back alley
IMAGES
You're just messin' with us then!
who loves ya baby?
I Love Film
Well-known
I don't care, I can stop debating it now.
You claim that you don't like the look of M lenses on the new mirrorless cameras, but for a couple of years you have been extolling the virtues of the R-D1. I also have had R-d1's, and I like them.
I was just curious why you think the images on an R-D1 with an M lens are good, but you don't like the images on a mirrorless camera with an M lens.
If you don't want to discuss it, fine with me. Next case.
You claim that you don't like the look of M lenses on the new mirrorless cameras, but for a couple of years you have been extolling the virtues of the R-D1. I also have had R-d1's, and I like them.
I was just curious why you think the images on an R-D1 with an M lens are good, but you don't like the images on a mirrorless camera with an M lens.
If you don't want to discuss it, fine with me. Next case.
back alley
IMAGES
oh, he does have a process...
i tried the m lenses on my panasonic g1 (?) and they were fine but i found the panasonic lenses better.
the rd1 was made for m mount lenses, they were not a curious after effect of the distance of a flange to a sensor.
damn, your jedi mind trick worked!
Bob Michaels
nobody special
I only know a few things:
1) what works for me
2) what works for me may not be what works for everyone else
3) everyone needs to be free to make their own decisions about what they like and do not like
pb908
Well-known
i am having the same issue, i really want to have rx1, but a little bit hard to justify the cost. I was thinking fuji x100 would be the solution for the same requirement. But i wonder why you ended up trading it back to rd1. Any user experience?
What rx1 looks attractive for me:
-leaf shutter (which x100 does)
-35mm (which x100 has )
- small form (as well as x100)
- full frame ( i can assume x100 is a "full frame" of it's own)
please share your thought about x100 vs rx1. Thanks
Adanac
Well-known
I shoot a moderate wide most of the time. I'd like to have available to me a short tele for portrait work from time to time, and occasionally for landscape use, as not all landscapes done with a wide after all.
What would be perfect is a high IQ lens converter from Sony to add on to the RX1. Then I might consider a very small pocketable as a backup.
I agree that they *can* make such a camera for a lot less than Leica, I just don't see them making a "M" camera, period. Not one optimized for M lenses at any rate.
If anything Sony will produce a full frame interchangeable lens body based on their own lens mount, maybe Alpha but possibly E Mount.
Over time they could produce a line of APS-S and Full Frame lenses for E Mount, much like Nikon has DX and FX.
At this point I believe the Cyber-shot RX1 is a one off. Sony's Mike Weir called it a "timeless design" and I think he meant that it has lasting power as an orderable SKU just as much as the design and specs.
kermaier
Well-known
Joe, what is it about the RX1 that seems so compelling to you over the X100? (Not an idle question -- I have an R-D1s and X100.)
::Ari
::Ari
back alley
IMAGES
it's hard to do a 'versus' when one of the cameras is not even out yet.
my very large assumption is that the rx1 is going to have stunning image quality.
back alley
IMAGES
i loved the x100, it's a great camera no doubt in my mind.
i had a serious case of 'traders remorse' and was missing a second rd1.
as i said above, i am assuming that the rx1 is going to be a killer camera.
the rd1 taught me about colour...it reminds me of the old agfa film, that european colour and is one of the reasons that i want to keep the rd1 close to home.
i'm thinking the rx1 might be a killer black and white image maker...cold, crisp and biting sharpness. all assumptions i know.
i'm basing my assumptions on the rx100...which to me is easier to use and slightly better and smaller than the x100.
Adanac
Well-known
I'm basing many of my assumptions on the X100 and my time spent with that camera, too.
My guess is the RX1 will be much less quirky and a faster operating camera than the X100. While it doesn't have the optical / hybrid finder of the X series, that's about all that it is missing.
In exchange the RX1 will deliver, if our optimistic expectations are fully met:
As mentioned up thread, I hope Sony takes a page from Fujifilm's book and delivers one or more lens converters to provide additional, optical, focal lengths from this "fixed" FL camera. That is an advantage for Fujifilm at present although the adapter is wider not longer as I'd want.
I greatly enjoyed using the X100 until it started to fail. Still, the camera and its firmware had enough flaws that it got in my way more than I really want my primary every day camera to get away with, so I sold it... but I still do miss the simplicity of one camera one lens in a small, very high IQ producing, package.
If the output and construction quality of the RX1 is all that is expected, then I've no doubts it'll meet my needs for the 80% plus shooting I do with a 35mm or equivalent field of view camera. Yes, the RX1 is expensive, but so was the X100 at $1,399 or whatever I paid for it. I figured at least $1,000 premium for a full frame version of the X100 so the $2,800 number isn't too far distant from that wild assed guess.
Speaking of guesses, maybe some of them are even 'educated' guesses, but it's all supposition at this point.
Can't wait for the pudding to arrive for proof.
My guess is the RX1 will be much less quirky and a faster operating camera than the X100. While it doesn't have the optical / hybrid finder of the X series, that's about all that it is missing.
In exchange the RX1 will deliver, if our optimistic expectations are fully met:
- faster more reliable autofocus (it isn't happenstance that I list this attribute first)
- faster shot to shot time
- much improved EVF for those who want the EVF option
- probably less flare prone lens than the X100
- a real 35mm perspective with real 35 on 35 depth of field characteristics
- Zeiss rendering look. I ^still^ own a bunch of Zeiss glass, so +1 for this. Others may differ.
- state of the art Sony sensor, with increased resolution and real estate
- improved ability to crop-zoom out of the camera while keeping quality up
- if the D600 sensor is the same as A99/RX1 as is thought, fantastic dynamic range
- sensor spec offers enough future proofing to be servicable for years for most folks
- vastly better video capabilities, for those who care about video or will in the future
- lens/aperture ring ergonomics look better (I found ring on X100 awfully cramped)
- manual focus actually usable
- no X100 Aperture Dance (one can hope)
As mentioned up thread, I hope Sony takes a page from Fujifilm's book and delivers one or more lens converters to provide additional, optical, focal lengths from this "fixed" FL camera. That is an advantage for Fujifilm at present although the adapter is wider not longer as I'd want.
I greatly enjoyed using the X100 until it started to fail. Still, the camera and its firmware had enough flaws that it got in my way more than I really want my primary every day camera to get away with, so I sold it... but I still do miss the simplicity of one camera one lens in a small, very high IQ producing, package.
If the output and construction quality of the RX1 is all that is expected, then I've no doubts it'll meet my needs for the 80% plus shooting I do with a 35mm or equivalent field of view camera. Yes, the RX1 is expensive, but so was the X100 at $1,399 or whatever I paid for it. I figured at least $1,000 premium for a full frame version of the X100 so the $2,800 number isn't too far distant from that wild assed guess.
Speaking of guesses, maybe some of them are even 'educated' guesses, but it's all supposition at this point.
Can't wait for the pudding to arrive for proof.
back alley
IMAGES
Adanac
Well-known
Heh.
I have a similar albeit much shorter list comparing a GXR with ZM25/2.8 against the RX1 which would replace the combo (or at least the lens). I won't bother readers with the entire list but here's the first few bullet points:
Just in case this hasn't been seen, a backstage Photokina hands-on look at the RX1.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OtINByvV60&feature=player_embedded#t=3897s
I like the comment about camera heft early on in the clip. One guess down (check!), more to go.
I have a similar albeit much shorter list comparing a GXR with ZM25/2.8 against the RX1 which would replace the combo (or at least the lens). I won't bother readers with the entire list but here's the first few bullet points:
- autofocus, autofocus, autofocus
- 35 f/2 on 35mm sensor instead of 25/2.8 on APS-C
- Much more sensitive sensor, better high (meaning > 200) ISO performance
- Improved shot to shot speed
- Did I mention autofocus?
Just in case this hasn't been seen, a backstage Photokina hands-on look at the RX1.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OtINByvV60&feature=player_embedded#t=3897s
I like the comment about camera heft early on in the clip. One guess down (check!), more to go.
steveclem
Well-known
Keep both Rd-1's, you'll only miss having the backup, it'll make you twitchy and that's no good for photography.
Sell the rx100 if you have to and buy the rx1 , then get a DP1 Merril for b&w as well.
Pump up the gas.
Sell the rx100 if you have to and buy the rx1 , then get a DP1 Merril for b&w as well.
Pump up the gas.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
And while you're at it a used D700 wouldn't be bad, or maybe the D600 ... and lets's not forget the new Fuji X-e1, that could be handy.
And I think now that you're back into film with the M4-P you should pick up a decent medium format camera ... I'd suggest a Hasselblad or a Rolleiflex. A Crown graphic would cover 4 x 5 if you're keen and for some panorama work an X-Pan could be really useful.
Please fell free to ask more questions if you're unsure ... were here to help and guide you!
back alley
IMAGES
And while you're at it a used D700 wouldn't be bad, or maybe the D600 ... and lets's not forget the new Fuji X-e1, that could be handy.
And I think now that you're back into film with the M4-P you should pick up a decent medium format camera ... I'd suggest a Hasselblad or a Rolleiflex. A Crown graphic would cover 4 x 5 if you're keen and for some panorama work an X-Pan could be really useful.
Please fell free to ask more questions if you're unsure ... were here to help and guide you!
i gave the dslr thing an honest try...not for me.
did the medium format thing years ago...great image quality in a camera that handled well, the mamiya 6...
no interest in larger formats...too much work!
the m4-p is a keeper (atm)...will send it off for a good old canadian cla when the snows fall.
love the idea of the xpan but no plans on acquiring one.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I've worked out that you're not really an RFF mod at all Joe.
This is a circus ... and you're the ringmaster!
This is a circus ... and you're the ringmaster!
back alley
IMAGES
ladies and gentlemen...may i bring your attention to our first ring...