p.37 #3 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
millsart wrote:
Agree fully, however the big question is, what is even better IQ going to do for us ?
I live in a normal sized home with normal sized rooms, and those rooms have walls that can accommodate prints of a certain size, which for the most part, current gear easily meets if not exceeds.
Realistically, even if the latest CaNikOny XZY88 has 100 megapixels etc, what am I going to do with that type of output ?
What is more IQ going to do for the same boring photos I take of the same boring sites along my typical evening walks ?
I know of course technology keeps moving forward, but, there also comes that point where you have to wonder if it really makes a difference anymore.
For 99% of PC users for example, there is no real advantage to newer PC's. Any machine in the past 5 years can easily do all the web surfing, video's etc most people need, save for a small handful with insanely high MP cameras
I'm not anti tech or anything like but, but simply have to wonder, is a ISO 1 million 200 megapixel image of a cat, or or kid etc really making the photo any better ? ...Show more →
Oh, I don't think it's going to really be all about MP's and resolution beyond around where we are today for most folks. Instead, I think it's more about color. In 5-10 years when we are all watching our 70 inch 4K OLED TV's, the other IQ benefits of a true color sensor will be noticeable. It will be like looking at huge transparency's on a ginormous light table! The last veil of interpolated color will be lifted.
p.37 #4 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Tariq Gibran wrote:
Oh, I don't think it's going to really be all about MP's and resolution beyond around where we are today for most folks. Instead, I think it's more about color. In 5-10 years when we are all watching our 70 inch 4K TV's, the other IQ benefits of a true color sensor will be noticeable. It will be like looking at huge transparency's on a ginormous light table! The last veil of interpolated color will be lifted.
I think for most photographers (meaning not necessarily the alt forum crowd), the next stepwise improvement to be made is still around high ISO sensitivity. I know people here bag on the endless race for higher ISO, but the fact is we still don't have a small, pocketable camera (meaning RX100-sized) that a casual user can use indoors in low light (say, dinner at a restaurant) and take excellent-quality pictures without a flash. The RX100 gets closest, but I think there's still room for improvement that would be noticeable to the casual observer, unlike with base ISO resolution, or even color.
p.37 #5 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
I'm so proud I could just say no to the Nex-7 But you have to love the EVIL gear race, and I'm ready to buy back in when there's a good reason, like a full frame.
Anyone who likes the old glass should realize the gear race has always been there---that little Leica 1 was the nex of it's day.
Since I am always trying for compelling landscapes, but can't carry a large format camera, I'd love to see a nex-sized camera that can resolve that well or better. SO I'm far from my maxi-pixels
Really, who would not like to play with the RX-1? It's like a 1000 HP mini-cooper, but much safer
p.37 #6 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Oh, I don't think it's going to really be all about MP's and resolution beyond around where we are today for most folks. Instead, I think it's more about color. In 5-10 years when we are all watching our 70 inch 4K OLED TV's, the other IQ benefits of a true color sensor will be noticeable. It will be like looking at huge transparency's on a ginormous light table! The last veil of interpolated color will be lifted.
man I spent lunch break yesterday at Myers with a mate who was shopping for appliances and I was sitting there looking at a $2k TV right next to a $4k TV, both playing the same movie, and bugger me if I could tell the difference... I'm concerned that the lifting of the laste veil of interpolated color will probably escape me
p.37 #7 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Spyro P. wrote:
man I spent lunch break yesterday at Myers with a mate who was shopping for appliances and I was sitting there looking at a $2k TV right next to a $4k TV, both playing the same movie, and bugger me if I could tell the difference... I'm concerned that the lifting of the laste veil of interpolated color will probably escape me
The difference between midrange televisions is relatively minor today, until you get to the high end.
Most displays can cover the BT.709 gamut with reasonable accuracy (BT.709 is the same gamut as sRGB, so not a difficult target) and the midrange panels all have similar brightness and contrast specs.
Where you start to see a difference is when you get to the high end with LED backlit panels rather than edge-lit. These have significantly better uniformity, motion handling (the backlight is scanned to reduce image persistence) and contrast. (areas of the screen can be selectively dimmed or turned off)
The biggest difference is contrast - but you're only going to notice that if you watch in a dim/dark room. Regular LCDs/Plasmas look completely washed-out in the dark with grey black levels compared to LED backlit sets.
OLED improves upon this further by being able to turn individual pixels off, rather than backlight zones. (approximately 300 on high end displays)
OLED also has pixel response times measured in microseconds rather than milliseconds, so motion sharpness is drastically improved.
In a few years we will finally escape the limitations of HDTV with a move to UHDTV that significantly widens display gamut (covers 99% of real-world colours) and increases resolution from 2MP (1080p/2K) to 8MP (4K) and in another 5-10 years, 33MP. (8K)
p.37 #9 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
uhoh7 wrote:
Really, who would not like to play with the RX-1? It's like a 1000 HP mini-cooper, but much safer
I'm oh so tempted. If it was a 28mm f/2 lens or supported interchangeable lenses my order would already be in. If they published a road map showing a fast 85 or 100mm fixed lens on the same body I might still be in. While I'm feeling loose with an imaginary wallet, two RX1's with a big delta in focal lengths could be a fun bit of kit.
As it is I'm tempted to check it out - in the early days doing catch-and-release doesn't cost much in depreciation at all.
p.37 #11 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
michael49 wrote:
If it supported interchangeable lenses I think all of us here would already have our order in.
If it had a viewfinder and interchangeable lenses, I would order one today... but as it is, it's just another expensive point&shoot for wealthy dilettantes.
p.37 #12 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
You mean like any camera above $200?
I've seen, far FAR more Canons and Nikons DSLRs in the streets of Manhattan being used wildly stupidly such as trying to take a picture of the Empire state building at night with their popup flash out.
Very few people know what the hell they're doing when they buy any camera and I doubt the market for super wealthy buying a RX1 will be so big that most will go to someone who uses a popup flash for a landscape.
Just because it's Expensive (which it's not for what it is) doesn't mean its to be stupidly dismissed because it's above what you want to pay.
p.37 #13 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
molson wrote:
If it had a viewfinder and interchangeable lenses, I would order one today... but as it is, it's just another expensive point&shoot for wealthy dilettantes.
How is it just another P&S? There isn't a single camera on the market like this. Not only wealthy dilettantes prefer using a single lens. In fact, most of the contemporary fine art photographers that I like tend to use a single lens.
p.37 #16 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
I'm not really sure what Mr. Daniel is saying in that interview from 2010. It is an EVIL camera, but still has a rangefinder? It sounds like he's just referring to an M10 that can take R lenses, since it has live view and potentially the rumored EVF on top, no?
p.37 #18 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
douglasf13 wrote:
I'm not really sure what Mr. Daniel is saying in that interview from 2010. It is an EVIL camera, but still has a rangefinder? It sounds like he's just referring to an M10 that can take R lenses, since it has live view and potentially the rumored EVF on top, no?
It could be the M10 with optical RF. It could be also an M shaped EVIL, with EVF in place of the RF. We will know on Monday, but my gut feeling tells me the leaked photos are of an M shaped EVIL, not M10.
p.37 #19 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
molson wrote:
If it had a viewfinder and interchangeable lenses, I would order one today... but as it is, it's just another expensive point&shoot for wealthy dilettantes.
I'm going to disagree with you too, on the target market, although wealthy dilettantes are a component of the market for any high end camera.
It does have a viewfinder albeit an external one; my bet is next year an interchangeable lens version will join the RX1 to become a growing family of cameras.
It's been suggested Sony did this as a one-off; this doesn't seem likely to me, although I do believe they gain some intangible value from the product launch simply by making the industry and consumers take notice.
Perhaps Sony, with their sensor producing hat on, was frustrated that manufacturers were not going after this market however niche it may be. This could be their way of telling other makers to get going or else Sony will eat all the pie. Compact mirrorless cameras have evolved, rapidly; we all expected a full frame compact camera eventually. Even Leica (in the 2010 interview) seems to have expected this development.
Maybe, probably, Sony looked at the X100 experience over the past two years and thought the introduction of the a full frame camera, the RX1, could enjoy a similar outcome over the longer term. Fujifilm tapped into some pent up demand with the X100 and now retro high end compacts are all the rage.
The external viewfinder has never been my preference but now having owned (and sold) a NEX-5N and Ricoh GXR, both with external EVFs, I'm more open minded about them. Tilting EVFs provide an any-angle, any-light shooting capability to a camera that a fixed EVF can not quite match even if the camera is equipped with a tilt rear LCD/OLED panel. My biggest issue with slide on EVF's is stowing the joined camera-EVF in my bag. Maybe I need a different bag.
As for whether the camera is merely for wealthy dilettantes or not, who can say. I've seen plenty of 5D's and other full frame DSLRs in the hands of soccer moms and tourists shooting pedestrian stuff.
When the X100 came out there were plenty of similar discussions going on. Fixed lens? What were they thinking! It's a point and shoot! Who would buy this? Only the idol rich surely!
Yet here we are, the X100 got bought by serious photographers and posers alike. Seemed expensive at the time for what it was but now seems quite reasonable in comparison doesn't it.
To me the RX1 seems like just the first step, bound to be followed by an ILC FF camera in the same family, and therefore a group of lenses. I can hear the groans already... it'll be a while before they flesh them out. Hopefully (speaking for myself) they'll more quickly come out with a line of fixed focal length Zeiss lenses for this hypothetical but likely future camera... those ought to be easier to develop and produce at a quality level matching where this camera should be selling at.
But you have to love the EVIL gear race, and I'm ready to buy back in when there's a good reason, like a full frame.
