Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.45 #10 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced! | |
InFocus2014 wrote:
I mostly agree.
For background, I have extensively shot the RX1R (ordered new, 12 years ago), the RX1RII and Leica Q3. Today, I shoot the A7CR, A7R5 and A1 II.
While my A7CR produces outstanding results, the outdated EVF and LCD make this a joyless camera to shoot, for me. The outstanding focus system and IBIS keep me shooting it, however, for travel. Conversely, my A7R5 and A1 II cameras provide a truly outstanding overall shooting experience (for me, personally).
I would love to, again, have a small camera like the RX1RIII, to keep in a small bag in my car and on my person to capture a lot of good opportunities. If Sony had kept the tilting screen on the III, I would pay the premium and endure the lack of IBIS and poor LCD/screen resolution to have such a small, powerful camera.
The nice thing about the RX1RII is that the tilting screen allowed me to shoot lower for a lot of shots, thus keeping the subject on the neutral lens axis and avoiding distortions. It also allowed me to more easily shoot my grandkids, pets, etc. I cannot easily do this with the RX1RIII as I am getting a bit old to kneel-down as I did when I was younger, shooting DSLR’s. 
I’m not complaining. I applaud Sony for producing such a technical marvel and I think they will sell a lot of these cameras. When they are available, used, in the future for a lower price, I will likely acquire one. In the meantime, I’m considering re-acquiring another Q3 (for travel and casual shooting) – a camera that was an absolute joy to shoot and which provided outstanding results – even in low-light. I’ll still shoot the A7CR when I need lens flexibility.
Finally, for the record, after shooting thousands of shots with both the RX1 and Q3 cameras, and reviewing shots on a 27”, 5K monitor at 100/200%, as good as the Zeiss lens is, it does not top the Leica in either sharpness or rendering, IMHO. Of course, Leica took lens performance to the next level with the Q3 43.
...Show more →
I often hear photographers comparing the RX1 series to the Q series, but honestly, aside from both having built-in lenses, they belong in completely different categories. Size really is the key here. Once you see in hands, shoot with it, and carry it around, you realize there's nothing else like the RX1. It's the smallest full-frame camera of its kind (built-in lens). The difference in size is huge compared to the Q2, which is actually closer to the size of a Leica M...
What some people miss is that the RX1's main strength is exactly that...giving you a full-frame sensor in the most compact form possible. That means certain features simply aren't possible. There are trade-offs, and that's part of the design philosophy.
On top of that, even the lenses are different in both focal length and character. The RX1 has a 35mm f/2, while the Q2 uses a 28mm f/1.7 (that requires mandatory extreme distortion correction). They not only behave differently in how they render but are also designed for different shooting styles. So you're nott just choosing between two camera bodies, you're also choosing between two distinct lenses with their own personalities.
So it really comes down to what matters more to you. If you want the smallest full-frame camera with great image quality, the RX1 delivers. If you need more features or a different shooting experience, something like the Q2 might be a better fit. But comparing the two directly, or complaining that the RX1 doesn't have what the Q2 does, kind of misses the point. They're built with different design goals and for different priorities.
|
