Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Upload & Sell
1 2 3 … 60 61 62 … 138 139 end

Yakim Peled
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.61 #1 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

esanchez wrote:
Looks amazing too bad it's WAY too expensive...if it was less expensive I would consider it.

Expensive? What is your point of reference?

Happy shooting,
Yakim.

Oct 12, 2012 at 08:53 AM

Makten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.61 #2 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

I think it's dirt cheap for what you get.

Oct 12, 2012 at 08:54 AM

alundeb
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.61 #3 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

Makten wrote:
I think it's dirt cheap for what you get.

Yup, the D600 + Distagon 35/2 is only a small grand $ less. It is a fair price to pay for miniaturization. If the lens is even better than the Distagon....

I think it is just that the small size and the fixed lens fool the brain to think "P&S pricing" unconciously.

Oct 12, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Jochenb
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.61 #4 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

My biggest complaint remains the price in Europe. It's utterly absurd. I see some bloggers also mentioning it. When you add the EVF, the total price will be around 3700 euro. That's about 4800 US dollar. Dirt cheap? Not in Europe...

Oct 12, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Bijltje
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.61 #5 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

alundeb wrote:
Makten wrote:
I think it's dirt cheap for what you get.

Yup, the D600 + Distagon 35/2 is only a small grand $ less. It is a fair price to pay for miniaturization. If the lens is even better than the Distagon....

I think it is just that the small size and the fixed lens fool the brain to think "P&S pricing" unconciously.

For the price with OFV in europe u can almost buy a used leica M9 with ZM 35 c-biogon.

Its not dirt cheap

Oct 12, 2012 at 02:04 PM

Kit Laughlin
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.61 #6 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

Does anyone know the reasons why European prices are so high?

And $4,800 with EVF is not cheap, at all. And for me personally, the form factor of the Leica bodies does not suit me at all, so that's not an option for me.

Oct 12, 2012 at 02:07 PM

dasrocket
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.61 #7 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

dirt...isn't cheap -it's real estate...

Oct 12, 2012 at 02:10 PM

michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.61 #8 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

I don't get the 'round the world pricing either. Currently it sits at $2999 + 12% tax (where I live) in Canada, despite the Canadian dollar being stronger than the U.S. at present.

There was a minor price delta in the same direction for the NEX-7 too, if I'm remembering correctly, although I had a $100 off coupon I could apply to any sizable order value back then so the net was close to U.S. pricing.

Maybe if it were not made in Japan...

Oct 12, 2012 at 03:07 PM

alundeb
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.61 #9 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

Bijltje wrote:
alundeb wrote:
Makten wrote:
I think it's dirt cheap for what you get.

Yup, the D600 + Distagon 35/2 is only a small grand $ less. It is a fair price to pay for miniaturization. If the lens is even better than the Distagon....

I think it is just that the small size and the fixed lens fool the brain to think "P&S pricing" unconciously.

For the price with OFV in europe u can almost buy a used leica M9 with ZM 35 c-biogon.

Its not dirt cheap

Why do people keep adding accessories, and then compare prices with used cameras?

Besides, you don't get the same at all with the M9. It is much bigger and heavier, and does not have live view. I don't care for rangefinders and don't need an OVF or EVF.

And now let us start talking about high ISO performance.

__I__ get a lot more for my money with the RX1.

Oct 12, 2012 at 03:56 PM

sebboh
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.61 #10 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

Bijltje wrote:
alundeb wrote:
Makten wrote:
I think it's dirt cheap for what you get.

Yup, the D600 + Distagon 35/2 is only a small grand $ less. It is a fair price to pay for miniaturization. If the lens is even better than the Distagon....

I think it is just that the small size and the fixed lens fool the brain to think "P&S pricing" unconciously.

For the price with OFV in europe u can almost buy a used leica M9 with ZM 35 c-biogon.

Its not dirt cheap

perhaps that's true by you due to the sillyness of international pricing. the RX1 plus evf (which i'd much rather have than the optical finder) costs less than half what an m9 plus biogon would cost by me. also, the c-biogon is only f/2.8. why not zm 35/2 for an extra $300?

having said that, the cameras are very different – e.g. rangefinder versus liveview camera. i would be willing to pay more for the RX1 than i would be willing to pay for an m9 simply because (on paper at least) i like the camera design better.

Oct 12, 2012 at 04:20 PM

michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.61 #11 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

Myself, I would not buy the M9 today as I really do want ^much^ better performance when I need to jack sensitivity up, better than what the M9 can deliver, better than what I use now. I want live view. I do want some limited macro ability.

The reality is there really is no other camera out there that compares with this one at present, but if you wanted to emulate it at a basic functionality level (full frame, good lens), you'd have to spend even more albeit you'd get more flexibility, particularly with a DSLR, in return. Alternatively... maybe a NEX-6 (which appears to be a winning combo of features and performance) with a ZA 24/1.8 would be an alternative for less dollars and more flexibility.

If you like 35 on 35, and intend to use the heck of of it, the price isn't out of whack at all for what you get. My principal concern with the camera has to do with longevity and Sony support. Comments about the build are encouraging, but only time will tell.

Starting today's link fest (which is likely to slow down now), here's a video from Steve Huff going over the camera in some detail.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSmV39bNuK4

Oct 12, 2012 at 04:34 PM

snowboarder
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.61 #12 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

michaelwatkins wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSmV39bNuK4

Looks really sweet. I wish he explained why the new EVF was "better"...
I think this is light years ahead of the old M9, the lenses can be compared,
but RX1 is just so much better. For my type of photography M9 is unusable.

Oct 12, 2012 at 05:17 PM

michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.61 #13 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

In print Huff also said the new EVF was better than the one integrated in the NEX-7. What that means, who knows. Maybe the improved sensor has more to do with the experience than changes in the EVF? Whatever the case, it's good news.

Oh, Huff has another piece:
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2012/10/12/sony-week-wrap-up-and-more-thoughts-on-the-sony-rx1/

Oct 12, 2012 at 05:25 PM

pdmphoto
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.61 #14 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

Really hard to get interested in this camera when I have my Samsung NX200 with the 30/2 sitting next to me here. No EVF but then I could always get a NX20 or wait for the NX300 or NX-R.

Just seems like too much for a fixed lens camera with no EVF. I'd rather shoot with APS-C and have 24mm (16/2.4), 45mm (30/2), and other interchangeable lenses. I can transfer the lenses to a new body as time progreses. Hard to imagine me saying that after being a big fan of FF sensors (and using them exclusively over APS-C for about ten years). There are other factors that are important to me though.

Seems like Steve Huff is really doing his best to be a Sony representative, rather than objective user.

Oct 12, 2012 at 06:10 PM

michaelwatkins
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.61 #15 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

With regards to the cost of the camera you could make almost the very same objection about a NEX-7 with the ZA24/1.8 or a ZM25/2.8 and the Hawk close focus helicoid adapter you would need for equivalent functionality. If you want the latest in APS-C sensor technology and one of either of those Zeiss lenses your cost will be approaching that of the RX 1.

For about 800 dollars more you get access to the full frame sensor, but yes you're going to have to spend another 5 or 600 dollars more for a viewfinder. That is my main objection regarding cost. [1]

This camera isn't marketed towards those want an interchangeable lens camera, and in that regard the RX1 is similar to the Fujifilm X 100. Probably the cost of the camera will serve as a useful filter to help prevent those who aren't sure what they want in a camera from buying it.

[1] I suppose if I ever did buy another NEX (or other Sony camera without EVF) that external EVF will probably be useful on other bodies.

Oct 12, 2012 at 06:49 PM

sebboh
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.61 #16 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

pdmphoto wrote:
Really hard to get interested in this camera when I have my Samsung NX200 with the 30/2 sitting next to me here. No EVF but then I could always get a NX20 or wait for the NX300 or NX-R.

Just seems like too much for a fixed lens camera with no EVF. I'd rather shoot with APS-C and have 24mm (16/2.4), 45mm (30/2), and other interchangeable lenses. I can transfer the lenses to a new body as time progreses. Hard to imagine me saying that after being a big fan of FF sensors (and using them exclusively over APS-C for about ten years). There are other factors that are important to me though.

Seems like Steve Huff is really doing his best to be a Sony representative, rather than objective user.

ha, ha. i seem to remember you saying you'd never ever seen an aps-c image that impressed you not too long ago.

it depends on what you're looking for. i would much rather shoot a 35/2 than a 24/3.5 or 45/2.8 (equiv) and nobody else has anything close to that in such a small package. size, light gathering, fov, and dof are all quite important to me. the lack of flip lcd and built in evf do worry me a bit though...

steve huff loves every camera he touches for at least the first week, so in a way he is kinda being objective.

Oct 12, 2012 at 07:11 PM

Bijltje
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.61 #17 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

alundeb wrote:
Bijltje wrote:
alundeb wrote:
Makten wrote:
I think it's dirt cheap for what you get.

Yup, the D600 + Distagon 35/2 is only a small grand $ less. It is a fair price to pay for miniaturization. If the lens is even better than the Distagon....

I think it is just that the small size and the fixed lens fool the brain to think "P&S pricing" unconciously.

For the price with OFV in europe u can almost buy a used leica M9 with ZM 35 c-biogon.

Its not dirt cheap

Why do people keep adding accessories, and then compare prices with used cameras?

Besides, you don't get the same at all with the M9. It is much bigger and heavier, and does not have live view. I don't care for rangefinders and don't need an OVF or EVF.

And now let us start talking about high ISO performance.

__I__ get a lot more for my money with the RX1.

Maybe its not all about u?

Above someone called it dirty cheap. 3100 euro for a fixed lens camera (with means in 2 years when the sensor is old school u can throw away the lens as well) or 3500 to 3800 euro for the same camera with EVF of OVF seems to me as an awful lot of money.

When I compare it to different camera's for the same or less money I see there's a lot u can buy for that amount with simular or better performance. M9, D800E, 6D, NEX7 ect.

Sure this RX1 is great since it combines a big sensor with a small body, but u pay a lot for that advantage.

And the only performance proof I have really seen from the lens is a calculated MTF chart. Not really comparable withe leica's or zeisses measured charts.

Oct 12, 2012 at 07:53 PM

alundeb
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.61 #18 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

Bijltje wrote:
alundeb wrote:
Bijltje wrote:
alundeb wrote:
Makten wrote:
I think it's dirt cheap for what you get.

Yup, the D600 + Distagon 35/2 is only a small grand $ less. It is a fair price to pay for miniaturization. If the lens is even better than the Distagon....

I think it is just that the small size and the fixed lens fool the brain to think "P&S pricing" unconciously.

For the price with OFV in europe u can almost buy a used leica M9 with ZM 35 c-biogon.

Its not dirt cheap

Why do people keep adding accessories, and then compare prices with used cameras?

Besides, you don't get the same at all with the M9. It is much bigger and heavier, and does not have live view. I don't care for rangefinders and don't need an OVF or EVF.

And now let us start talking about high ISO performance.

__I__ get a lot more for my money with the RX1.

Maybe its not all about u?

Above someone called it dirty cheap. 3100 euro for a fixed lens camera (with means in 2 years when the sensor is old school u can throw away the lens as well) or 3500 to 3800 euro for the same camera with EVF of OVF seems to me as an awful lot of money.

When I compare it to different camera's for the same or less money I see there's a lot u can buy for that amount with simular or better performance. M9, D800E, 6D, NEX7 ect.

Sure this RX1 is great since it combines a big sensor with a small body, but u pay a lot for that advantage.

And the only performance proof I have really seen from the lens is a calculated MTF chart. Not really comparable withe leica's or zeisses measured charts.

I see you try really hard to give me reasons to not get this camera, but unfortunately they don't work.

The sensor will not be old school in 2 years. The Sony 16 MP EXMOR APS-C sensor is just over 2 years and still going strong.

There will not be a similar camera with EVF or OVF. There is simply no space for it. The camera will have to be larger.

It is not true that we pay a lot for the advantage of the size of this performance. The cheapest big and heavy alternative at this performance is only a few percent cheaper.

Oct 12, 2012 at 08:15 PM

Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.61 #19 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

Kit Laughlin wrote:
Does anyone know the reasons why European prices are so high?

And $4,800 with EVF is not cheap, at all. And for me personally, the form factor of the Leica bodies does not suit me at all, so that's not an option for me.

Sure.

1) most EU countries have sorta high VAT (our does have 20% I think, Ireland had or have 21% etc.)
2) import taxes
3) last but not least, Sony pricing

Truth is that its mostly Sony (but first 2 factors are there). Thing is that 5DMK3 or D800 costs pretty much like anywhere else. So question is why is Sony so expensive. Well, answer is simple. Sony hates EU (or rather say, they live in certain illusion that they are "premium" brand here) and so they set ridiculous prices.

For example A900 when new was around 3200 EUR (4000 USD) here. You can imagine they didnt sell much of them. Tho our Sony Czech is particulary insane, our neighborough Austria is bit more "sane". But not by much..

Oct 12, 2012 at 08:50 PM

sebboh
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.61 #20 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)

Bijltje wrote:
When I compare it to different camera's for the same or less money I see there's a lot u can buy for that amount with simular or better performance. M9, D800E, 6D, NEX7 ect.

Sure this RX1 is great since it combines a big sensor with a small body, but u pay a lot for that advantage.

all of those cameras are a lot more expensive when you include the zeiss (or leica) 35mm lens (the m9 is much more expensive even without a lens). the nex-7 is cheaper but there is no comparable lens for it. they are also, as you point out, significantly larger.

Oct 12, 2012 at 08:54 PM

1 2 3 … 60 61 62 … 138 139 end
FM Forums \| Alternative Gear & Lenses \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 60 61 62 … 138 139 end