p.50 #2 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Yakim Peled wrote:
If you have APS-C MILC with a constant f/2.8 collapsible zoom in that size I'm all ears. The closest thing we have is the 12-35/2.8 for MFT.
Lets assume we use the same sensor and a good lens so IQ is not compromised. Now it's only an issue of DoF and size. As the lens is collapsible and close to the sensor (not interchangeable) you can make it relatively small. DoF? Well, it won't be the same as the current 35/2 lens but OTOH, you'll have several FL's to choose from. As someone who shoots with 40D/7D + 17-55/2.8 IS for almost 6 years I can tell you I'm fine WRT shallow DoF.
Yes, it's all a matter of trade-offs. I'd like the RX1 to be slightly bigger, to have integral EVF, to have a collapsible 28-70/4 zoom lens (or 24-50/2.8 ) and a bit more buttons.
if your ok with it being f/4 and FF or f/2.8 and aps-c it should be possible to make something like that as small as the NEX-7 + kit lens. i'd much rather just shoot the nex-7 and a couple of small fast primes than that though.
p.50 #3 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
sebboh wrote:
if your ok with it being f/4 and FF or f/2.8 and aps-c it should be possible to make something like that as small as the NEX-7 + kit lens. i'd much rather just shoot the nex-7 and a couple of small fast primes than that though.
If it's APS-C than the zoom will have to be 2.8. So, a kit lens a-la 17-55/2.8 IS is fine with me.
p.50 #4 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
michaelwatkins wrote:
Ron is the voice of reason here, damn him.
Is the question we are trying or vying to answer: "is $2,500 too much for the RX1"?
Or is it "what digital camera offers ^ insert list of requirements ^ in a compact package? What alternatives are there to the RX1?"
Or should we move upscale and look a little farther afield and at least compare the RX1 to the Leica Minilux:
As advanced as some of these advanced compact 35mm fixed lens cameras were, none of them come close to meeting what a camera like the X100 or RX1 offers. But... does it matter?
I'm wrestling with why I want one, trying to be honest with myself and also trying to figure out what limitations this camera has, other than the obvious, a fixed lens, that would drive me crazy down the road....Show more →
That minilux 40/2.4 can make great photos. My girlfriend has had one a little while now after her Ricoh died and it is very nice. Sure awful VF, and the controls aren't like a 'real camera', but a great lens. I can see the comparison in general... I use a fixed lens rangefinder with a 40/1.7, hi-matic 7s2 clone... Pretty small. Entirely different beast of course, but it fills a similar area. For me, I can take it absolutely anywhere and not really give a damn about what happens to it. I like that. I can't do that with my SLR's which I use for my business, nor can I see myself doing that with a camera that would cost me around £3k... For me, I think the RX1 is a great step forward, and will be a good choice for many, will open doors for the future developments. But it is a first of its kind, and so probably too much right now for me. I'll check in and see what's about in a other couple of years I think.
p.50 #8 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Yakim Peled wrote:
Douglas,
If the lens is not interchangeable then it could be smaller than the usual FF counterparts.
For me, a camera with a fixed prime lens is not something I'm willing to spend a lot of money on. Horses for courses...
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Gotcha, I misunderstood your post. For me, a fixed prime is a fantastic idea. In fact, I'd rather the little RX100 have a faster, fixed prime, rather than the zoom.
p.50 #9 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Did some more reading. As I thought, a lot of R&D went into leveraging the fixed lens concept, both at the lens design stage and the sensor design. Apparently the cutaway reveals that the rear element is both huge and very close to the sensor:
'Yes, the lens really is amazing. They showed me a sample before I came here: that cutaway, it’s just unbelievable. The enormous rear element and the fact that it projects so far into the camera body, it’s definitely a different approach.'
'...certainly, the back focus distance is very small and the lens projects pretty far into the camera body...'
It is also a very highly developed video capable camera, for which the very nice bokeh (from samples) add to the aesthetic appeal of output. AF is reportedly snappy, and the lens looks the part with very nice rings and markings. The leaf shutter may preclude an ILC version, they either make a series of such lenses, or work on the internal dimensions to accommodate a focal plane shutter.
Reactions are as I hoped, mostly negative.
David Kilpatrick thinks 35mm focal length lenses 'on full frame is...uninspiring for me', 'easy to use and fairly boring' and good for 'general house and garden shots'.
Lloyd dislikes the hotshoe EVF idea (despite it looking very innovative and functional) and thinks anyone over 40 has poor eyes and cannot focus the cam properly despite it having both Sony's excellent peaking and fast AF and zoom to focus as they have to hold the camera at arm's length, 'Holding the camera at arm’s length is a disaster in terms of sharp images'.
Speak for yourselves fellas, and sorry about your eyesight Lloyd. I read these guys for laughs mostly; and they say Ken Rockwell is a goose.
Forums indicate a general disdain as well, so that is very good news for reduced prices in the near future, and interest being restricted to aficionados. It seems most people will find the camera too limiting.
The best take is our Mr Cicala who opines that the camera will rise or fall depending on the lens quality. Hear hear. If a conservative but modern design by CZ with 3 asph elements and a high price point on a matched Sony sensor does not far exceed say, the ZE 35/2 on a 5Dii I would be very surprised indeed, but time will tell.
Last note is people's shooting habits. I loathe lens changes, for me they are a hassle, often dangerous, always interrupt the flow, and take precious time I don't often have. I also really dislike exposing the camera innards to dust/ash. Just another two benefits, and sometimes less is more, as most street shooters who are actually doing it will attest, many use just 1 or 2 lenses - ever.
And it is 482 grams with card and battery, has a nifty small flash - a take anywhere camera. Keep all the old junky gear photos coming, they sure don't make them like they used to, just as well
p.50 #10 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Well said, Philip! My thoughts entirely! Sure, the RX1 is not THE camera for everyone, but, if the IQ is what the price suggests it must be, i.e. at least as good as a Zeiss Z* 35mm f:2.0 on a Canikon FF, this will be THE camera for some of us. Myself included.
p.50 #11 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
The lens on the RX1 will have to be better than the Zeiss Z* 35/2 imo. That lens suffers some pretty severe CA until stopped down. I would expect it will be given it's design.
As a side note, the lens design with the huge rear element positioned close to the sensor was first pioneered by Sigma on the DP series. It was also used on the Fuji X100 of course. Only point being that Sony really did not have to spend a lot of time figuring this approach out as the innovation had already been made. Here is the lens design on the older Sigma DP2: http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/photo/sigma/dp2.lens._V229901507_.jpg
p.50 #12 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
I believe that compacts have been using large, correcting elements against the sensor for a while, but it was actually Sony who developed it first for larger sensors on the DSC-R1, so they've come full circle:
p.50 #13 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Nice find Douglas! It very well may have been Sony. The more extreme optical versions since then have smaller front elements than the very large rear elements. The point remans the same that the innovation was already there before Sony designed the current RX1. They scaled it up from previous smaller sensors but it does not seem like it would have required a huge amount of new R&D as they had plenty of previous designs to go by (both by themselves and others).
p.50 #15 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
An updated R1 with either the FF 24 or 36MP Sony sensor and a very high end, limited zoom range Zeiss (for prime like performance) would sure be awesome.
p.50 #16 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Tariq Gibran wrote:
An updated R1 with either the FF 24 or 36MP Sony sensor and a very high end, limited zoom range Zeiss (for prime like performance) would sure be awesome.
p.50 #17 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
The thing about the R1 is that, despite having an aps-c sensor (actually, just a tiny bit smaller than full aps-c,) the lens is very long, so someone would need to make a collapsable version. If you look at the picture below, you can see the marking where the sensor is inside of the camera. The lens elements actually extend through much of the camera body, since they extend all the way to the sensor itself. I'd imagine that a FF version would be pretty large.
The designers of this camera did a good job disguising the true length of the lens by putting half of the lens elements in the camera body.
p.50 #18 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
douglasf13 wrote:
The thing about the R1 is that, despite having an aps-c sensor (actually, just a tiny bit smaller than full aps-c,) the lens is very long, so someone would need to make a collapsable version. If you look at the picture below, you can see the marking where the sensor is inside of the camera. The lens elements actually extend through much of the camera body, since they extend all the way to the sensor itself. I'd imagine that a FF version would be pretty large.
The designers of this camera did a good job disguising the true length of the lens by putting half of the lens elements in the camera body.
Of course, you know I'm thinking with that design I would be cradling it in my left hand and using my right hand for controls/ adj.(looks like you could even use your left thumb for a few adj.) while looking down at the WL LCD. Used like that, a large lens really would not bother me too much, as long as it was not really big. Something in the range of 28-70 or 90mm would be perfect imo.
p.50 #20 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
After almost a year of shooting the GXR and nothing but manual focus primes, and in addition another four intensive months with the X100, I've concluded a few things. While I have and do love prime lenses, I have too many. I also find myself needing for the first time in my life a solid autofocus solution, and I want this at least for my primary shooting focal length (moderate wide). And for some very specific needs I require more performance at high ISO sensitivities than I have in my setup today.
When I look back at my time with the X100, what I disliked most about the experience wasn't the fixed focal length but the handling of the camera. It worked great for me in some contexts but not very well at all in others. Better AF performance would have helped in some situations, and better manual focus would have helped in others. Sub-optimal, for me, at both, was a problem. I also much prefer the results I can get with any of my Zeiss SLR or rangefinder lenses to what the Fujinon provided, although to be fair my main gripe with the X100 lens was flare of various types. Maybe I had a bad sample.
The "Phils" in several posts preceding have echoed my sentiments about the RX1. Of course we'll have to wait for in-depth hands-on reports to be sure, but based on what's known and what we expect, compared to the X100, the RX1 could be a large step forward and in multiple directions and particularly in areas that had been issues for me.
Even if Ricoh does exactly what I'd like them to do - produce a full frame M mount module, or a completely new dedicated M camera - I'd still need an AF solution unless focus peaking and EVF and other magic pixie dust really improved manual focus in all sorts of shooting conditions.
Dear Sony: please bring out a RX2 with a fixed Zeiss 85/1.4, or a Zeiss converter resulting in 85/2. Thank you.
) and a bit more buttons. 
