Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Non Rangefinder Cameras > Digital Fixed Lens Advanced Compacts > Other Digital Advanced Fixed Lens Compacts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

RX1 review from luminous landscape
Old 12-20-2012   #1
GaryLH
Registered User
 
GaryLH's Avatar
 
GaryLH is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,682
RX1 review from luminous landscape

Steve Huff posted his a while ago. Here is the one from LL today.. Good thing I am currently not interested. For those who are..

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...1_review.shtml

Toward the end he has a one liner mentioning that dp Merrill had better resolution, but that was only place he felt the Merrill won.

Gary
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #2
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 40
Posts: 13,692
I thought people here would be clamouring for this... but I only see a few that are interested. It appears that once you go over $1000 and then again over $2000... people lose interest quick.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #3
stompyq
Registered User
 
stompyq is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 976
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
I thought people here would be clamouring for this... but I only see a few that are interested. It appears that once you go over $1000 and then again over $2000... people lose interest quick.
Sounds like your looking to get one
__________________
www.pramodhsphotos.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #4
f16sunshine
Like boots in the dryer..
 
f16sunshine's Avatar
 
f16sunshine is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Seattle
Age: 46
Posts: 3,121
Anyone suppose sony will get this thing priced under $2k in the next year?
It simple does not deliver enough at this price point.
However good it is at what it does.
It is too expensive sitting next to it's also very good competition.
__________________
Andy
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #5
thegman
Registered User
 
thegman is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 34
Posts: 3,549
I'm sure the price will go down, especially with the price of FF DSLRs now.
__________________
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #6
Benjamin Marks
Registered User
 
Benjamin Marks is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vermont
Posts: 2,313
Ditto on price drops. In a year they will have one with interchangeable lenses or x-ray vision or a top ISO of a billion and then this one will sell for $1500. Yum.

Ben
__________________
<a href='http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=1566'>My Gallery</a>
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #7
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 40
Posts: 13,692
Quote:
Originally Posted by stompyq View Post
Sounds like your looking to get one
Nope, no interest at all Pramodh. It's looking like a slim year for cameras for me. As we spoke about, I have an expensive item I have to pay for this year... as well as some dental issues.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #8
burancap
Registered User
 
burancap's Avatar
 
burancap is online now
Join Date: May 2010
Location: South Carolina
Age: 48
Posts: 1,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
I thought people here would be clamouring for this... but I only see a few that are interested. It appears that once you go over $1000 and then again over $2000... people lose interest quick.
My sentiments as well.

I was rather excited when it was first announced.

Then the realization settled in that perhaps as never before -there is such a really brilliant plethora of amazing cameras available today at better price points. Moore's law as applied to photography, I suppose.

I think it is a great time to sit and watch -then go cherry-pick the winners.
__________________
Jeff @ flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #9
Godfrey
wonderment
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,999
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
I thought people here would be clamouring for this... but I only see a few that are interested. It appears that once you go over $1000 and then again over $2000... people lose interest quick.
I was momentarily interested, but then I thought: "I already have the Leica X2 for a fixed lens, 35mm FoV compact. Good as the RX1 might be, I can't see it being worth the cost of selling the X2 and then paying another $1200 on top of that to get the same thing."

Then I figured I'd put that extra outlay into the fund for the new M, when it's available.

Then the Hasselblad SWC came available ... and there went that money. I'd much rather have an SWC than ANY new digicam however good the digicam might be.

Life is full of twists and turns... ;-)
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #10
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 40
Posts: 13,692
I don't necessarily have an issue with the price. I get it. However, I just feel the body is too small for the lens size... and I don't really think it is truly pocketable. While they are arguably inferior cameras in most ways, I'd much rather stick with the X100 and DP2 Merrill in this category. They feel right in my hands.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #11
burancap
Registered User
 
burancap's Avatar
 
burancap is online now
Join Date: May 2010
Location: South Carolina
Age: 48
Posts: 1,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalintrigue View Post
APS_C is the price/performance leader.

However for a tiny body, full frame, with a Zeiss lens, the price is pretty fair IMHO. Figure a $500 adder for the small size, $1500 for the full frame sensor/body, and $800 for the Zeiss lens.
Well, let's remash that a bit just for fun.

Sony - check
Tiny body - check
Zeiss lens - check
~24Mp - check
Full frame - no

=~$600.00 RX100 (faster at 1.8)

~$2,400 for full frame is tough.
__________________
Jeff @ flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #12
back alley
ɹoʇɐɹǝpoɯ moderator
 
back alley's Avatar
 
back alley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: searching for fresh
Posts: 37,242
i think he likes it...i know that i do and the first spare 3k that falls my way will allow me to buy one!
__________________
heart soul & a camera


x-e1/23/56/16-50
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #13
Monochrom
Registered User
 
Monochrom's Avatar
 
Monochrom is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 631
well..he really liked the camera...but i dont think ill get one...im quite happy with my m9..an not so fan of 35mm lenses...

ill get me myaself a dp2M...45 fov suit me better! and of course its cheaper....
__________________
M9 + 5cm summar + 28 zm


Do you send overseas your flat tire to get fixed?

Aligning the RF is faster and easier than changing a flat tire, also neat and lightweight.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #14
Snowbuzz
Registered User
 
Snowbuzz's Avatar
 
Snowbuzz is offline
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 546
Don't forget to factor in an extra $550-$650 for the viewfinder: using an LCD to take pictures is beyond my ability.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #15
back alley
ɹoʇɐɹǝpoɯ moderator
 
back alley's Avatar
 
back alley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: searching for fresh
Posts: 37,242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowbuzz View Post
Don't forget to factor in an extra $550-$650 for the viewfinder: using an LCD to take pictures is beyond my ability.
have you tried?

i use the lcd on the sony rx100 and it took a few tries before it was old hat...
__________________
heart soul & a camera


x-e1/23/56/16-50
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #16
GaryLH
Registered User
 
GaryLH's Avatar
 
GaryLH is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,682
If I need to take the picture below 1/30 then I would prefer an evf or ovf to get the most stable setup for the picture.

Gary
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #17
GaryLH
Registered User
 
GaryLH's Avatar
 
GaryLH is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,682
I am not sure if the rx1 has steady shot. I would assume it does. I have the rx100 and I wished it had an evf, but to get a truly pocket camera, I am ok w/o it. The rx1 is not a pocket camera by any stretch of imagination unless u are wearing some really baggy pants. Which puts it in xe1 or nex6 territory.

As I get older need faster shutter speeds

Gary

Last edited by GaryLH : 12-20-2012 at 16:40. Reason: Rewrote my original post
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #18
fotomeow
name under my name
 
fotomeow's Avatar
 
fotomeow is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Posts: 721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowbuzz View Post
Don't forget to factor in an extra $550-$650 for the viewfinder: using an LCD to take pictures is beyond my ability.
agreed. I can see paying $500 for an external digital VF for a camera costing $1000. But on top of the $3k price tag? and no faster than f2?
forget it.
__________________
--> Gary G

"HELP: I need an arm for my MOOLY!! (i'm serious, contact me if you know of one that is available!

Galleria RFF
[size=1]old stuff, new stuff, stuff that works and stuff that doesn't.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-20-2012   #19
aizan
Registered User
 
aizan's Avatar
 
aizan is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Torrance, CA
Age: 32
Posts: 3,353
Quote:
What I do agree with is not having a built-in EVF. Not that I wouldn't want one. But, when you hold the camera and look at the rear LCD almost completely filling the rear panel, you realize that the only way one could be built in would be to make the camera bigger, which Sony clearly didn't want to do.
here's a crazy idea: make the rear LCD smaller to make room for an EVF in the corner. does it really need to be that big? i'd be ok with a 2'' screen.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2012   #20
thegman
Registered User
 
thegman is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 34
Posts: 3,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by aizan View Post
here's a crazy idea: make the rear LCD smaller to make room for an EVF in the corner. does it really need to be that big? i'd be ok with a 2'' screen.
I expect they could have put one in if they had wanted to, but profit margin goes down, and they lose the ability to sell you a clip one. It also becomes trickier to think of must-have features for the RX2.

It's clearly not in Sony's or any other camera maker's interests to make the RX1 perfect right off the bat. It's probably not even in most buyer's interests either as the early adopters, and frequent upgraders fund price cuts for the rest of us and keep the used market stocked with nice gear.
__________________
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2012   #21
btgc
Registered User
 
btgc's Avatar
 
btgc is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,123
Quote:
Originally Posted by thegman View Post
I expect they could have put one in if they had wanted to, but profit margin goes down, and they lose the ability to sell you a clip one.
I know quality optical devices aren't cheap but when finder costs 1/3-1/2 of camera something has to be done....like raising price of camera to get proportion looking more reasonable

p.s. I'm aware rx1 isn't exactly cameraphone and I'm not complaining FF-sensor and Zeiss prime together cost more than typical P&S. I just think built-in finder is the thing to have in serious cameras. External finders are tech from mid of XX century, they tend to engage with clothings, straps and rest of the world. Just do it right and we say amen.
__________________
MyFlickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2012   #22
mugent
Registered User
 
mugent is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 476
I don't really get it as a camera, it's full frame but on a fixed lens camera, it's kind of irrelevant as there is no 'crop factor'. Obviously some people will always want ff for the of depth of field, but in this case it's a marketing decision, not a technical one.

The merrill is a fraction of the price, if you want incredible resolution in a small form factor, it's still the best one IMO.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2012   #23
Paddy C
Unused film collector
 
Paddy C is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Too far north for my liking
Posts: 774
Quote:
Originally Posted by mugent View Post
The merrill is a fraction of the price, if you want incredible resolution in a small form factor, it's still the best one IMO.
Except the merrill doesn't do low-light.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2012   #24
taemo
Registered User
 
taemo is offline
Join Date: Apr 2012
Age: 29
Posts: 296
while the RX1 is a great achievement, I would rather get an X100 than it.
(here's me hoping that used X100s would drop down to $500 or X200 comes out)
__________________
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-21-2012   #25
apodeictic
Registered User
 
apodeictic is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 70
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
I thought people here would be clamouring for this... but I only see a few that are interested. It appears that once you go over $1000 and then again over $2000... people lose interest quick.
And yet there's still people out there willing to fork out $2000 for an M8, which in terms of digital cameras is antiquated (6 years is ages in digital technology).
  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 12:24.


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.