Makten's first copy seemed far worse than what Lloyd has shown. It's all about expectations and what each and one of us consider okay taking the price into consideration. I've said it before, the RX1 really is awesome. I'll probably get one in the future some time.

Martin just showed his one close range tesr which most people thought was not a proper/good test due to short distance to target. I looked at all hos posted shots and don't see any decentering. Maybe he could post 100% crops of his Stockholms slott image which seems to be fine but is a better test for decentering.
I understand you can take it back and get another copy if you like. But minor performance variation can not be considered gross QC issue. And price should not matter in this issue. You can see from Lensrentals graphs of different manufacturers lenses that there is quite some expected variation.

I'm glad you are happy with your RX1.

Seriously, my point is best summed up best bywhat Roger Cicala just mentioned to me on this subject is "Perfection doesn't exist at any price". His articles have shown how much variation is normal between lens copies and even left and right sides of a lens. Also, he can tell how easy it is for very slight amounts off from being square to a close target can affect the results.
Performance not equal to perfect is not grounds for saying there is a QC issue. No matter the price.

Well, who really cares? I think it's fair to say that for most people, as price goes up, so does expectations for the feel of quality, among other factors. If you would like to call a non-circular aperture (where OOF highlights look awkward), bleeding rear LCD, or the right hand side corners (not the color cast) of the first copy I got - for "normal variation" - then that's awesome. My only point is: My expectations weren't met for a $4200 camera. Plain and simple. I'm not bashing the camera at all, it just didn't work for me at $4200. I understand I'm not alone in this, even for people paying $2800.

mortyb wrote:
Well, who really cares? I think it's fair to say that for most people, as price goes up, so does expectations for the feel of quality, among other factors. If you would like to call a non-circular aperture (where OOF highlights look awkward), bleeding rear LCD, or the right hand side corners (not the color cast) of the first copy I got - for "normal variation" - then that's awesome. My only point is: My expectations weren't met for a $4200 camera. Plain and simple. I'm not bashing the camera at all, it just didn't work for me at $4200. I understand I'm not alone in this, even for people paying $2800.

"My expectations weren't met for a $4200 camera. Plain and simple."

I can not agree more after reading most from the internet about this camera, (also Lloyd Chambers)

I feel the same way. I expected more quality for the money.

mortyb wrote:
Well, who really cares? I think it's fair to say that for most people, as price goes up, so does expectations for the feel of quality, among other factors. If you would like to call a non-circular aperture (where OOF highlights look awkward), bleeding rear LCD, or the right hand side corners (not the color cast) of the first copy I got - for "normal variation" - then that's awesome. My only point is: My expectations weren't met for a $4200 camera. Plain and simple. I'm not bashing the camera at all, it just didn't work for me at $4200. I understand I'm not alone in this, even for people paying $2800.

From what I've seen, the images from the RX1 are quite good. The handling seems ok (I'd like more options regarding auto ISO in M mode, but oh well). What I really miss though, are: 1. GPS built-in (it's just so handy for geotagging, I've shot over 100k images, and doing it manually is a drag...), 2. flip LCD with touch screen (my Nex 5n showed me that it can be handy at times).

Oh, and the battery life seems disappointing.

I think I'm going to wait some more for a price drop, and some sort of bundle to come out, and then reconsider.

So, while I really like the idea of the RX1, Sony did sort of blow it with the execution and the pricing, especially on the accessories (the ones I'd want add a whopping 33% to the price).

Camera: 3100
Viewfinder: 500
Lens hood: 200
extra battery: 50 each (so 100 total)
battery charger: 50
Sony case: 200

Total 3100 + 500 + 200 + 100 + 50 + 200 = 4150 euros.

Nikon D600: 1669 (D800 is 2300)
Nikon 35 f1.4: 1400
Zeiss 35 f1.4 (no AF): 1600

Total either 3069 (Nikon 35) or 3269 (Zeiss 35).

But it sure looks like an awesome camera, imho.

wayne seltzer wrote:
Performance not equal to perfect is not grounds for saying there is a QC issue. No matter the price.

Very true. But the variety of colour casts seen by various people is definitely a QC issue.

Yesterday I returned home from ten days in Sweden. I only brought RX1 and RX100 and it was perfect. I shot landscapes and some reindeers along the way, and of course family members in various light. No issues at all and I'm very happy with the image quality! When I have time I'll post some shots in the picture thread.

So glad it worked out, because this will now be my light traveling kit (urban, and warm climate with lots of walking).

Now for a little accessory talk - I was looking for a half case for the RX1 and stumbled across the Korean "Gariz" offerings on eBay.

Ordered the case yesterday, it arrived TODAY from Seoul via Fedex Intl prio (for an extra $20 shipping).

The quality is exquisit. The leather feels and smells great, the stitching is meticulously aligned. The thick, shiny bottom plate is precisely cut and adds just the right amount of height to the camera to allow for a better grip.

I got the EVF today and it instantly transformed the RX1 to what I've wanted it to be all the time. The image is large, crisp and gives a nice DR. The only downside is that your eye must be centered to get a sharp image of the corners. Oh, and of course it's butt ugly.

I have a question for those who have shot with the NEX 7 as well as with the RX1.

Other than the obvious difference of one being a crop sensor and the other being a FF sensor.How much difference do you see in IQ? Color,detail,etc between the 2.Comparing quality glass used on the NEX 7 of course.All i am interested in is strictly IQ.
-Jim

Interesting question, Jim, and I am looking forward to the answers.

I have not shot with any of them, but has been on the fence for both, and after looking at a lot of pictures and following threads, my impression is, that it (color, details) is a bit better with the RX1, the iso-performance is really better, and of course you get the thin dof with the RX1, and that matters for many.

But let us hear from the real users of those 2 cameras.

Jim, I had a NEX7 and shot it with various lenses including some of my Leica ones. I ended up mostly with the Sony Zeiss 24 1.8 as it was such as nice combination of AF and IQ. I now have a RX1 and have sold my NEX7. I am still keeping my 24 1.8 for now as I'm still very impressed with this lens. Tack sharp and beautiful rendering.

I do not have side by side comparisons as I sold the NEX7 prior to buying the RX1. From looking back at some of my recent pics, I won't say the NEX 7 with the 24 1.8 is inferior to the RX1 in anyway if you look purely at IQ shot at base or close to base ISO. Noise starts to creep in on my NEX7 even at ISO400 and probably hit my limit at ISO800 whereas I am not bothered by the noise on my RX1 until ISO3200. The colors on RX1 and NEX7 & 24/1.8 looked similar (RAW) but you can definitely push the files on the RX1 more than the NEX7. Both the RX1 and 24 1.8 have the Zeiss pop and contrast look to them. Dynamic range on the NEX7 was very good, certainly the best of APC sensors. If you don't need full frame, high ISO or a more compact setup, I would say the NEX7 with good glass is a better buy. For me, I wanted full frame and high ISO in a relatively compact setup which led me to the RX1.

I was really skeptical of the RX1 when it was announced. Up till December, I wasn't even interested in the camera or bothered looking at the reviews. But when an opportunity turned up and one was available, I decided to give it a try and am liking it so far except for possibly four caveats. 1. I still think its too expensive for what it is, especially considering that you most probably need to add the EVF. 2. battery performance sucks big time, but luckily you can buy cheap knockoffs for $10 a pop 3. I expected better barrel correctionfor carrying the Zeiss name. I need to add +12 to +14 barrel correction in LR4 on the RAW files and I'm effectively throwing away pixels. 4. video implementation was watered down compared to the A99, ie no mic volume control, no focus peaking in manual video mode, no histogram display in manual video mode. Again not important to many shooters but Sony really could have done better here.

Hope this helps.

Joe, thank you for a detailed comparison of the 2 cameras. Very much appreciated
Jim

HelenaN wrote:
Yesterday I returned home from ten days in Sweden. I only brought RX1 and RX100 and it was perfect. I shot landscapes and some reindeers along the way, and of course family members in various light. No issues at all and I'm very happy with the image quality! When I have time I'll post some shots in the picture thread.

So glad it worked out, because this will now be my light traveling kit (urban, and warm climate with lots of walking).

Seems like an awesome combination! RX1 and RX100 would be perfect if RX1's AF becomes more capable through firmware optimization.

I'm having a weird problem, but it's more about my computer than the camera. Sorry to bring it up here, but I didn't know where else to ask and I hope that someone can help.


I use Windows 7 and when I connected RX1 (using the USB cable) my computer recognized the camera and it showed up in the file Explorer with name and all, and I could see the folders for each day. It looked like this (but said RX1 instead of RX100, of course):

My guess is that you've changed the USB connection mode in the camera settings. Compare it with what you've got set on the RX100 and change the setting.

Did you format the card in the camera?

The 2nd view looks like what I see on my NEX-7.