn't do low-light.
taemo
eat sleep shoot
while the RX1 is a great achievement, I would rather get an X100 than it.
(here's me hoping that used X100s would drop down to $500 or X200 comes out)
(here's me hoping that used X100s would drop down to $500 or X200 comes out)
apodeictic
Established
And yet there's still people out there willing to fork out $2000 for an M8, which in terms of digital cameras is antiquated (6 years is ages in digital technology).
bwcolor
Veteran
Sony seems to excel at technological expertise and I think that this was simply a demonstration as to what they can do. I've limited funds and honestly, my NEX-7, X100 and old 1DMKIII fill my digital requirements nicely, so there is no longer a real need for another camera. That said, I'll wait for a FF interchangeable mirrorless and it must have a viewfinder and if EVF, it better be a notch above the NEX-7 EVF. So, limited funds and no real need.
I considered the DP-2. It looks like a great camera for slow, methodical daylight shooting. Once again, I realized that more money spent gives me less to spend on FF. I've come to the point where I need to sell equipment to buy equipment. This makes for a more careful consideration of what I buy. I can buy the new Leica 'M'. but the price paid is selling more camera equipment.
I considered the DP-2. It looks like a great camera for slow, methodical daylight shooting. Once again, I realized that more money spent gives me less to spend on FF. I've come to the point where I need to sell equipment to buy equipment. This makes for a more careful consideration of what I buy. I can buy the new Leica 'M'. but the price paid is selling more camera equipment.
I'm one of them... a Leica rangefinder's a niche that's never cheap. At least it holds it value better than this sony will.
NicoM
Well-known
Though this camera is not for everyone, it's a huge step in the right direction. With analogue photography, there was a greater sense of equality. Though lenses and features did differ from one camera system to another, 35mm cameras all had access to the same film. The film played a huge roll in how images turned out. When digital came about, the premium for at full fram sensor was thousands more than P&S and APS-c cameras and the option the have that 35mm frame in a pocketable camera wasn't there.
The Sony RX1 is the answer to this. Sure, it is expensive. However, it'll only get cheaper with time.
I do agree that the accessory prices are outrageous. Sony is just taking advantage of the fact that the RX1 is a one of a kind at the moment. I don't expect prices to stay that way once the RX1 has some competitors in the market.
The Sony RX1 is the answer to this. Sure, it is expensive. However, it'll only get cheaper with time.
I do agree that the accessory prices are outrageous. Sony is just taking advantage of the fact that the RX1 is a one of a kind at the moment. I don't expect prices to stay that way once the RX1 has some competitors in the market.
Snowbuzz
Well-known
Hmmm, ummmm, I tried on my Fuji X10 but I admit to not trying too hard.
I must be an old grump.Snowbuzz
Well-known
Count me in. I just bought an M8, and I can't wait for it to get here. Kinda weird as the new cameras hold no interest for me with the exception of the X-Pro1. That, and I can't afford the new M.