p.13 #1 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
chez wrote:
I’d say the size difference definitely is consequential as there is no way to fit the Q or GFX into your pocket so you are then toting around some kind of case to hold the camera. For me, this makes a huge difference for an every day carry around camera.
I never found the original RX1 to be "pocketable" and always used a small sling/ bag for carry. Clearly some folks have bigger pockets! At 4.5 x 2.7 x 3.4" for this RX1, it's not like one can easily slip it into a pocket...say like a relatively thin Ricoh GRIII. The thickness due to the wonderful lens on the RX1 prevents it from being truly "pocketable" imo. Once you have to resort to using any sort of separate carry pouch/ bag/ sling, the size of the camera becomes less important in my experience.
p.13 #3 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
What about features that Fuji X100VI like leaf shutter, 4 stop ND, built in flash, tilt-able rear LCD, and IBIS?
They really are excellent and useful features. But this offers superb AF, FF, 60mp, and a much better lens, also very attractive qualities. I still think my X100VI is probably good enough. The missing 10% I can almost get with the Sony A7rIV.
p.13 #7 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
+1. It is small but not pocketable unless one is built like Shaq and wears a size 65 XXL jacket.
Tariq Gibran wrote:
I never found the original RX1 to be "pocketable" and always used a small sling/ bag for carry. Clearly some folks have bigger pockets! At 4.5 x 2.7 x 3.4" for this RX1, it's not like one can easily slip it into a pocket...say like a relatively thin Ricoh GRIII. The thickness due to the wonderful lens on the RX1 prevents it from being truly "pocketable" imo. Once you have to resort to using any sort of separate carry pouch/ bag/ sling, the size of the camera becomes less important in my experience.
p.13 #8 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
For those of you still using the RX1rII, what is the ten-year-old autofocus like? Is it possible to use back-button focus? What is it like for single, central focus and recompose? Is continuous focus useable for moving subjects? Does the eye autofocus work, is it at all sticky? Any other obvious faults/problems?
p.13 #9 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
This whole thread (along with a similar Redditt thread) is really funny. Lots of very smart people who love camera gear trying to find technical reasons why they are upset the camera is more than they are willing to spend. If this camera was $3000, everyone would be talking about how long it would take to get one and whether it would be perpetually sold out like the Fuji X100VI.
So, why is it so expensive? Because Sony is fine leaving it as a niche product and there's pent up demand, albeit from a small group. If someone wants it, they will buy it. If they want an A1 ii instead, they'll buy that. If you want to see some super high priced, very niche Sony gear, check out their audiophile grade stuff. The DMP-Z1 is an $8,500 digital audio player. It is a work of art, but I doubt they sell many and I doubt they care.
Also, the retail price in Japan is 660,000 yen, which is about $4500. Still not cheap, but shows likely impact of tariffs.
p.13 #11 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
gdanmitchell wrote:
The question of how much weight and bulk is added when incorporating IBIS is tricky to answer. I spent some time looking for a straightforward, reliable answer without success. There are some general comments on camera forums and elsewhere suggesting that the IBIS mechanism is actually quite small and adds little bulk/weight to the sensor system, though it seems obvious that it should add some.
We can look at cameras that exist(ed) in both IBIS and non-IBIS versions, though this is often complicated by the fact that they are different generations, and the addition of IBIS isn't the only difference. (There are some comparisons out there involving Fujifilm and Olympus cameras, for example.)
In general the IBIS-equipped camera appear to be a bit larger and heavier, though to look at them you probably would not immediately notice the difference. In most cases, from what I've seen, you would not notice a weight difference either, since it is small.
However, the difference is likely to be greater with cameras using a larger sensor. For example, the miniMF sensor on the Fujifilm GFX system is said to be larger and heavier than, say, the similar system on the Fujifilm x-trans cameras such as the XT, XH2, X100vi, XE5 and so on. It seems reasonable to think that the effect on a FF camera might lie somewhere in between.
What we can say for sure is that there are some pretty small and light camera that incorporate IBIS. In fact, it is readily become essentially a standard feature in cameras.
As mentioned earlier, all decisions about camera design involve compromises and trade-offs. These are pretty subjective matters — for example, there's no way to state objectively that the added weight/bulk of IBIS is a universally good or bad thing relative to the advantages of IBIS. So manufacturers make choices, we discuss, and buyers vote with their wallets.
(If anyone has authoritative sources for facts about the actual weight and bulk of IBIS systems... and non-cherry-picked examples, that would add to the discussion. Oh, and maybe we could try to keep the ad hominem attacks out of the conversation... if we're really interested in facts?)...Show more →
edit: found an image i can actually embed in the post:
this is what the original rx1 sensor assembly looks like:
the difference in size is about 1/2 inch in depth from the sensor surface. the difference in size on the x and y dimensions is probably even greater than that.
this is how the sensor sat in the original rx1 (you can see the mounting points of the lens from the other picture here):
how much weight and size growth there would be from adding IBIS depends on how the engineers choose to move other things around and what sacrifices they decide are worthwhile, BUT the camera has to get half an inch deeper or the lens has to stick out half an inch further (or some combination of the two) in order to allow the depth of the IBIS mechanism.
p.13 #13 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
tiltonlane wrote:
This whole thread (along with a similar Redditt thread) is really funny. Lots of very smart people who love camera gear trying to find technical reasons why they are upset the camera is more than they are willing to spend. If this camera was $3000, everyone would be talking about how long it would take to get one and whether it would be perpetually sold out like the Fuji X100VI.
I think the issue for many is the obvious lack of innovation and advancement seen with this update of a beloved camera given the extreme amount of time that has passed since the introduction of the last version. In some ways, the camera has actually regressed (loss of some control buttons, loss off tilting rear screen). The high price of the new version is just salt in the wound given all of this.
p.13 #16 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
tiltonlane wrote:
This whole thread (along with a similar Redditt thread) is really funny. Lots of very smart people who love camera gear trying to find technical reasons why they are upset the camera is more than they are willing to spend. If this camera was $3000, everyone would be talking about how long it would take to get one and whether it would be perpetually sold out like the Fuji X100VI.
So, why is it so expensive? Because Sony is fine leaving it as a niche product and there's pent up demand, albeit from a small group. If someone wants it, they will buy it. If they want an A1 ii instead, they'll buy that. If you want to see some super high priced, very niche Sony gear, check out their audiophile grade stuff. The DMP-Z1 is an $8,500 digital audio player. It is a work of art, but I doubt they sell many and I doubt they care.
Also, the retail price in Japan is 660,000 yen, which is about $4500. Still not cheap, but shows likely impact of tariffs. ...Show more →
The problem is, the specs fall short of a true halo product. If it checked every box and was $5500, people would actually go buy it in numbers, because the demand for a truly small camera of that capability is quite high. Terrible analogy, and silly to assume that people are "trying to find flaws" with a badly placed item in a very competitive market. Sony is just being lazy, just as they have been for the last 3-4 years.
p.13 #18 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
tiltonlane wrote:
This whole thread (along with a similar Redditt thread) is really funny. Lots of very smart people who love camera gear trying to find technical reasons why they are upset the camera is more than they are willing to spend. If this camera was $3000, everyone would be talking about how long it would take to get one and whether it would be perpetually sold out like the Fuji X100VI.
So, why is it so expensive? Because Sony is fine leaving it as a niche product and there's pent up demand, albeit from a small group. If someone wants it, they will buy it. If they want an A1 ii instead, they'll buy that. If you want to see some super high priced, very niche Sony gear, check out their audiophile grade stuff. The DMP-Z1 is an $8,500 digital audio player. It is a work of art, but I doubt they sell many and I doubt they care.
Also, the retail price in Japan is 660,000 yen, which is about $4500. Still not cheap, but shows likely impact of tariffs. ...Show more →
I’m not so sure that your analysis is true of most people responding. Many would buy it at $3000, but I wouldn’t because I would prefer the larger/more capable A7CR. I think that many would consider this camera at the current price if it had OIS, or IBIS and a tilting screen. The EVF is not a selling point, but probably wouldn’t deter most. I use to look forward to Sony’s innovation in the next generation of cameras, but not so much these days. Perhaps this is a product of a more mature technology, or a smaller market. Likely it is the result of both factors.
p.13 #19 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
sebboh wrote:
if you look at the old versus new models (top view) you can see that mark denoting the location of the sensor surface is moved further from the back of the camera and the lens is longer by the same amount. this means that there is more internal space behind the camera sensor (my guess is the new sensor needs a bigger heat sink). for those talking about adding IBIS, take a look at where the marking for the location of the sensor surface is on the a7cr – adding IBIS would mean adding roughly half an inch of thickness to the back of the camera. also, it is probably impossible because the rear element is attached directly to the sensor:
p.13 #20 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Sorry to be direct Scott but I see time, and again, you finding issues with Sony products. This is not to say that you have to like any of their products or even say they are not for you, ZV-E1 ain't for me.
But there is a difference in not wanting something and going around saying the sky is falling because Sony "has not innovated". I am yet to see another company deliver a RX1, ZV-E1, 28-70 f2, global shutter and so on.
Heck, you even mentioned in the thread that folks that "defend the camera" are "loyalists". You know people can enjoy things you do not, right?
For my part: loved the 2nd version and I am sure I will love the new version. As will many in this thread.
At 4.5 x 2.7 x 3.4" for this RX1, it's not like one can easily slip it into a pocket...say like a relatively thin Ricoh GRIII. The thickness due to the wonderful lens on the RX1 prevents it from being truly "pocketable" imo. Once you have to resort to using any sort of separate carry pouch/ bag/ sling, the size of the camera becomes less important in my experience.
