p.16 #1 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
Can we keep the price whining talk to the other RX1 thread, please and not this image thread. As I have sai before I have the C/Y 35/1.4 and ZF35/2 and have shot with ZE35/1.4 and IMHO that this lens is closest to the CY 35/1.4 but handles flare and high contrast scenes better and has slower focus transition to OOF and smoother bokeh. Sensor behaves like my D800E with excellent DR and excellent high iso performance and low iso performance. But has added benefits of. no shutter slap, quiet no sound shutter, much smaller size to be less intrusive in social settings and more stealth for street shooting and obviously nice size to carry everywhere.
p.16 #3 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
I'm not sure that Sony expects the RX1 to be a huge seller. It's a halo product, meant to attract attention and establish Sony as a serious player in the camera industry. Given the amount of chatter the RX1 has generated, I'd say they've succeeded on that count.
Now, whether the price makes sense for you or not is a personal call. It is definitely expensive, but if it's the camera that meets your needs there are no alternatives.
That said, it costs less than 3100 euros in the US, I'm not sure I'd pay that price either
p.16 #4 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
carstenw wrote:
I played around with the RX1 and the A99 in the Sony store in Berlin today, and got some feeling for how it works. I found the build quality good, but not 3100 Euro-good (price in that store). More like 1000 Euro-good (as opposed to 500 Euro). The flash especially felt very fragile.
The shape was nice, but I couldn't really get a good grip on it somehow, too small. And I am 5'10"/180cm and don't have especially large hands. The operation was good, once we (jotdeh was visiting, we went together) figured out how to use the manual focus region functionality.
The lens had a really nice look to it, but somehow very close to the 35/1.4 ZF.2 @ f/2.0 (which I had there for comparison). The white balance was a bit warm, compared to the slightly cool (or maybe slightly greenish; maybe I do have this issue a little bit after all) D800+ZF.2 35/1.4, but other than that, the boke in the store was very similar. Maybe a bit less CA.
Overall, I would be very interested in this camera at around 2000 Euro including the EVF, but at 3100+600? I find it totally uninteresting, just way too expensive, and I have to say that I really hope that no one buys these incredibly massively overpriced accessories from Sony, so that whatever they are experimenting with will fail. Just ludicrous. The optical viewfinder cost 600 Euro here in Germany, ferchrissake!...Show more →
Sadly, I feel the same.
I like what I'm seeing from the lens. The rendering close to mid distance is really nice.
I have the money to buy one, but I just can't... it just doesn't feel right. I'm not saying it's overpriced (like Martin says: there's no competition at the moment), but for this price I just expect a camera that oozes quality.
The many reports about people returning theirs makes this feeling even stronger.
p.16 #5 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
Makten wrote:
I haven't owned the C/Y Zeiss 35/1.4, but the rendering of that lens is the closest I have seen to the Sonnar. And I think you are seing things in the highlights that you connect with the early JPG:s, right? I can't say that the RX1 sensor behaves in any special way and I have blown the highlights on purpose because of the very large DR of the scenes in low light. I actually have the compensation wheel set at +1 stop as default and it workes fine.
I have seen the highlight thing consistently. Not in all shots, but in enough that I think it is likely an attribute of the sensor/processing. It seems like it waits a while to blow, but then does it suddenly and dramatically. There doesn't appear to be much of a shoulder at the tip of the curve.
p.16 #6 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
Jochenb wrote:
Sadly, I feel the same.
I like what I'm seeing from the lens. The rendering close to mid distance is really nice.
I have the money to buy one, but I just can't... it just doesn't feel right. I'm not saying it's overpriced (like Martin says: there's no competition at the moment), but for this price I just expect a camera that oozes quality.
The many reports about people returning theirs makes this feeling even stronger.
I feel the same as well. I REALLY want to love this camera but it is not quite up to what I would expect at this price point. Having said that, the images sure do look good.
p.16 #8 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
carstenw wrote:
I have seen the highlight thing consistently. Not in all shots, but in enough that I think it is likely an attribute of the sensor/processing. It seems like it waits a while to blow, but then does it suddenly and dramatically. There doesn't appear to be much of a shoulder at the tip of the curve.
A digital sensor can't have a "sholder". When the pixels are saturated, they are saturated and there's nothing to do. The differences you might see is the only due to the processing of raw data, including the gamma curve (which we never get to see unless we use Matlab or so).
If you'd want really smooth highlights, just underexpose a bit and then push the shadows.
p.16 #9 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
Yes, I guess Sony is aggressively pushing the exposure up for other reasons, and this is the compromise. I am sure there are ways around it, I am just not fond of that choice, I suppose.
p.16 #11 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
The highlight rendering + recovery with RAW is the best I've had, at least for portraits on bright daylight where you can blow out regions very easily. This is compared to the D700 (not very good) and the NEX-7 (quite decent thanks to the large dynamic range at low ISO). With LR4 the highlight recovery is impressive, while keeping the rest of the colors excellent (yes, you could do with any camera, but many times the whole image gets dull right away).
p.16 #12 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
Hmm, I've felt that my RX1 is underexposing in general. I've had to dial in positive exposure compensation pretty frequently, but I haven't had much of an issue with blown highlights at all. The RAW files are extremely malleable in LR4, pretty close to what I can do with a D800 file.
p.16 #14 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
Martin - are you mostly using AF or MF with your shots. I know a fair number of your shots are in lower light situations and I am wondering if you just stick to AF. Do you find it accurate enough (in low light) for your needs?
p.16 #15 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
Don't really understand the expectations for the RX1 at this price to ooze "Leica" quality. It's not priced like a Leica, it's priced like a D800, an A99, or a 5dmk3. I haven't handled an RX1 yet: but is the build in that quality range?
p.16 #16 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
the build quality is pretty good except the battery door (made of plastic & flimsy latch) and lens aperture blades misalignment at f2.8 at down. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3358727
p.16 #17 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
I find the RX1 build quality quite a bit cheaper-feeling than my D800 (apart from the flash bit on the D800, which doesn't feel so great). I had them both side by side. The RX1 does feel a little better than the A99 though :/ I didn't mean to imply that the RX1 should ooze Leica quality, just that the Leica plays in the top price league partly by oozing quality, whereas the RX1 really doesn't. It is fine, but the build quality doesn't feel special to me, just normal, like a D7000 or something.
p.16 #18 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
Well, Leica does needs an electronic push up , a better writing speed and a better LCD screen for a long time in that top notch body of theirs. We will see soon.
It's the output in combination with the price...... bodys are gone in no time these days and what is left is a fantastic piece of craftsmenship with outdated electronics in it.
That could become a problem.
p.16 #19 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
Gary Clennan wrote:
Martin - are you mostly using AF or MF with your shots. I know a fair number of your shots are in lower light situations and I am wondering if you just stick to AF. Do you find it accurate enough (in low light) for your needs?
I use AF all the time except for when the light is so low that it doesn't work. I can't see any reason to use MF unless you have to. I don't think I've posted anything that needed MF yet.
