Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)
/forum/topic/1147292/187

1       2       3              187      
188
       189       190       191       end

ryankarr
Registered: Sep 25, 2009
Total Posts: 951
Country: Canada

edit, wrong thread



douglasf13
Registered: Apr 09, 2008
Total Posts: 5740
Country: United States

Tariq Gibran wrote:
douglasf13 wrote:
Thanks, Tariq. The problem for me is that I shoot a lot of stuff in the 2-3m range, so I'm not sure Id want to cut the frame off at closer distances. It's a classic external OVF/Leica rangefinder dilemma. Optimized for 2m is about right for me, which would still leave a fair amount of air around the frame at infinity, like the m240 does.

This 33.5mm (in the center according to DXO) lens makes ovfs a bit of a challenge.


Yeah, I don't know. I just re-tested again in the house to check accuracy at 2-3m's (against hard edges like door jams and picture frame edges, etc) and it seemed about as good as could be expected and more accurate than what I posted above at infinity outside (where the finder shows a little more than what is captured). So, for instance, at 2m's framed horizontally, the right and left sides are perfect, the bottom of the finder view is right at the edge (maybe a tiny bit obscured) by the lens front with the top dotted line in the finder accurately showing the top of the captured frame. Thus, I think the most accurate (except for the parrallax) is actually at 2-3m's. At all these distances, it feels much better matched to the uncorrected RX1 lens than that Zeiss 35 finder I had. If you do go back to using the full 3:2 aspect ratio, it's probably worth a try.



Well, you've convinced me to give it a shot. Just ordered one.



Tariq Gibran
Registered: Oct 01, 2006
Total Posts: 9903
Country: United States

douglasf13 wrote:
Tariq Gibran wrote:
douglasf13 wrote:
Thanks, Tariq. The problem for me is that I shoot a lot of stuff in the 2-3m range, so I'm not sure Id want to cut the frame off at closer distances. It's a classic external OVF/Leica rangefinder dilemma. Optimized for 2m is about right for me, which would still leave a fair amount of air around the frame at infinity, like the m240 does.

This 33.5mm (in the center according to DXO) lens makes ovfs a bit of a challenge.


Yeah, I don't know. I just re-tested again in the house to check accuracy at 2-3m's (against hard edges like door jams and picture frame edges, etc) and it seemed about as good as could be expected and more accurate than what I posted above at infinity outside (where the finder shows a little more than what is captured). So, for instance, at 2m's framed horizontally, the right and left sides are perfect, the bottom of the finder view is right at the edge (maybe a tiny bit obscured) by the lens front with the top dotted line in the finder accurately showing the top of the captured frame. Thus, I think the most accurate (except for the parrallax) is actually at 2-3m's. At all these distances, it feels much better matched to the uncorrected RX1 lens than that Zeiss 35 finder I had. If you do go back to using the full 3:2 aspect ratio, it's probably worth a try.



Well, you've convinced me to give it a shot. Just ordered one.


Ha ha...let me know what you find as far as accuracy. I'm curious how it compares to your previous finders (particularly the voigt 35).



douglasf13
Registered: Apr 09, 2008
Total Posts: 5740
Country: United States

Tariq Gibran wrote:
douglasf13 wrote:
Tariq Gibran wrote:
douglasf13 wrote:
Thanks, Tariq. The problem for me is that I shoot a lot of stuff in the 2-3m range, so I'm not sure Id want to cut the frame off at closer distances. It's a classic external OVF/Leica rangefinder dilemma. Optimized for 2m is about right for me, which would still leave a fair amount of air around the frame at infinity, like the m240 does.

This 33.5mm (in the center according to DXO) lens makes ovfs a bit of a challenge.


Yeah, I don't know. I just re-tested again in the house to check accuracy at 2-3m's (against hard edges like door jams and picture frame edges, etc) and it seemed about as good as could be expected and more accurate than what I posted above at infinity outside (where the finder shows a little more than what is captured). So, for instance, at 2m's framed horizontally, the right and left sides are perfect, the bottom of the finder view is right at the edge (maybe a tiny bit obscured) by the lens front with the top dotted line in the finder accurately showing the top of the captured frame. Thus, I think the most accurate (except for the parrallax) is actually at 2-3m's. At all these distances, it feels much better matched to the uncorrected RX1 lens than that Zeiss 35 finder I had. If you do go back to using the full 3:2 aspect ratio, it's probably worth a try.



Well, you've convinced me to give it a shot. Just ordered one.


Ha ha...let me know what you find as far as accuracy. I'm curious how it compares to your previous finders (particularly the voigt 35).


Yeah, your finding that the sides matched up around 2m sealed the deal, for me. It's interesting that a 28mm OVF would work so well, but I imagine when you take into account the slightly wider than 35mm lens of the RX1, and then mix it with variances in hotshoe/sensor location, I guess it works. Plus, maybe the Voigtlander is slightly long and calibrated for .7m, which would probably influence things quite a bit.

p.s. I wish more finders had a center spot for imagining the center AF point. I'll miss that with the Kontur finders.



douglasf13
Registered: Apr 09, 2008
Total Posts: 5740
Country: United States

I received my Voigtlander 28mm OVF today, and I've been loosely testing it around the house shooting at different distances. First of all, the Voigtlander 28 and 35 OVFs are similar in build quality and optics. The 28 obviously has less magnification and a lower eye point, since it is wider, but they are both pretty high quality and bright. Both are worlds better than my Olympus VF-1 in terms of build, brightness, framelines and distortion.

The frustrating part is that, while the Voigtlander 35 is too narrow and adds a lot of "air," seemingly being calibrated to the RX1 at around .5m (with distortion correction on,) the Voigtlander 28 is too wide, and it even cuts a little bit off of the side of the frame at 5m. I made sure that distortion correction was turned off, and it still cuts some of the frame.

That being said, the 28 OVF cuts off less of the frame than the 35 OVF adds, so it's an interesting dilemma. Would I rather have a noticeable amount of the frame cut off up close, a little bit cut off at mid-distance, and a things just about right at infinity...or, would I rather have things right at .5M, with more and more "air" being added as the distance increases? Since I can easily crop in LR, I think I'm leaning towards the 35 OVF, but it's a tough call. I have to return the 28 OVF, anyways, because it has a slight tilt in the frame lines (not enough to affect my tests,) so I'll have to ponder it some more. Ugh.

Does anyone know if the official Zeiss OVF is even slightly wider than the Voigtlander 35 OVF? It may be the goldilocks OVF, after all, but I really don't want to spend the money on it.

edit: After looking at some more files, I'm thinking maybe it will be the 28 OVF. Man, if it was a 30mm OVF, it would be perfect.



millsart
Registered: Apr 29, 2009
Total Posts: 4247
Country: N/A

So what happened to RX1 demand ? Few months ago they were back up to $2k used with everyone feeling how it was "better" to just get a used RX1 w/ its fantastic Sonnar lens, rather than trying to find an ideal 35mm option for the A7(r)

Now it seems I'm only getting silly lowball offers from people of $1400. Surely this camera hasn't lost 50% of its retail price already has it ?

Now that the weather is starting to warm up soon I'm shifting my funds/main hobby interest back to cycling and building a new aero carbon fiber road bike, thus the sale.



Tariq Gibran
Registered: Oct 01, 2006
Total Posts: 9903
Country: United States

millsart wrote:
So what happened to RX1 demand ? Few months ago they were back up to $2k used with everyone feeling how it was "better" to just get a used RX1 w/ its fantastic Sonnar lens, rather than trying to find an ideal 35mm option for the A7(r)

Now it seems I'm only getting silly lowball offers from people of $1400. Surely this camera hasn't lost 50% of its retail price already has it ?

Now that the weather is starting to warm up soon I'm shifting my funds/main hobby interest back to cycling and building a new aero carbon fiber road bike, thus the sale.


I don't think it's lost that much value. Just a finicky market. Somewhere between $1650 - $1950 is about right depending on condition and patience.



Jochenb
Registered: May 25, 2010
Total Posts: 1634
Country: Belgium

millsart wrote:
Now that the weather is starting to warm up soon I'm shifting my funds/main hobby interest back to cycling and building a new aero carbon fiber road bike, thus the sale.


You'll be back



millsart
Registered: Apr 29, 2009
Total Posts: 4247
Country: N/A

Tariq Gibran wrote:

I don't think it's lost that much value. Just a finicky market. Somewhere between $1650 - $1950 is about right depending on condition and patience.



Hopefully, luckily I'm in no huge hurry to sell, but its just crazy how the new price is still $2800 for them and frankly nothing else has come along that I would consider "better". I went down the A7r route and ended up right back at the RX1

I've even got the $100 Fotodiox grip and hood included, mint condition camera etc and I've gotten an offer of $1300 today (some slightly more reasonable ones too of course) but its just crazy.

I remember when open box on Amazon at $2100 would be gone in under and hour on these things.



Tariq Gibran
Registered: Oct 01, 2006
Total Posts: 9903
Country: United States

millsart wrote:
Tariq Gibran wrote:

I don't think it's lost that much value. Just a finicky market. Somewhere between $1650 - $1950 is about right depending on condition and patience.



Hopefully, luckily I'm in no huge hurry to sell, but its just crazy how the new price is still $2800 for them and frankly nothing else has come along that I would consider "better". I went down the A7r route and ended up right back at the RX1

I've even got the $100 Fotodiox grip and hood included, mint condition camera etc and I've gotten an offer of $1300 today (some slightly more reasonable ones too of course) but its just crazy.

I remember when open box on Amazon at $2100 would be gone in under and hour on these things.


Maybe you should add something like "serious offers only" or "Price Firm" to your ad. I suspect for most folks, it's still full on winter (even though I'm in shorts today and the temp was close to 70). Probably late March/ April might catch those with Spring fever. I think these price fluctuations also go in cycles. Of course, eventually it will go down in price and level off.



weezintrumpete
Registered: May 18, 2005
Total Posts: 2272
Country: United States

New RX1 owner here!

Have had it for a couple days now. Bought it Sony refurbished and it looks like new. So far, I'm loving it. I'm still waiting on an EVF (should be here this week) as I don't really enjoy shooting via the rear screen.

The IQ is unbelievable. I currently have an X100S and the RX1's IQ is in another league, especially dynamic range. Crazy.

Short of reading through this massive thread, any quick tips for setting up the camera, etc?



Richie S
Registered: Aug 29, 2005
Total Posts: 566
Country: United States

weezintrumpete wrote:
New RX1 owner here!

Have had it for a couple days now. Bought it Sony refurbished and it looks like new. So far, I'm loving it. I'm still waiting on an EVF (should be here this week) as I don't really enjoy shooting via the rear screen.

The IQ is unbelievable. I currently have an X100S and the RX1's IQ is in another league, especially dynamic range. Crazy.

Short of reading through this massive thread, any quick tips for setting up the camera, etc?


Similar situation here. Just waiting on mine to arrive.

Clearly the A7 is screwing the with second-hand market here. It is tough to hold up the price when c$2k will get you an A7 and 35 on ebay and on here.



CalW
Registered: Mar 26, 2005
Total Posts: 1984
Country: United States

I'm pleased that this thread has been revived. Over the past week or so I have gone through all of it, after going through all of the sister photo thread. The photo thread was responsible for my purchasing a used RX1 on B&S. Made me realize that I could put more fun into my photography if I broadened my horizons. (Literally!) Back problems made me give up my 1D's and L glass a couple of years ago and I have been pretty satisfied with M43 gear - until I got a few pages into that damn photo thread. So I'm anxiously following my "new" camera's progress across the country and looking ahead to getting back to full frame, at least at 35mm.

Patrick, there are a LOT of tips and suggestions in here, but as you might guess based on what you know of the folks here there are more ways of setting up the camera than there are users I took notes as I went along based on what I assume will be my intended use of the camera, and many of them are contradictory I suggest paging backwards by date and screening based on your own expectations - most of the useful information is recent, when more folks actually had the camera in hand and some experience with it. And there are big off-topic sections that you will be able to skip over. Many of my notes involve various ways to make use of auto ISO, as it is mostly implemented well and is usable over a wider range with this camera. Many notes are also on the few things that surprisingly don't work well or are not included at all. After I have had the camera in hand for a while perhaps I can make more sense out of all this...



Richie S
Registered: Aug 29, 2005
Total Posts: 566
Country: United States

Ugh - or course with the latest $300 off the A7 and 35MM suddenly become cheaper than I paid for the RX1. Still - holding judgment until the thing arrives.



darrellc
Registered: Jan 02, 2005
Total Posts: 385
Country: N/A

I've got A7/FE 35 and RX1 and RX1 has extra magic in it... Don't regret taking the RX1 route unless you really need the interchangeable lenses with the same camera. I've got the VC 35/1.2II on the A7, and that combo is pretty nice at f/2, but the lens alone probably weighs as much as the RX1.



Jochenb
Registered: May 25, 2010
Total Posts: 1634
Country: Belgium

Richie S wrote:
Ugh - or course with the latest $300 off the A7 and 35MM suddenly become cheaper than I paid for the RX1. Still - holding judgment until the thing arrives.


Don't worry. The IQ of the RX1 will make you forget every price difference.



Richie S
Registered: Aug 29, 2005
Total Posts: 566
Country: United States

Thanks for the reassurance. I do have a full M43 system after selling off the 5DII and glass. I wasn't looking to start yet another system. Still second-guessing a camera purchase is par for the course.



ebookman
Registered: Jul 15, 2012
Total Posts: 481
Country: United States

Jochenb wrote:
Richie S wrote:
Ugh - or course with the latest $300 off the A7 and 35MM suddenly become cheaper than I paid for the RX1. Still - holding judgment until the thing arrives.


Don't worry. The IQ of the RX1 will make you forget every price difference.



+1



Brody LeBlanc
Registered: Oct 04, 2007
Total Posts: 1008
Country: Canada

I seriously considered selling my RX1 that I just got back from repairs. Now that I finally was able to use my RX1 the way it was meant to, I don't think it'll be going anywhere. If anything I'll get the A7 with longer lens and keep the RX1 as my 35mm standard. I don't think it's worth it to sell the RX1 at the moment. It's worth more than the second hand price tag.



jmr237
Registered: Mar 12, 2014
Total Posts: 3
Country: United States

I am considering a new RX1 or RX1R. If you bundle the Zeiss 35mm OVF with the camera, you can get it for $300. Right now the Voigtlander 28 OVF is $230 and the 35 is $210.

So price is no longer a compelling reason to skip the Zeiss OVF.

I read through the discussion and opinions differ on which OVF works best on the RX1. The Voigtlander models look physically smaller and easier to keep on the camera while putting it into a case, etc (due to the rounded form factor). The Zeiss model is designed for this camera and hence you'd think the best match of the three in terms of framing accuracy. However, if I understand correctly, it seems like some are saying the 28 is more accurate?

Perhaps another consideration is that the Voigtlander models are generalized accessories for any camera lacking a VF, whereas the Zeiss is specific to the RX1 and hence might be more likely to lose resale value over time?

For people who have tried the different options, which OVF fits the most securely in the camera?

Given the price of the Zeiss has come down to earth, which one would you suggest for a new RX1 user?



1       2       3              187      
188
       189       190       191       end