p.39 #1 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
photo.guy wrote:
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.39 #2 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
douglasf13 wrote:
I thought that would be the case with my X100, and I really like the camera, but I do enjoy "aligning little images," I guess. Plus, I don't love having to trust AF without visually confirming in the viewfinder whether I focused on the correct thing (without having to quickly go to EVF mode by pressing on the thumb dial.) Either way, I'm sticking with my X100/NEX tandem for now.
One quick flip with your index finger to the EVF gives you focus confirmation without removing your eye from the viewfinder. Another flip and you are back to OVF. A small price to pay instead of paying thousands upon thousands of dollars to align the little images.
I've been shooting with my X100 for two entire years now and the amount of misfocused images is absolutely miniscule.
p.39 #3 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
rattymouse wrote:
One quick flip with your index finger to the EVF gives you focus confirmation without removing your eye from the viewfinder. Another flip and you are back to OVF. A small price to pay instead of paying thousands upon thousands of dollars to align the little images.
I've been shooting with my X100 for two entire years now and the amount of misfocused images is absolutely miniscule.
i don't think i'll every buy a leica camera and i don't like rangefinders for anything other than casual snaps, but i definitely prefer rangefinders to the x100s autofocus or manual focus.
p.39 #4 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
michaelwatkins wrote:
I'd rather have a full frame GXR module for $1,500 or $2,000 than a Leica M9 for $4K.
Michael, you still believe in Santa Claus? With your pricing ideas guys, if I am Ricoh, I would quit this camera manufacturing business and move to selling potato chips, there is more profit overthere.
A FF GXR M module will easily sell for 3000$, not including the body and EVF. Probably Ricoh would even want more for different considerations.
p.39 #5 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
edwardkaraa wrote:
Michael, you still believe in Santa Claus? With your pricing ideas guys, if I am Ricoh, I would quit this camera manufacturing business and move to selling potato chips, there is more profit overthere.
A FF GXR M module will easily sell for 3000$, not including the body and EVF. Probably Ricoh would even want more for different considerations.
Half the people that want full frame don't want to pay for it. Very weird.
p.39 #8 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
rattymouse wrote:
One quick flip with your index finger to the EVF gives you focus confirmation without removing your eye from the viewfinder. Another flip and you are back to OVF. A small price to pay instead of paying thousands upon thousands of dollars to align the little images.
I've been shooting with my X100 for two entire years now and the amount of misfocused images is absolutely miniscule.
I know how to work the camera, but I'd still rather have a rangefinder. The OVF of the Fuji is great, but it still kinda feels like driving a 911 with an auto transmission. I start wondering what the point is a little bit.
p.39 #11 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
edwardkaraa wrote:
A FF GXR M module will easily sell for 3000$, not including the body and EVF
Edward, as long as we are only talking the module, not the rest of the camera system, I don't see how a FF GXR module could possibly come in at $3,000, not from Ricoh. From Leica, sure, it'd be more.
My rationale is simple - more complex complete cameras sell for less. An a99 sells for less and is certainly a more complex piece of equipment than a mere GXR module. Ditto for the RX1, a complete camera system with lens for less.
If a full frame sensor were double or triple or quadruple the cost of the APS C sensor in the A12 Mount module ($649 when I bought mine), a FF module wouldn't necessarily be double or triple or quadruple the cost to produce since many of the components would come in about the same. A shutter is a shutter after all, just a little larger for the FF module.
Sure, Ricoh certainly *could* price such a module high and probably still sell out. But their pricing for the existing modules doesn't suggest to me they'd go that route. Whatever their strategy would be, I still believe pricing for the module alone would come in well under the cost of a high end FF complete DSLR.
That's how I come up with a $1,500 - $2,000 price tag.
Am I smoking something? No, but yes you might be right, I might as well be.
p.39 #12 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Michael, your reasoning is very sane no doubt
But you should take into consideration the expected unit sales of this niche product, which is targeting yet another niche product (Leica M users) who would like a cheaper option or back up body. As you already mentioned, manufacturing cost is highly dependent on quantities. Leica mentions 8-9 million euros as developing cost for the M9, which arguably is just an M8 with a larger sensor.
I am not sure how many FF modules Ricoh can sell, but I am sure that if Ricoh believe they can sell their module for 3K instead of 2k or 1.5K, they would not hesitate to do it.
p.39 #14 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Edward,
My feeling is that $649 for the A12 Mount module, the first module of its kind in the GXR line up so presumably incurring some one off development costs, was not priced so differently to the lensor/camera unit modules. The lack of lens in the A12 Mount module appears to have paid for the development cost delta and/or afforded a margin premium to Ricoh. At the very least the A12 Mount module was not priced in an aggressively premium manner despite being by definition a niche product.
But then all the GXR modules are pretty niche, unless you are in Japan I guess. Or probably more correctly, the lensor modules and the A12 Mount likely share a good deal of the same R+D; if Ricoh were to bring out a full frame M Mount module, it is also just as likely they'd bring out one or more premium lensor/camera unit modules (lens and sensor modules for the uninitiated) too, so again the Mount / lensor products would share development costs.
Rational or wildly optimistic thinking? Who knows, but based on history to date, that's what I expect from Ricoh - reasonableness in the future.
There is of course a more pressing problem: for all we know Ricoh may never undertake the development of a M mount full frame sensor module for the GXR, and may never update the existing GXR body / EVF and other related components and modules.
Hopefully we'll learn something, anything, to the contrary in a few more days. (More silly optimistic thinking most likely!)
p.39 #19 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
The M9 was a weird experience for me, neither fish nor flesh. Build quality is nice, handling is quite poor - a mechanically sound camera with crippling electronics and rather poor battery life. Even for a camera that is supposed to be a bit lacking in menu options it felt frugal.
I love rangefinders but much as I tried I didn't feel the love. I liked the output of the camera for sure but felt let down as a whole.
The M10 would have to be much improved to impress me.
Rattymouse: how can "lots of reports of improvement" on a product yet to be released be anything but rumors, hearsay and/or wishful thinking?
I bet the same was said going from M8 to M9.
p.39 #20 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Well it was exactly after my discussion with Kosmoskatten that I changed my mind about buying the M9.
The weaknesses are very well documented, especially on LL and Diglloyd, but to sum them up:
- Low quality LCD.
- Small buffer and slow processor.
- Problems with many memory cards.
- Sensor noise above ISO 800 useless for anything but b&w
- RF problems, not as good as in film cameras. Frequent misalignment.
- Sensor not fully optimized for RF glass. Software fix still obligatory.
- Sensor cover breaking.
I'm sure I forgot a couple of points
In fact, I would prefer to avoid Leica altogether if another manufacturer introduces a mirrorless FF, and I would prefer to avoid rangefinders and their problems and extra cost so if Leica introduces a non RF version I would much prefer that.
