Sony RX1R II announced
- Thread starter jsrockit
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 66
- Views 16K
f16sunshine
Moderator
I wonder if they solved any of the issues there. Looks like a new finder compared to the rx100iii version.
Still I'm with you, this camera should have a real finder not a pop up.
The body really is too small. Sony needs to get some north americans and europeans on the user experience panel when choosing designs.
Their cameras have long been too small.
cpc
Established
The rx100 is "small", barely. It just about qualifies for a "compact", i.e. something to stay in a pocket.
This one, on the other hand, is too bulky to be "small". 🙂
This one, on the other hand, is too bulky to be "small". 🙂
jsrockit
Moderator
Spicy
Well-known
Can someone give me a real/actual reason for a pop-up finder being better than a fixed/integrated one? I've been sitting here for 5min brainstorming and I can't come up with a single one other than the marketing dept saying "we'll sell way more of them!"
Incorrect "arguments" in favor (vs. counterpoint):
Better ergonomics (virtually no difference, doesn't enable rotating finder)
Protection (nope, just add a sliding cover like Nikon viewfinder light-blockers but on the outside
Allows for smaller packaging (nope, just mount it lower)
Less complicated manufacturing (nope)
The only thing that could actually be a reason it might be better is heat-dissipation, which presumably isn't a big concern. Either that or it's easier to replace, which it probably isn't...
Silly.
Incorrect "arguments" in favor (vs. counterpoint):
Better ergonomics (virtually no difference, doesn't enable rotating finder)
Protection (nope, just add a sliding cover like Nikon viewfinder light-blockers but on the outside
Allows for smaller packaging (nope, just mount it lower)
Less complicated manufacturing (nope)
The only thing that could actually be a reason it might be better is heat-dissipation, which presumably isn't a big concern. Either that or it's easier to replace, which it probably isn't...
Silly.
jsrockit
Moderator
Where else are they going to put the Zeiss T logo?
Samouraï
Well-known
Looks like an ideal travel camera to me, with a good enough lens and enough resolution to make a 50mm crop setting somewhat useful. If Leica released a Q with a 50mm lens, I'd rather that. But this looks like it could meet most of my needs. Lots of compromises (like that goofy popup viewfinder and small/no grip), but it charges via USB and takes up very little travel space.
I'm only annoyed that it doesn't have a curved sensor or a foveon-style layered sensor.
I'm only annoyed that it doesn't have a curved sensor or a foveon-style layered sensor.
f16sunshine
Moderator
Well.... it's a nice gimmick don't you think?
Sony hates passing up a chance to build in a gimmick.
I hate the pop up EVF Just as much as the add EVF on from the last model.
Why can't they build a camera big enough so that all the damn features they want to put into it fit INTO it ?
It just makes no sense at all. Build it so small that they must externalize vital components! It's plain stupid!
JP Owens
Well-known
"I hate the pop up EVF Just as much as the add EVF on from the last model.
Why can't they build a camera big enough so that all the damn features they want to put into it fit INTO it ?"
That "feature" will be in next year's model at $4200.
Why can't they build a camera big enough so that all the damn features they want to put into it fit INTO it ?"
That "feature" will be in next year's model at $4200.
jsrockit
Moderator
They wouldn't have to change the size... if a pop up EVF fits, then, I would imagine, a regular EVF would fit. Well, I guess it could move elements within the EVF as it gets tucked away, and it does have to be retracted once it is enabled...but...
cpc
Established
Does that make the smallest digital medium format camera (whichever it is) "small"? 🙂
Spicy said:
They can't mount it lower, there is no space because of the lcd:
http://2.static.img-dpreview.com/files/p/E~TS589x442~articles/6006313151/DSC00269-processed.jpeg
jsrockit
Moderator
David_Manning
Well-known
People complained when the original RX1 was introduced, saying it needed some kind of finder. Sony had one...optical...but it was a "dumb" finder w/no useful information.
Now Sony includes a stowable 100% accuracy EVF and people are complaining.
It'll still shoot like any other compact P&S...you don't have to use the EVF. But for those shooters who hate shooting like a zombie (you know...stop walking, extend arm in frozen pose), it's starting to look like a usable small camera. Sony usually implements great video, too.
A pop-up strobe would be very useful, but it's just not physically possible with this design. Too bad...it would be something Anders Petersen would shoot if he ever switched to digital. Plenty of resolution for gallery-sized portrait prints.
I'm still liking it. Have to do some soul-searching.
Now Sony includes a stowable 100% accuracy EVF and people are complaining.
It'll still shoot like any other compact P&S...you don't have to use the EVF. But for those shooters who hate shooting like a zombie (you know...stop walking, extend arm in frozen pose), it's starting to look like a usable small camera. Sony usually implements great video, too.
A pop-up strobe would be very useful, but it's just not physically possible with this design. Too bad...it would be something Anders Petersen would shoot if he ever switched to digital. Plenty of resolution for gallery-sized portrait prints.
I'm still liking it. Have to do some soul-searching.
Samouraï
Well-known
I believe there was a hot shoe EVF available for the original RX1 as well. This is the better option, though I might have preferred a smaller LCD if it meant a non-popup VF.
GaryLH
Veteran
Yep.. Quite agree.. Either make it bigger w/ built in evf or make the LCD slight smaller to make room for evf..
I don't need 42mp... 24 if max I will ever need... As it is, I a very happy w/ the 12mp I'm getting from my lx100. 😀
Wasn't it Nokia on their 40something mp camera phone that did pixel binning to maintain a certain smaller size mp size.. If u were at native for of the lens then the mp would be 12 mp (just guessing, can't ember what it really was). It would then maintain that same mp size no matter how much u digitally zoomed the lens..until u hit the max where u got 12mp w/o any pixel binning.
That would be a neat sw feature option... Maybe get a 35-105 fov while maintaining a the same raw mp size. Any never going to happen..
Not a camera I'm interested in, but I applaud Sony for pushing the envelope.
Gary
uhoh7
Veteran
The world is pixel mad.
But a bigger issue to me was the manual focus by wire on the original, which had a very inconsistent throw. Wanna bet that's one unchanged feature?
Samouraï
Well-known
Apparently the lens hasn't changed at all according to a Sony rep in a video I recently watched. So it's fair to assume that the RX1R2 has the same rotten focus-by-wire that all native Sony E-mount AF lenses have.
More importantly, the original RX1 lens had surprisingly strong barrel distortion. I'd have been sold if they had improved the lens, but I'd find it hard to stomach spending the asking price on a camera that absolutely requires heavy software correction because the lens is kind of ehh (I know it has other good qualities, but such a high degree of barrel distortion is distressing to me).
Lss
Well-known
The lens is fine in this respect (on the 24-mp sensor anyway). There are no issues after software correction has been applied. Pixel peeping on the new sensor may prove otherwise, especially when doing a side-by-side comparison against the original version. But that's speculation at this point.
The focusing is the weak point of the lens. It's just not very good.
FranZ
Established
Does anyone knows how the auto iso in the RX1RII will look like?
I absolutely love the output of my RX1, but here was defenitely some "room for improvement"
I absolutely love the output of my RX1, but here was defenitely some "room for improvement"
Muju79
http://muju.tumblr.com/
I bet they didn't improve the scale focusing system either which would be a big mistake.
The original RX1 and RX1r never had a single FW update and while I agree that mostly the camera was fine like that right out of the box, there was for sure room for improvement as many serious users will know.
I have a RX1 (for sale now to support paper and film costs, not the new RX1rII!) and one of the main issues is that the focusing distance when in MF is automatically reset to 3mt every single time the camera goes to sleep, and of course when turned off and on again. This basically makes it hard to use for quick snapshots in MF, unless you don't keep it always on. Not the best option at all...And the AF while being sufficiently fast for general applications, it's too slow for candid shots.
The RX1 would be a real killer with a seriously implemented snap focus mode (i.e. the one on the GR). I wonder if it is really that hard to do, or it's just engineers at Sony being dumb and short-sighted.
The original RX1 and RX1r never had a single FW update and while I agree that mostly the camera was fine like that right out of the box, there was for sure room for improvement as many serious users will know.
I have a RX1 (for sale now to support paper and film costs, not the new RX1rII!) and one of the main issues is that the focusing distance when in MF is automatically reset to 3mt every single time the camera goes to sleep, and of course when turned off and on again. This basically makes it hard to use for quick snapshots in MF, unless you don't keep it always on. Not the best option at all...And the AF while being sufficiently fast for general applications, it's too slow for candid shots.
The RX1 would be a real killer with a seriously implemented snap focus mode (i.e. the one on the GR). I wonder if it is really that hard to do, or it's just engineers at Sony being dumb and short-sighted.
Similar threads
- Article
