Old 12-07-2012   #51
apodeictic
Registered User
 
apodeictic is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruhayat View Post
I have to agree. Either a short zoom or prime 50mm f2.0 would have been more of an alternative to the existing Leica X2, Fuji X100 etc. I think full frame makes more sense in the telephoto, portrait range where the shallow DOF is desirable.
If you want "50mm" or "75mm" you can always use the in-camera crop option. It's not a perfect solution, but there's a dedicated button which allows you to switch between 35, 50 and 75 equivalents. The file size does go down, but given the clarity of the images I've seen from the camera, it looks like a viable option.

And for me, it's the exact opposite: full frame, at least in a compact body like this, is far more advantagous in the wideangle department to minimize distortion. Wideangles on crop bodies give that weird distortion in the corners that give people football shaped heads. One of the reasons I went from digital to film, aside from loving the aesthetic, was that I could shoot at 35 or 28mm and the image just "breathed." It didn't feel like looking through peephole. If I wanted to shoot full frame with long lenses, I would just go for an SLR, which is going to balance better with the lens anyway.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2012   #52
gustavoAvila
Registered User
 
gustavoAvila is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by apodeictic View Post
Wideangles on crop bodies give that weird distortion in the corners that give people football shaped heads.
This has nothing to do with cropped sensors and everything to do with software barrel distortion correction.

To satisfy consumer demands for "pancake" sized lenses, designers accept huge amounts of native barrel distortion.

This barrel distortion is corrected using software algorithms.

While two dimensional surfaces can be adequately corrected, the same is not true for three dimensional shapes (such as human faces).

This is the reason for the gross facial distortions seen in software corrected, wide angle lenses. (Humans are very sensitive to facial features.)

Finally, every mirrorless wide angle lens is software corrected to some degree (including that on the RX-1).
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-07-2012   #53
CaptZoom
Registered User
 
CaptZoom's Avatar
 
CaptZoom is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 111
I'd like to see a tele prime RX1x...than istead of changing lenses, I can change camera bodies...it would make event photography sweet.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-09-2012   #54
Ruhayat
Registered User
 
Ruhayat is offline
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by apodeictic View Post
If you want "50mm" or "75mm" you can always use the in-camera crop option. It's not a perfect solution, but there's a dedicated button which allows you to switch between 35, 50 and 75 equivalents. The file size does go down, but given the clarity of the images I've seen from the camera, it looks like a viable option.
That's interesting to know. I still say they should have gone with a 50mm, though. Simpler to design, maybe it would have been smaller and cheaper, too.
__________________
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ramayanax/] (Old Flickr - can't log into it anymore)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/97682169@N08/ (NwrFlickr) (NwrFlickr)
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-09-2012   #55
Adanac
Registered User
 
Adanac is offline
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by apodeictic View Post
If you want "50mm" or "75mm" you can always use the in-camera crop option. It's not a perfect solution, but there's a dedicated button which allows you to switch between 35, 50 and 75 equivalents. The file size does go down, but given the clarity of the images I've seen from the camera, it looks like a viable option.
The Smart Teleconverter function is optional and must be assigned to a button to enable this feature. The crop affects in-camera JPG only, so you could use the feature to change the "brightlines" while still leaving a full sized raw file for cropping otherwise in post should the need arise.

An APS-C sized crop to 50mm would leave ~ 11MP in resolution - very usable.

Or just crop in post off a full sized JPG or raw file.

I'm a former owner of the X100 and do not feel this camera duplicates the X100 except at a superficial level; surely there is room for more than one 35mm or equivalent fixed lens compact on the market. Each has their own strengths and the differences are not inconsequential if of course the differences are meaningful to an individual photographer.

PS: I'm glad they went with 35mm. If it was a 50mm optic I'd not have spent even a second considering the camera as much prefer the moderate wide view and opportunities to crop tighter when the situation fits.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-09-2012   #56
Santtu Määttänen
Visual Poet
 
Santtu Määttänen's Avatar
 
Santtu Määttänen is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Finland
Posts: 133
Only other focal length which would have made more sense to me (and would have been WAY WAY more preferred then 35mm would have been true normal, as in diagonal length of the sensor). Other then that, I'm all drools here. Considering this against XPRO-1 system or OMD system...
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #57
AM*shoots*SF
Registered User
 
AM*shoots*SF is offline
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 11
This is a fascinating camera, though flawed: no EVF and yes to useless mode dial (how about shutter speed?). Though the full size sensor and Zeiss lens are very attractive. But at the end ofthe day, I wonder how better the photos will be in jpeg (what I shoot), given the excellent jpeg engine in the x100. At this point I'm sticking with my fuji x100, but I am keen to see the inevitable comparisons to the x100. We will need to see plenty of A and B photo comparisons to truly judge the new Sony. This should be interesting!
__________________
See my street photography at http://www.flickr.com/photos/aminsf/
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #58
Maiku
Maiku
 
Maiku is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Canada
Age: 43
Posts: 595
I picked one up the other day a camera store. I did not like the balance. The lens barrel seems way out proportion to the body. It just felt awkward. Have some kind of viewfinder would be nice.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #59
GaryLH
Registered User
 
GaryLH's Avatar
 
GaryLH is online now
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 5,194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maiku View Post
Have some kind of viewfinder would be nice.
It has optional ovf or evf.

Gary
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #60
btgc
Registered User
 
btgc's Avatar
 
btgc is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,338
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryLH View Post
It has optional ovf or evf.
For a mere $450 on sony corp. site. This finder should be as good as whole NEX-5N w/ 18-55 for $499 from B&H. But I understand, variable FOV finder for camera of this price tag can't be $150 piece. Even for NEX-5 finder will part one from $260 (half of camera price, yuk).
__________________
MyFlickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-11-2012   #61
Harry Lime
Practitioner
 
Harry Lime's Avatar
 
Harry Lime is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,588
I think one of the biggest questions for street shooters is how well zone / scale focus is implemented. If it's poorly executed it will just be a PS, albeit with a huge sensor.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2012   #62
btgc
Registered User
 
btgc's Avatar
 
btgc is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,338
Lookig at pictures I just realized red band around lens base stating "35mm full-frame CMOS image sensor" looks annoying. Like putting "6-cyl Otto cycle combustion engine" decal in dashboard to be seen each time you drive.
__________________
MyFlickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2012   #63
bigeye
Registered User
 
bigeye's Avatar
 
bigeye is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 1,133
Rockwell kind of hammers it. (He's an editor's nightmare, but technically quite reliable.)

-Charlie
__________________
Anything that is very simple is apt to be sloppy. - Elliott Erwitt

I bought a new camera. It's so advanced you don't even need it. - Steven Wright
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-16-2012   #64
btgc
Registered User
 
btgc's Avatar
 
btgc is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,338
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigeye View Post
Rockwell kind of hammers it. (He's an editor's nightmare, but technically quite reliable.)
I don't know what to think about his rant about .jpg color balance, doesn't sound like an adult person. But then, he makes interesting remarks like about "LCD quality" menu item, which is implemented automatic on some other compacts. Ken is like everyone other - biased on some points and true on others.
__________________
MyFlickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-18-2012   #65
Tobers
Registered User
 
Tobers is offline
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 14
I actually have an RX1 and it is superb. As a previous M9 owner the RX1 overcomes many of the problems with the Leica, and the best way to think of it is as a pocketable 5D with a top quality fast 35 lens on it.

I have used it professionally at two events in the last week where it was my second body (well, 4th actually as I had two remotes) and it turned in some beautiful images alongside my 1D IV bodies and L lenses.

Usability is great and some people simply havn't tried the camera and are talking nonsense. For example the shutter speed has a dedicated dial on the back, and setting the user memory settings took me 30 seconds. Menus are fine, way simpler than the OM-D, and the build quality is very ver solid.

If you are after a small full frame camera with a superb lens and cant afford an M and 35 cron then this is the one for you. If you are lucky enough to have a wodge of cash and can afford the Leica then thats great and I would have gone that route if I had the cash. If you can't afford the RX1 then you'll find the Olympus OM-D to be an admirable substitute (I have one of those as well).

Overall, a superb piece of kit.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-19-2012   #66
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 41
Posts: 14,246
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tobers View Post
For example the shutter speed has a dedicated dial on the back...
I think dedicated means you can only use it for one function... is that dial on the back only for shutter speed?
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #67
Tobers
Registered User
 
Tobers is offline
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 14
There's two dials on the back - one is the obvious one with the button in the middle and the 4-way controller cabability. The other is horizontally situated above it and its this one which handles shutter speed.

It may be possible to reconfigure that dial but I haven't tried it yet as it makes sense to use it for shutter speed.

I'd prefer a top mounted shutter speed dial with visible markings though.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #68
hteasley
Pupil
 
hteasley is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,950
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigeye View Post
Rockwell kind of hammers it. (He's an editor's nightmare, but technically quite reliable.)

-Charlie
He writes like an overexcited teen, and seems to not have much in the way of article to article consistency in his opinions. He strikes me as not very worthwhile to read for review information.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-03-2013   #69
hteasley
Pupil
 
hteasley is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,950
Handled an RX1 yesterday at Newtonville Camera, and took some shots in the store... it's sort of incredible. Handles really well, controls are lovely, and really wonderful 3D pop in how it draws. Manual focus worked well, although the default settings caused the zoom-focus to snap out too quickly: it was hard to fine tune because it snapped out of zoom mode almost the instant you stopped manipulating the focus ring. Dunno if that's adjustable.

If I didn't have an M9, I'd get it in a heartbeat. I'd have to get the EVF for it: I just can't stand to hold the camera away from my eye. But wow, it is incredible.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-03-2013   #70
Paul T.
Registered User
 
Paul T.'s Avatar
 
Paul T. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigeye View Post
Rockwell kind of hammers it. (He's an editor's nightmare, but technically quite reliable.)

-Charlie
His points about the program mode are very reasonable, if they're correct. How autoISO and preferred apertures/exposures are implemented are key, crucial areas (although, of course, this can nearly always be improved in Firmware, as was the X100.

Then I read to the bit where Ken Rockwell said "I'm an artist", laughed, and stopped reading.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-03-2013   #71
Griffin
Grampa's cameras user
 
Griffin's Avatar
 
Griffin is online now
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 496
Interesting read. I enjoyed that. Perhaps if Sony would've handled my grd for a couple if days they would've made a killer legendary camera that would be reveered(?) for decades to come.
__________________
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-03-2013   #72
Benjamin Marks
Registered User
 
Benjamin Marks is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,337
This camera and the Leica MM seem like prime candidates for rental first (like Lensrentals.com) to see if you are happy with the machine. It's a lot of coin to part with if you are uncertain of how you will get on with the camera . . .
__________________
<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=1566'>My Gallery</a>
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-03-2013   #73
nightfly
Registered User
 
nightfly is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,511
Wondering what problems you had with the M9 that the RX1 overcomes. A used M9 or an RX1 would be my first two choices in a higher end digital camera. Would probably use the M9 with my 35mm Summicron most of the time so would love a comparison between the two.

Great to hear from someone who's actually used one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tobers View Post
I actually have an RX1 and it is superb. As a previous M9 owner the RX1 overcomes many of the problems with the Leica, and the best way to think of it is as a pocketable 5D with a top quality fast 35 lens on it.

I have used it professionally at two events in the last week where it was my second body (well, 4th actually as I had two remotes) and it turned in some beautiful images alongside my 1D IV bodies and L lenses.

Usability is great and some people simply havn't tried the camera and are talking nonsense. For example the shutter speed has a dedicated dial on the back, and setting the user memory settings took me 30 seconds. Menus are fine, way simpler than the OM-D, and the build quality is very ver solid.

If you are after a small full frame camera with a superb lens and cant afford an M and 35 cron then this is the one for you. If you are lucky enough to have a wodge of cash and can afford the Leica then thats great and I would have gone that route if I had the cash. If you can't afford the RX1 then you'll find the Olympus OM-D to be an admirable substitute (I have one of those as well).

Overall, a superb piece of kit.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-03-2013   #74
Tobers
Registered User
 
Tobers is offline
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 14
Really enjoying my RX1. For me, as an ex M9 user, it is a very worthy successor. Image quality is fab, the lens is excellent, and it pops into a coat pocket very easily so goes with me more than my M9 did.

Focus on anything moving at f/2 is pretty useless. Static subjects are fast to focus on, not as quick as my OM-D but faster than I could with my M9.

White balance is accurate. Exposure in aperture priority is usually spot on. You can get rid of all non essential info from the display and keep things simple with aperture, iso and shutter speed. But its also really nice if you want to be "lazy" or hand the camera to someone else and let it sort itself out.

And it is very very quiet, doesn't stand out so is very discrete. I'll be playing with the 1/2000th flash sync in the next week or two on a couple of upcoming jobs.

Three examples from yesterday at a nearby outlet mall...


Bored by Tobers, on Flickr


Burberry by Tobers, on Flickr


Bags by Tobers, on Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-03-2013   #75
Tobers
Registered User
 
Tobers is offline
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightfly View Post
Wondering what problems you had with the M9 that the RX1 overcomes. A used M9 or an RX1 would be my first two choices in a higher end digital camera. Would probably use the M9 with my 35mm Summicron most of the time so would love a comparison between the two.

Great to hear from someone who's actually used one.
Sorry - missed that question initially. My main problem with the M9 was that I needed a load of cash for a new motorbike so had to sell it . That being said, I loved using it - a delightful camera amd the Zeiss 2/50 I had on it was gorgeous. However, I just couldn't afford a set of Leica lenses that I wanted.

Also, with a brace of Canon 1DIV bodies with nice L lenses already working for me, the M9 was a real luxury purchase. With poor high ISO, dodgy white balance (fixable in post I know), and a tendency to my corrupt SD cards (happened to me 3 times losing images on the cards), I found I couldn't rely on the M9 as I would have liked in professional shoot situations. And I couldn't pocket it either, so took a bag with me making things just a bit more awkward.

Thankfully I sold the M9 before the announcement of the M so "only" lost £1000 on it. I see a couple of M9s in my local dealer going for £2,700 so that's at least a £2,000 loss on new. Yikes. Still I could have a used M9 for the price of the RX1 which I considered long and hard, but I'd need to spring another grand for a decent lens.

Be in no doubt that if I had the money I'd have a new M and a 24 1.4 and 50 1.4, and probably a 75 as well. And a spare M as changing lenses is such a drag. But I don't, and in my opinion the RX1 is a very very worthy substitute, much more so than a 5D for example which is so much bulkier with 35 f/2 on.

Oh, I also have an Olympus OM-D as well which is excellent, but cant match the RX1 for image quality. It's a very good little camera with some great lenses, but oh so fiddly and confusing to use with a bonkers menu system.

Hope that helps.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:54.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.