p.21 #1 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
I think one thing to consider is that EVFs are progressing at a faster rate than sensors, these days. By using an attachable EVF, it leaves the possibility of upgradable EVFs in the future. Having an internal EVF might really date the camera in a few years.
p.21 #2 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
douglasf13 wrote:
I think one thing to consider is that EVFs are progressing at a faster rate than sensors, these days. By using an attachable EVF, it leaves the possibility of upgradable EVFs in the future. Having an internal EVF might really date the camera in a few years.
p.21 #3 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Tariq Gibran wrote:
At it's best, it should just out-resolve a bayer 24MP sensor. Most everyone agrees it's ability to resolve is equel to a bayer based sensor of somewhere between 28-30MP's. After playing with the DP2M images, I think the only thing currently around that does outresolve it is the NIkon D800E. Of course, that's with the DP2M being shot and processed at it's best (in that limited area of base ISO, daylight WB with proper processing).
Hmm I think Lloyd found in his testing that the 20mpx of the RX100 is actually only about 12-15 in actual resolved detail.
So you think the SD1 and DP2M outresolves a normal D800 as well?
I don't know, I just find that hard to believe that the DP2M can out resolve an A99, D600, 5D Mk3, and D800.
p.21 #4 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
FlyPenFly wrote:
Oh I'm sure the DP2M will easily out resolve the RX100 but then again the DP2M is a bit bigger, much slower, has a prime lens, dodgy Adobe RAW support, and several other issues.
To me, the DP2M is an incredible camera good at doing 1 specific thing with a pain in the butt workflow, the RX100 is a general all around powerhouse for it's size.
That said, I do find the DP2M more interesting.
To use between ISO 100-400 with a certain level of patience, $1000 is a steal.
p.21 #5 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
FlyPenFly wrote:
Hmm I think Lloyd found in his testing that the 20mpx of the RX1 is actually only about 12-15 in actual resolved detail.
So you think the SD1 and DP2M outresolves a normal D800 as well?
I don't know, I just find that hard to believe that the DP2M can out resolve an A99, D600, 5D Mk3, and D800.
I think it's very close but the D800 has the problem of mounting a lens that can fully take advantage of it's resolution across the entire frame. The DP2M has a perfectly matched, extremely sharp lens giving it an advantage over even the SD1M (as far as I am aware, there is not anything you can mount on the SD1M that matches the fixed lens used on the DP2M - a shame really).
p.21 #9 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
FlyPenFly wrote:
It supposed to be the hottest UWA in APS-C. There's nothing that can touch it right now.
Of course you give up aperture and filters for it.
Really. I will have to look into that lens.
Personally, I think the SD1M is a difficult choice to make with the D800 and it's vast ecosystem around. You just give up so much in versatility and I doubt there is any IQ benefit in actual use.
Conversely, as a single use, limited tool, I think the DP2M is a fairly easy choice at 1K.
p.21 #10 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
At F8.0 the Sig gets close, as long as you don't need large prints or heavy cropping. Unfortunately that means that the 14-24 in many situations can be used at F4.0 and two full steps lower ISO (or 4x shorter shutter speed) - and THAT does make a world of difference in many real-world scenarios. And a good sample of the 14-24 (many seem to have decentering problems) is better over the field at F4.0 than the Sig is at F8.0.
But they're very "different". The Sig is at it's best at the long end, the 14-24 is at it's best at the wide end. And the difference overall package size and handling is pretty noticeable.
p.21 #11 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Right but the Sigma solution is far cheaper than the Nikon solution. I think for general photography use the Nikon solution will be far more flexible. But for tripod situations, I think the Sigma solution can be compelling.
p.21 #14 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
FlyPenFly wrote:
Hmm I think Lloyd found in his testing that the 20mpx of the RX100 is actually only about 12-15 in actual resolved detail.
So you think the SD1 and DP2M outresolves a normal D800 as well?
I don't know, I just find that hard to believe that the DP2M can out resolve an A99, D600, 5D Mk3, and D800.
That kind of "absolute" statements has to be filtered through quite a lot of priors before you can make any useful information out of it.
-What detail contrast do you set as "minimum required" in the resolution?
-How were the images developed?
-What are the circumstances where you can actually get close to the "perfect" (tripod, stationary target and so on) resolution?
I've seen quite a lot of SD1 comparisons. Only in the absolutely best of conditions can it get close to even a now close to antiquated Sony A850 24MP FF camera. AND the FF camera will be a LOT less sensitive to "using the perfect aperture for the lens" and so on.
But the small Merril with the same sensor system should retail for about 1000USD - which makes it a rather sweet deal I think - if the camera fits your usage needs - the camera body and mechanics have their own quirks and let-downs compared to a much faster and more responsive DSLR system...
For the low-light and street shooters out there, a 24MP FF sensor with F2.0 will give them about a two-stop (four-fold) increase in light throughput compared to the Sigma F2.8 lenses on a slightly-smaller-than-APS Foveon sensor. Adding in Sony's later generation sensor low-light abilities, I guess you could increase that margin to three or even four full stops in higher ISO situations.
p.21 #15 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
FlyPenFly wrote:
Right but the Sigma solution is far cheaper than the Nikon solution. I think for general photography use the Nikon solution will be far more flexible. But for tripod situations, I think the Sigma solution can be compelling.
It is. It gives a lot of good imaging competence for a reasonable price and size package. One does have to ask what your personal requirements are, and what your general usage situation will be.
Many of the newer ultra-wide zooms are very competent - especially when you consider what you have to sacrifice to get "anything noticeably better".
p.21 #16 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
That photoshopped "product example" has one fatal flaw...
The last element in the lens is probably something almost close to what an X100 uses - a positive field-flattener just a few mm's in front of the sensor - covering almost the entire sensor surface (which means a ~40mm diameter in a RX1). It will be interesting to see a lens diagram for the RX1.
What you CAN say immediately just by looking at the (what we have to assume are genuine) product images is that most of the interesting stuff from an optical PoV happens BEHIND the aperture. The more you can expand the construction - both in diameter and depth - the more compact you can make the overall package.
The reason why the 24/1.8 is HUGE compared to the focal length and the projection circle (APS) is that it's a Sonnar constructed to do most of the corrective "work" in front of the aperture. This is mostly because the E-mount sets quite strict demands on rear end diameters and BFD, a problem with short lenses.
Spent a few minutes going through all Sony patents in Japan and USA regarding imaging lenses for the last few years, and nothing even remotely like the parameters set by the RX1 is met in any of them. But they MIGHT have put the patent under some other holding company (maybe Zeiss themselves?).
p.21 #17 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
There's a leaked image of the full frame e-mount camcorder floating around on the SAR site. Assuming it's real, is it just me or are the corners of the sensor seem to be cut?
p.21 #19 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
FlyPenFly wrote:
If you created that picture, that's really Dick of them to not at least credit you with it.
That guy was recently in trouble with Ming Thein for posting his photos as well.
They didn't know the source because it was sent to them anonymously, I contacted them and they have now credited me.
sonyalpharumors wrote:
P.S.: Don’t know who is the author of that image sent me anonymously via contact form. You may send me the source if you find it? Thanks!
p.21 #20 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
jonrock wrote:
There's a leaked image of the full frame e-mount camcorder floating around on the SAR site. Assuming it's real, is it just me or are the corners of the sensor seem to be cut?
