News Sony RX1. Full frame compact.

BruPri

Top Veteran
Location
Seattle, Washington USA
Real Name
Bruce J. Pritchard
Two observations, Sony, a company which traditionally obsoletes any given model with another within a years time, is going to be hard pressed to get anyone to lay out that kind of scratch for any product no matter how groundbreaking it is. B) I had a very difficult time reading Kai's review using any other voice but Kai's in my head...
 
Location
Milwaukee, WI USA
Real Name
Luke
But Bruce...isn't that part of the beauty here? We don't need to worry about Sony abandoning this "lens mount" or discontinuing the manufacture of minidisc cards to save our images to here. It's a single complete product and once you buy it, you never even need to deal with Sony again.

Now where did I leave my Walkman® ?
 

pictor

All-Pro
In my opinion this camera is very promising. It is the modern version of the legendary Rollei 35. Although 35mm is not my favorite focal length, the camera has got my attention. Maybe I should change the lens now from my 24mm to the Olympus 17mm to get accustomed to that focal length. I put the 24mm on my E-PL1 two months ago and nearly never removed it since then. Before that, I have loved my 35mm and before that I loved 50mm (all on my E-PL1). Maybe it is time to go for something wider now. Maybe I will end up loving the 35mm on full frame.
 

wt21

Hall of Famer
But if the rumored Nikon D600 is FF, and about D5000 sized, and has access to all that wonderful Nikon glass, and the (rumored) price is $1500 body only, I think I'd go for the Nikon instead.
 

Pelao

All-Pro
Location
Ontario, Canada
Real Name
Stephen
But if the rumored Nikon D600 is FF, and about D5000 sized, and has access to all that wonderful Nikon glass, and the (rumored) price is $1500 body only, I think I'd go for the Nikon instead.

I am very much looking forward the the D600 release. If it is in that price range, then it will be very attractive to me. Canon is also rumoured to be releasing a 6D, which will be a lower cost FF camera.

The Sony A99 is likely to be more expensive, but the assumed specs are good.
 
Two observations, Sony, a company which traditionally obsoletes any given model with another within a years time, is going to be hard pressed to get anyone to lay out that kind of scratch for any product no matter how groundbreaking it is. B) I had a very difficult time reading Kai's review using any other voice but Kai's in my head...

I don't understand why Sony releasing a newer model every year would be a hinderance. It's not like the "obsolete" model will stop working the day the new model comes out. I've been using a Sony laptop for the last 2.5 years. It's been my favorite laptop ever over decades and 20 odd laptops I've owned. It's no longer made. I'm not fond of the replacement model and I will weep when it eventually dies. This laptop was groundbreaking in it's day and received accolades very similar the RX100 and now the RX1. Never was there a laptop as powerful in so small a package then and since.

It's also not true that Sony replaces all it's models every year. The A900 hasn't been replaced in 4 years. The A99 will be that. Also other camera makers don't exact support their cameras after a year. The GF2 came out in 2010. The last firmware update was in 2011. It's an orphan.
 

pictor

All-Pro
But if the rumored Nikon D600 is FF, and about D5000 sized, and has access to all that wonderful Nikon glass, and the (rumored) price is $1500 body only, I think I'd go for the Nikon instead.

I think that D5000 size is not realistic. According to all leaked images, I expect it to be a little bit bigger than a D7000. However, I think that your comparison is a little bit strange. The point of the Sony RX1 is its small size. It is the digital equivalent of a Rollei 35 and its intended use is different to a SLR.
 

olli

Super Moderator Emeritus
Location
Sofia, Bulgaria
Real Name
olli
I think this is an interesting announcement in light of the recent announcement from Zeiss that they are planning to launch a range of lenses for mirrorless cameras. While they have not specified which brand it seems reasonable to assume that it would be Sony E mount given the existing relationship between the companies. According to the press release they are initially planning a wide angle, a standard and a macro. However, these focal lengths are - or shortly will be - well covered, so, to add to the pointless speculation, wouldn't it be interesting if these were lenses for a planned interchangeable lens version of this camera? Just a thought.
 

Andrewteee

All-Pro
I think this is an interesting announcement in light of the recent announcement from Zeiss that they are planning to launch a range of lenses for mirrorless cameras. While they have not specified which brand it seems reasonable to assume that it would be Sony E mount given the existing relationship between the companies. According to the press release they are initially planning a wide angle, a standard and a macro. However, these focal lengths are - or shortly will be - well covered, so, to add to the pointless speculation, wouldn't it be interesting if these were lenses for a planned interchangeable lens version of this camera? Just a thought.

They could certainly do that. I mean, the lens looks to be about the size of an m-mount lens, which works fine, with some correction, on the FF M9. So Sony could be planning an interchangeable lens camera based on the RX1 with lenses designed by Zeiss from the ground up for FF digital mirrorless.

As pointed out elsewhere, it's nice to have a choice in sensor sizes, but these are exciting times.
 

Pelao

All-Pro
Location
Ontario, Canada
Real Name
Stephen
I think that D5000 size is not realistic. According to all leaked images, I expect it to be a little bit bigger than a D7000. However, I think that your comparison is a little bit strange. The point of the Sony RX1 is its small size. It is the digital equivalent of a Rollei 35 and its intended use is different to a SLR.

I suspect it wasn't necessarily a comparison as such, more of a comment on a full frame being available for less, with access to a range of lenses. $1500 for a full frame DSLR also has the potential of being a game changer.
 

macjim

Regular
when I see people write that 35mm is too wide for general use, I always wonder what their general use is... it seems to me that there's hardly a more versatile focal length available! You can do landscapes, street, environmental portrait, documentary, still life, and with some compromise also architecture and maybe even tighter portraits (and otherwise you can always crop for more tightness, particularly with a 24mp sensor), and depending on the lens, macro (although that's unlikely to really work for a full frame 35mm).

Well, to answer your question. Back in the day when full frame was the norm, I used an Olympus OM-1n and the standard lens was a 50 mm lens. Most people used this fine camera with – a 50 mm lens – and with this 50 mm lens, we took landscape, portrait, sport, street photography etc etc. so, the reason why I said what I said in my original post was because of my previous experience and that is why I think Sony has missed the mark here. It should have been at the least, a 40 mm – not quite as much a compromise as the 35 mm – and that would have made it a better all round camera. In saying that, I still say it should have been a 50 mm seeing as it is a full framed camera. Now, I have tried using a 35 mm lens with a camera – I had, until a few weeks ago – a Leica M9 and a 35 mm Leica f2.5 lens. I thought it would be the best all round camera for myself, but that has proven to be not the case. It was too wide for my style of street photography, it was too wide for general use as I had to crop many shots to get the image I wanted. I had a 50 mm Leica lens on back order but when the fuji X-Pro1 was announced, I cancelled the lens order and bought this camera with the 35 mm fuji lens – 52mm in 35 mm equiv. size – and that is the lens I use mostly with it (18 & 60 mm fuji lenses are in my bag too).
So, yes, 35 mm in your opinion will be the best lens size depending on your style of work but in my opinion it's a big chance that Sony is taking with their choice – maybe they're after the Leica M8/9 & future M10 users the do street work?
Maybe they should have put a short focal lens zoom – say an 24-50 mm and that would have made it a more rounded camera?


Cheers, Macjim.
 

drd1135

Zen Snapshooter
Location
Lexington, VA
Real Name
Steve
Of course, a 35mm equivalent is also what Fiji chose for the x100. I would prefer the 50 as well, but then we would just have a different subset disappointed. Even Oly made the E-p1 prime a 34 and Panasonic chose a 40. It seems the standard is shifting a bit wider.
 

bartjeej

Hall of Famer
Real Name
bart
thx for your reply :) we clearly work very differently, since I very quickly feel constricted at "normal" focal lengths. I do quite like the 40mm of the Sigma DP2 and the Panasonic 20/1.7, but 50mm is just too much for me, unless I really want to isolate something - but usually I prefer to show a lot of context, and to be honest I often find 35mm quite narrow already. I did start using film, and my 2 (simple) cameras had a fixed 40mm, and a wide angle of 38mm. At the time I often found that too wide, but that's mostly because I was really into wildlife photography and hadn't really discovered any other categories. When I discovered wide angle, after switching to digital, I noticed the 35mm is right on the edge of both worlds, which is what I feel gives it its versatility. But clearly for you, that's already well into the wide angle world!

a 2x zoom should definitely allow a lot of people to shoot at their preferred focal length while not requiring too much compromise in image quality or size... or maybe even a tri-elmar kind of lens! (I don't know whether that would perform better optically or size-wise than a zoom, but I always liked the idea of several primes in 1 lens)
 

Latest threads

Top Bottom