Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)
/forum/topic/1147292/155

1       2       3              155      
156
       157              192       193       end

millsart
Registered: Apr 29, 2009
Total Posts: 5077
Country: N/A

douglasf13 wrote:


I'd imagine the 32/1.2 still focuses pretty fast. It's still only equivalent to shooting f3.3 on FF, so there's some depth of field to work with.

I went with the V1 for a friend (when it was super on-sale,) because I figured he'd appreciate the fast AF and size over the IQ differences, since he'd only been shooting P&S cameras up till that point.



The 32mm f1.2 uses Nikon's Silent Wave Motor (SWM) like the higher end G series and also the newer Nano coating, so pretty much is a lens that is fitting of its $900 price tag for the most part.

Seems pricey though compared to the prices of the body, to say the least.

All accounts I've read so far say its very sharp wide open, and quite fast to focus, obviously giving plenty of light for the PDAF system to work.

Nikon is really doing some pretty innovative stuff in with the system that hopefully we can see translate more to the mirrorless market as a whole.

PDAF with good subject tracking abilities on par with a DSLR, something that has always been otherwise elusive in mirror-less, even the EP5/OMD. It can clearly be done though

Ultra fast but compact lens, there have been some f1.4 options on the market, but this is the first f1.2 I've come across. Hopefully its the sign of more to follow, as Panny has the Nocti f1.2 45mm announced as well. Shows that there is a demand for fast glass on smaller sensors, which helps to give increased DoF control and allow shooting at lower ISO's.

Electronic Shutters - Panny has one in the GX7 as a silent option, with limitations IIRC, but electronic shutters of course can give very fast fps rates, zero shutter shock/bounce issues, and of course are totally silent. Hopefully we start to see more models using an electronic or global shutter.



philip_pj
Registered: Apr 03, 2009
Total Posts: 3142
Country: Australia

'I'm not sure that any of the IQ or size advantages of a fixed lens camera are going to translate to a tele.'

Precision engineering (the body-lens interface and the lens-sensor assembly interface) coupled with superior manufacturing methods and higher levels of QA are almost certain to result in a better outcome - for a given lens performance. Sony say so and I agree as it makes simple good sense, and will of course apply to all FL lenses.

All these things are made to a price...more money = better product, ceteris paribus. It's the Leica principle again - make the product to very high levels and it WILL last. The RX1 is a long life, long ownership camera, if the user desires.

Size - I don't believe the range of shooting opportunities and shooter confidence and accessibility of the camera for shot preparation are equal for a D800 plus 85/1.4 Nikkor, and the kind of RX I describe hypothetically. Not even close. Not to mention the effects of IBIS, a quiet and low inertia leaf shutter. It would make the large body/lens combos look and feel like a V8 supercar compared to a Le Mans Audi.

The fact that the interior of the camera can be retained in pristine condition is another factor in fixed lens cameras that is very attractive - everything will degrade over time, and steady ingress of dust, moisture and assorted gunk cannot do much for product longevity - for ILCs that is. Not everyone wants to be a camera mechanic ;-)



douglasf13
Registered: Apr 09, 2008
Total Posts: 6108
Country: United States

philip_pj wrote:
'I'm not sure that any of the IQ or size advantages of a fixed lens camera are going to translate to a tele.'

Precision engineering (the body-lens interface and the lens-sensor assembly interface) coupled with superior manufacturing methods and higher levels of QA are almost certain to result in a better outcome - for a given lens performance. Sony say so and I agree as it makes simple good sense, and will of course apply to all FL lenses.

All these things are made to a price...more money = better product, ceteris paribus. It's the Leica principle again - make the product to very high levels and it WILL last. The RX1 is a long life, long ownership camera, if the user desires.

Size - I don't believe the range of shooting opportunities and shooter confidence and accessibility of the camera for shot preparation are equal for a D800 plus 85/1.4 Nikkor, and the kind of RX I describe hypothetically. Not even close. Not to mention the effects of IBIS, a quiet and low inertia leaf shutter. It would make the large body/lens combos look and feel like a V8 supercar compared to a Le Mans Audi.

The fact that the interior of the camera can be retained in pristine condition is another factor in fixed lens cameras that is very attractive - everything will degrade over time, and steady ingress of dust, moisture and assorted gunk cannot do much for product longevity - for ILCs that is. Not everyone wants to be a camera mechanic ;-)


The trick of the RX1 is that it has a very complicated rear element that acts as a field flattener, and that rear element being so close to the sensor is why tolerances have to be so tight. An 85mm lens wouldn't require such a design, so I can't see how an "RX85" would make much sense, when one could just buy the new FF NEX (assuming it is real) and attach some kind of M tele (until a native tele came for the FF NEX.) There won't be much of a potential savings on size by having a fixed tele as compared to fixed normal/wides. Plus, I'd want a built-in EVF for an 85mm lens, because the DOF would make focusing with an OVF unreliable.



TMaG82
Registered: Aug 31, 2012
Total Posts: 614
Country: United States

Much like millsart, I really enjoyed the RX1 but I too have moved on from it. The IQ is incredible and until the FF-NEX comes out and is proven, the IQ won't be matched in its size. I got mine for a great price from Amazon and really enjoyed shooting with it. It wasn't until I got my wife a EOS M though that my opinion changed. I found out how much I missed shooting different focal lengths. In the few short weeks that went by my GAS went nuts.

- Bought a EOS-M (subsequently returned).
- Bought a NEX-7
- Sold RX1
- Bought 3 Legacy glass and a Speed Booster
- Realized that I'm not a big MF guy and was getting more OOF pictures than ever.
- Bought my wife a RX100MII
- Realized how having fast AF and various focal lengths are important to me.
- Determined that I need fast, responsive AF, proper handling, and interchangeable lens.
- Saw the press release for the new Panasonic GX7, did some research on the vast native lenses for the m4/3, the placed my preorder for it.

I realized at this point in my photography taking life, fast AF is important for capturing my growing daughter who's 4 months now. Sluggish AF and missing focus won't cut it. I don't view at 100%, don't pixel peep, etc.



douglasf13
Registered: Apr 09, 2008
Total Posts: 6108
Country: United States

FWIW, the large majority of my pictures have been of my 16 month old, and I've had no real issues with the RX1's AF. If you stop the camera down quite a bit to match the depth of field of the smaller sensors, the focus issues are even less.



TMaG82
Registered: Aug 31, 2012
Total Posts: 614
Country: United States

douglasf13 wrote:
FWIW, the large majority of my pictures have been of my 16 month old, and I've had no real issues with the RX1's AF. If you stop the camera down quite a bit to match the depth of field of the smaller sensors, the focus issues are even less.


I've noticed that too. I just may reacquire a RX1 again in the future, this time maybe a RX1R, just needed to rationalize yet another camera purchase to my wife. Se fully supports my hobby, just not having multiple bodies/systems around. Funny how getting another lens doesn't seem to bother her, but show her me shooting with 2 bodies and she thinks its the end of the world.

I just have an overseas trip coming up and would like to have a bag of lenses to play with. The GX7 seems to satisfy my desire to have both an EVF, tilt screen, and quality native glass. And seeing that it will AF even up to -4 EV, and have a tilt EVF seems to seal the deal for me. But much like anyone else I just love buying new toys.



sebboh
Registered: Nov 02, 2009
Total Posts: 10763
Country: United States

TMaG82 wrote:
Much like millsart, I really enjoyed the RX1 but I too have moved on from it. The IQ is incredible and until the FF-NEX comes out and is proven, the IQ won't be matched in its size. I got mine for a great price from Amazon and really enjoyed shooting with it. It wasn't until I got my wife a EOS M though that my opinion changed. I found out how much I missed shooting different focal lengths. In the few short weeks that went by my GAS went nuts.

- Bought a EOS-M (subsequently returned).
- Bought a NEX-7
- Sold RX1
- Bought 3 Legacy glass and a Speed Booster
- Realized that I'm not a big MF guy and was getting more OOF pictures than ever.
- Bought my wife a RX100MII
- Realized how having fast AF and various focal lengths are important to me.
- Determined that I need fast, responsive AF, proper handling, and interchangeable lens.
- Saw the press release for the new Panasonic GX7, did some research on the vast native lenses for the m4/3, the placed my preorder for it.

I realized at this point in my photography taking life, fast AF is important for capturing my growing daughter who's 4 months now. Sluggish AF and missing focus won't cut it. I don't view at 100%, don't pixel peep, etc.


i had pretty much the exact opposite reaction to getting the rx1. i bring along my NEX-7 with longer lenses periodically but never get it out. 35mm is great for 90% of my shooting. i'm sure as time wears on i'll want to use some my favorite lenses more for their unique looks, but i don't feel like i need them at all.

with regard to AF the rx1 certainly hasn't changed my opinion that AF is useless for shooting people, but manual focus is easier than expected due to the large dof and nice pop from the lens. btw, if you think tracking a 4 month old is hard just wait till she can run and jump and climb.



millsart
Registered: Apr 29, 2009
Total Posts: 5077
Country: N/A

douglasf13 wrote:
FWIW, the large majority of my pictures have been of my 16 month old, and I've had no real issues with the RX1's AF. If you stop the camera down quite a bit to match the depth of field of the smaller sensors, the focus issues are even less.


RX1 focus is always surprisingly spot on, even wide open. I've been nothing less than thrilled with how accurate its proven to be, and certainly stopped down a bit you can work with a zone focus method that works great because the RX1 has next to zero shutter lag (a point few seem to mention)

At the same time, I think its still a bit of a more contemplative style camera. I've actually used it for some sports images, and it worked great, but, I used it in a much different manner than a Nikon D3s.

Its basically the difference in responding to the action vs planning a shot. When I'm going after a photo of a deeply thrown pass, I don't know where in the field its going, I pretty much sit in the back of the endzone with a long lenses, and when I see the ball is up in the air, find the receiver and motor drive the heck out of it. That's pretty reactive shooting, with a fair bit of experience knowing which might be a favorite target of the QB and such...

On the other hand, if I happen to see the sun in setting low on one side of the field for a HS Friday night game, and there is some nice color in the sky, I might get the idea to get a silhouette type shot of a kid getting taped up on the bench or something, or the guys all standing along the sidelines holding their helmets. I envision an idea and go looking for the right subject to make it happen.

That in a nutshell is sort of two different approaches I see to photography, at least in my style. You could say its the difference from a street shooter sitting and waiting for someone to pass a certain spot, or merely walking down the street and shooting stuff as it happens.

V1 is fantastic at the first, RX1 is excellent at the later examples. Doesn't mean they can't be used in other ways, but for me, the way I shot, and sometimes even what I shoot, is dictated by the tool I have in hand.



douglasf13
Registered: Apr 09, 2008
Total Posts: 6108
Country: United States

Yeah, I don't do a lot of faster moving people at wide aperture, so I usually don't have any issues. For people street stuff, I just stop down a few stops or so and either zone focus or AF on the street below people, and it works fine. If I'm trying to get "action" shots of my son, I just stop down a little, and the AF works fine most of the time.



melcat
Registered: Jun 13, 2008
Total Posts: 731
Country: Australia

According to the instructions the camera has an "internal rechargeable battery" which keeps the clock running when the main battery is changed. While a clever idea, I thought such batteries had a limited life. I wonder whether anyone here knows what kind of battery it is, how long it would last, and the procedure/cost for changing it. It doesn't strike me as a camera that can be casually taken apart.



philip_pj
Registered: Apr 03, 2009
Total Posts: 3142
Country: Australia

'At the same time, I think its still a bit of a more contemplative style camera.'

Yes, I can understand that response. I would say it is more a camera that rewards shot preparation which is an EVF advantage also, as you can tailor the image in its final appearance quite accurately. Bokeh preview is very important to me as I need a lot of subject separation to minimise clutter. IQ is very important to me, others too.

AF is everybody's moan in reviews, I guess DSLR level speed is needed for such people. Not me, and not for a lot of photography either.

Douglas, any such config will confer a big advantage in precision engineering and matching, that is my main point, though the single lens design opens up more 'degrees of freedom' additionally, should any exist or be known.

Here is a RX1r comparo with a 5D3 + Sigma 'Art' 35/1.4:

http://force-photos.blogspot.fr/2013/08/sony-rx1r-my-feel.html

Which has a greater sense of realism, colour appeal and speaking generally, image quality?



TMaG82
Registered: Aug 31, 2012
Total Posts: 614
Country: United States

I guess it would've been easier for me to use the camera in good light but because most of my shooting of my daughter is reserved for indoor shooting now, I didn't do too much stopping down. Also maybe my mistake was I was using center point AF which resulted in a higher share of OOF shots.

No system is going to be perfect and I'm not expecting a m4/3 system to be either. I did to some comparisons size/weight wise between the Panasonic 24-70 and 70-200 equivalent zooms (12-35, 35-100) and their Nikon FF equals and it seemed like a joke. While I'm not saying the m4/3 is the same IQ wise, but even if I can get say 70% of the IQ, I'll take it with the size savings.

I'm saying this all now, but I'll probably use the m4/3 system for a while, take a gander at the FF-NEX and use some weird methodology to convince myself that I need to make another switch. The 2nd hand market must love me.



alundeb
Registered: Nov 06, 2005
Total Posts: 4561
Country: Norway

philip_pj wrote:

Here is a RX1r comparo with a 5D3 + Sigma 'Art' 35/1.4:

http://force-photos.blogspot.fr/2013/08/sony-rx1r-my-feel.html

Which has a greater sense of realism, colour appeal and speaking generally, image quality?


Philip, it strikes me that you are not as critical with your sources as with your image quality.

In that article, we can read that removing the AA filter gives a higher resolution image. I dispute that as a fact, and argue that the truth is that you get higher actuance at the expense of false detail entering the image, false detail that can never be repaired to the quality of a sharpened AA filtered image.

As for the image comparisons, they are not matched for brightness in the first place. The differences in color reveal more than anything that not much care has been taken to acheive accurate colors with either camera.



douglasf13
Registered: Apr 09, 2008
Total Posts: 6108
Country: United States

philip_pj wrote:


Douglas, any such config will confer a big advantage in precision engineering and matching, that is my main point, though the single lens design opens up more 'degrees of freedom' additionally, should any exist or be known.

Here is a RX1r comparo with a 5D3 + Sigma 'Art' 35/1.4:

http://force-photos.blogspot.fr/2013/08/sony-rx1r-my-feel.html

Which has a greater sense of realism, colour appeal and speaking generally, image quality?


Hi, Philip. Using that comparison to justify an advantage for a fixed tele is a false equivalence, which was my point. A fixed lens makes perfect sense for a wide angle, but those advantages go away with a tele, which is likely why I can think of many, many fixed lens standard/wide prime cameras that have been made over the years, but only one with a tele (and its a short tele/macro,)



douglasf13
Registered: Apr 09, 2008
Total Posts: 6108
Country: United States

I wanted to report a quick tip for the RX1. As many of you know, you can set one of the user definable buttons to deactivate the LCD, which is nice for OVF use, but there is still a strip along the bottom of the LCD which shows exposure info. I find that handy, but, if you set the LCD mode to the "For Viewfinder" setting first, and the deactivate the LCD, the whole thing goes black, which I didn't realize.

Secondly, if you're looking for one of the smallest bag options around for the RX1, you might want to look at the LowePro Apex 60 AW. I cut the center divider out of it, and it fits my RX1 with the Voigtlander 35mm OVF attached, as well as a UV filter and 49->37 stepdown ring as a hood, albeit VERY snugly. I also put an ND filter, extra battery and SD card in a tiny draw string sack, and I was able to wedge it in there pretty easily, as well. This bag is cheap and comes with an all weather cover, so you might take a look. I've had one for several years, and it is holding up well. I can't really think of a better, smaller case option, although it does have a more technical look to it, which you may or may not like (I blackened out the orange parts with a Sharpie.)



vovkinson
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Total Posts: 844
Country: United States

your story is good , now show us some pics of your "perfect" bag

douglasf13 wrote:
I wanted to report a quick tip for the RX1. As many of you know, you can set one of the user definable buttons to deactivate the LCD, which is nice for OVF use, but there is still a strip along the bottom of the LCD which shows exposure info. I find that handy, but, if you set the LCD mode to the "For Viewfinder" setting first, and the deactivate the LCD, the whole thing goes black, which I didn't realize.

Secondly, if you're looking for one of the smallest bag options around for the RX1, you might want to look at the LowePro Apex 60 AW. I cut the center divider out of it, and it fits my RX1 with the Voigtlander 35mm OVF attached, as well as a UV filter and 49->37 stepdown ring as a hood, albeit VERY snugly. I also put an ND filter, extra battery and SD card in a tiny draw string sack, and I was able to wedge it in there pretty easily, as well. This bag is cheap and comes with an all weather cover, so you might take a look. I've had one for several years, and it is holding up well. I can't really think of a better, smaller case option, although it does have a more technical look to it, which you may or may not like (I blackened out the orange parts with a Sharpie.)



stuuke
Registered: Feb 28, 2002
Total Posts: 1600
Country: United States

I bought the Crumpler Sebang Outpost small and it fits the RX1 with viewfinder attached and my RX100. It still has plenty of room for batteries and is pretty compact.



douglasf13
Registered: Apr 09, 2008
Total Posts: 6108
Country: United States

stuuke wrote:
I bought the Crumpler Sebang Outpost small and it fits the RX1 with viewfinder attached and my RX100. It still has plenty of room for batteries and is pretty compact.


Yeah, this has been a problem that I kept running into, in that I wanted the absolute, most compact little bag that would fit the camera and not much else. The Sebang Outpost is still probably double the size of the LowePro Apex 60 AW (and 5x the price.) I'll have to post some pics when I get home.



cityathrt
Registered: Aug 08, 2013
Total Posts: 21
Country: United States

As a former RX1 user (and newcomer to FR, hello everyone!) I just wanted to chime in with my two cents on this topic. I had one for about half a year and really appreciated the amazing image quality in the compact form factor. For those who like to appreciate their camera as well as images coming out of the machine, the RX1 is utterly marvelous to hold and use. No other alternative feels quite like a work of art in itself. I struggle to connect emotionally with a DSLR, and other mirrorless options just simply aren't on the same premium level.

The quality of the files simply blew me away, and while the lens wasn't as fast enough for amazing bokeh, it was still very beautiful. I loved having full frame image quality in a P&S form factor.

But having the RX1 woke me up to the fact that I liked shooting wide angle much more than I realized, and that I liked playing with different lenses just a bit more. Eventually, I ditched it during Canon's rebates earlier this year and sprang for a 6D. It's actually much lighter and smaller than I thought DSLRs to be, I've had no problem with it when taking it on a 10 day backpacking/camping trip across the Grand Canyon earlier this summer. In fact, I brought along both cameras but took all of one shot with the RX1 because I wanted to have some amazing bokeh with acorns.

This was also a turning point in this hobby as my eyes started to recognize that different brands really have their own unique color rendering. Sure I knew this before but just dismissed it, thinking it really wasn't that important. I did a couple shootouts between the two and realized that I always preferred the 6D output more. If I didn't want to spend exhaustive amounts of time in LR and only took JPGs, RX1 output tended to be a little "colder" than the output of Canon or Fuji. It was also usually underexposed, but a bit of ETTR could solve that problem. It was case closed for me and the RX1 went on its merry way to a happy buyer.

However, there's really something magical about the RX1 and I still think about it from time to time. So now I endlessly trawl Fuji forums.. wondering if I should get a X-Pro 1 to satisfy the craving that the RX1 started..



douglasf13
Registered: Apr 09, 2008
Total Posts: 6108
Country: United States

cityathrt wrote:
As a former RX1 user (and newcomer to FR, hello everyone!) I just wanted to chime in with my two cents on this topic. I had one for about half a year and really appreciated the amazing image quality in the compact form factor. For those who like to appreciate their camera as well as images coming out of the machine, the RX1 is utterly marvelous to hold and use. No other alternative feels quite like a work of art in itself. I struggle to connect emotionally with a DSLR, and other mirrorless options just simply aren't on the same premium level.

The quality of the files simply blew me away, and while the lens wasn't as fast enough for amazing bokeh, it was still very beautiful. I loved having full frame image quality in a P&S form factor.

But having the RX1 woke me up to the fact that I liked shooting wide angle much more than I realized, and that I liked playing with different lenses just a bit more. Eventually, I ditched it during Canon's rebates earlier this year and sprang for a 6D. It's actually much lighter and smaller than I thought DSLRs to be, I've had no problem with it when taking it on a 10 day backpacking/camping trip across the Grand Canyon earlier this summer. In fact, I brought along both cameras but took all of one shot with the RX1 because I wanted to have some amazing bokeh with acorns.

This was also a turning point in this hobby as my eyes started to recognize that different brands really have their own unique color rendering. Sure I knew this before but just dismissed it, thinking it really wasn't that important. I did a couple shootouts between the two and realized that I always preferred the 6D output more. If I didn't want to spend exhaustive amounts of time in LR and only took JPGs, RX1 output tended to be a little "colder" than the output of Canon or Fuji. It was also usually underexposed, but a bit of ETTR could solve that problem. It was case closed for me and the RX1 went on its merry way to a happy buyer.

However, there's really something magical about the RX1 and I still think about it from time to time. So now I endlessly trawl Fuji forums.. wondering if I should get a X-Pro 1 to satisfy the craving that the RX1 started..



Welcome! To be honest, much of the color differences that you'll see between cameras in LR comes down to the profile that Adobe makes and how each camera white balances. You may want to look here for alternatives to Adobe's RX1 profile: link

As someone who owns both the X100s and RX1, I don't think you'll find X-trans to be in the same universe as the RX-1, at least in terms of resolution and "look."

edit: Wait, I think I misread your post. If you're just shooting jpegs, than that may be another story entirely. I don't have much experience with the jpegs from any camera.



1       2       3              155      
156
       157              192       193       end