Sony RX1 Full Frame sensor Compact leaked photos / rumor

[EvilTed]

distant.star

Whatever!

The point I'm trying to make is that people are immediately dissing this camera because it is not a Canon or they are saying "I could do this with my Canon XXX".
Yes you could but you are missing the point.
There is no Canon full frame mirrorless and the only mirrorless they have released to date is apparently not that good.

The only other full frame mirror less camera on the market currently is the Leica M9.
It is smaller, lighter and when paired with good Leica glass, has arguably better IQ than anything Canon can muster.

A good, small, light FF Sony paired with good Zeiss glass may make an ideal competitor to a Leica M9 for a fraction of the cost (A Leica M9 + Sumicron 35mm F/2 will set you back $10K).

Go read CR guys review of it here and his opinions about why he feels the M9 makes a better street camera than a Canon DSLR...

http://www.canonrumors.com/reviews/leica-m9-a-second-opinion/

Then leave your DSLR at home and go shooting with a Fuji X-Pro 1 or Leica M on the street for a day and come back and tell me which you prefer...

ET

[tron]

If you are willing to pay the astronomical amount that M system costs go for it. But since this is a major invesment maybe you could check for the newly announced Leica's (either type 240 or 220).

[EvilTed]

More on the Leica M / Summicron 35/F2 comparison by Digllyod.

http://diglloyd.com/blog/2012/20121011_5-SonyRX1-lens.html.

He seems to feel that spec wise and based upon his experience of the Leica lens that the RX-1 may be a very good deal (if you can live with the fixed lens part).

Personally, I'd get the Leica M until Sony makes a removable lens variant.
This is a similar purchasing decision with Fuji (x100 over XE-1/X-Pro 1).

I prefer the results of no AA filter...

ET

[EvilTed]

Tran,
The Leica M 240 is the new Leica (people were calling it the M10 before it was released).
24 MP CMOS sensor with no AA filter + live view and focus peaking + external EVF via hot shoe.

The thing is, while high end DSLRs can approach the IQ of the M system, they require careful matching of lens to body.
D800E + Nikon 50mm 1.2 or Zeiss 50 is being touted as "close" to M9 + Summicron 50 but you also have the weight and bulk to consider.

I hate shooting street in dangerous places where Canon or Nikon shouts cop/reporter to the locals and I have to rush shots or get the hell out of the area quickly (and yes, I have used 5D MK3 + 40mm pancake but it is still too awkward for me).
This hasn't happened when I shoot with the Fuji.

If Fuji had a FF equivalent, I'd go with it but right now there is only Leica or this new Sony in the small FF game.

ET

[tron]

Tran,
The Leica M 240 is the new Leica (people were calling it the M10 before it was released).
24 MP CMOS sensor with no AA filter + live view and focus peaking + external EVF via hot shoe.

The thing is, while high end DSLRs can approach the IQ of the M system, they require careful matching of lens to body.
D800E + Nikon 50mm 1.2 or Zeiss 50 is being touted as "close" to M9 + Summicron 50 but you also have the weight and bulk to consider.

I hate shooting street in dangerous places where Canon or Nikon shouts cop/reporter to the locals and I have to rush shots or get the hell out of the area quickly (and yes, I have used 5D MK3 + 40mm pancake but it is still too awkward for me).
This hasn't happened when I shoot with the Fuji.

If Fuji had a FF equivalent, I'd go with it but right now there is only Leica or this new Sony in the small FF game.

ET

Whatever suits you. I just mentioned  the latest M bodies. I do hope that their shutter is inaudible. I think that was the case with the old ones. But it's just a thought I have no personal experience. An inaudible shutter is very helpful for street  photography. I agree that the size factor is important here. Leicas, Fuji X-Pro 1 and the new Sony do indeed have the advantage here. I would prefer the Fuji system for the cheaper price relatively to Leica and the exchangeable lenses relative to Sony. But I guess if Sony looks like a small compact it is even a better stealth camera.

[Aglet]

DxOMark rates RX1 extremely high, 93.  Not surprising, given the guts inside it.

www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Is-the-RX1-the-compact-photojournalists-are-waiting-for/Measurement

[IronChef]

Lens review from Spanish site.
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dslrmagazine.com%2Fpruebas%2Fpruebas-tecnicas%2Fcarl-zeiss-sonnar-t-35-mm-f-2-para-sony-rx1-la-prueba.html

As expected. The lens is amazing

[Axilrod]

Here are some amazing stills all shot on this one, they look pretty awesome I must admit:
http://rx1files.tumblr.com

[sanj]

Concerning the price, I think many of you forget there's a Zeiss 35mm f/2 in front of that tiny thing

It's a Zeiss that costs 800-1000 tops!

What I heard though, is that's no Zeiss lens, it's a design collaboration between Zeiss and Sony, Sony made the lens with some Zeiss expertise, or just enough support to justify slapping a Zeiss logo on the thing. If it were actually a Zeiss lens, the RX1 wouldn't be $2800

Noooo.

[tron]

Concerning the price, I think many of you forget there's a Zeiss 35mm f/2 in front of that tiny thing

It's a Zeiss that costs 800-1000 tops!

What I heard though, is that's no Zeiss lens, it's a design collaboration between Zeiss and Sony, Sony made the lens with some Zeiss expertise, or just enough support to justify slapping a Zeiss logo on the thing. If it were actually a Zeiss lens, the RX1 wouldn't be $2800

Noooo.

Although I realize that your reasoning  is correct (assuming the facts you mentioned) to me it's the other way round. If it's not actually a Zeiss lens then RX1 is not worth $2800.

In fact I believe that it would be hard to sell even at $2000.

But please bear in mind that this is just my subjective speculation that probably has nothing to do with what is going to really happen.
We'll see...

[drjlo]

More on the Leica M / Summicron 35/F2 comparison by Digllyod.

http://diglloyd.com/blog/2012/20121011_5-SonyRX1-lens.html.

He seems to feel that spec wise and based upon his experience of the Leica lens that the RX-1 may be a very good deal (if you can live with the fixed lens part).

Personally, I'd get the Leica M until Sony makes a removable lens variant.


ET

For those willing to pay $7000 for Leica M 240.

John Dooley demonstrates The Leica M	Small | Large

[verysimplejason]

There should be an RX1 variant with 24-105 F4/F2.8 lens.  Add a battery grip like the Fuji XPRO and this would be almost perfect for most usage.  The 35mm even if it's F2 isn't that interesting enough for its price of 3K.

[pedro]

Cameras are obsoleted in 3-5 years, often sooner.  Having a 3K body with fixed lens that will be obsolete in 5 years or less seems like overkill.  I'd prefer to buy a good lens that will last for 20 or more years, and a  cheap body that can be sold in 4 or 5 years.  With Sony's record of poor product support, they will likely walk away from it in three years.
I think this is a very limited product, aimed at those with money to burn.

Mt Spokane: That's what drove me away from Sony some 7 years ago. Started digital photography with a humble DSC-P 30 3.2 MP cam. Moved on to the DSC-F 828. While other Sony's came out they all of a sudden changed their memory cards. So no way to rely on a system here. The R1 was announced as the new big thing and soon forgotten. When I dropped the F 828 I switched to Canon. Nice lenses. Slightly cheaper bodies back in the day (2007 - 30D purchase). So here I am with a 5Diii since past summer and I don't regret it. 

[IronChef]

There should be an RX1 variant with 24-105 F4/F2.8 lens.  Add a battery grip like the Fuji XPRO and this would be almost perfect for most usage.  The 35mm even if it's F2 isn't that interesting enough for its price of 3K.

A lens like that would be huge and defeats the whole purpose of the camera.

[tron]

There should be an RX1 variant with 24-105 F4/F2.8 lens.  Add a battery grip like the Fuji XPRO and this would be almost perfect for most usage.  The 35mm even if it's F2 isn't that interesting enough for its price of 3K.

A lens like that would be huge and defeats the whole purpose of the camera.

+1 however, the above comment regarding the 35mm f/2 lens is valid. A similarly sized camera with exchangeable lenses though ...