Sony RX1 Full frame compact!

[sueifong]

Well, given a FF NEX doesn't exist and that a 5Dmk3 is an utterly different camera from the almost pocketable fixed 35mm lens RX1 it may just be worth it to the right person...ie, to someone who wants a camera that firstly exists and secondly, isn't a great big huge DSLR. As far as I'm concerned, the Fuji X100 sans EVF/OVF is, probably the only comparable camera.

I'd still go for the OMD with a 17.5mm f1.8 if you ask me, it maybe still smaller than the RX1. But then again it's just me.
I am not saying that RX1 is not a good camera but compares to the OMD and the NEX7 + 1.8/24 , it just fall short in my opinion. It's too much of a PnS daytime holiday camera and it is very good at that.
Funny that the reason I bought it is to replace my little Sony TX9, so I really shouldn't be complaining. I think I was spoiled by the functionalities and usabilities of the OMD and NEX7.
size comparison rx1, omd + 14mm, nex7 + 24mm
<IMG width=1024 src="https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8216/8312967157_490543a2c1_h.jpg">
photo taken with sony tx9

 

[Luckypenguin]

My feeling is that if the Fuji X100 didn't pique my interest, then neither will the RX1.

 

[Yohan Pamudji]

Well, not really.
Rx1 is not as good as Steve you know who made out to be. It's over hyped and over priced.
IMHO, OMD and NEX7 out perform RX1 in so many areas. RX1 is a point and shoot camera does a good job in daylight still photo and bokeh. I am seriously underwhelmed.

Well to be fair nothing is as good as Steve "you know who" makes it out to be Fair play to him for parlaying his enthusiasm into a successful camera review business, but if you want level headed reviews you don't rely on his stuff.

Thanks for the frank assessment on the RX1. I'm keeping track of the camera but only from a distance. Maybe in 2-3 years when it's selling used for closer to $1000 I'll take another look, but at its current new price I'd much rather have a full m4/3 kit. Unfortunately for some of us it's an either/or situation :smile:

 

[tardegardo]

Well to be fair nothing is as good as Steve "you know who" makes it out to be Fair play to him for parlaying his enthusiasm into a successful camera review business, but if you want level headed reviews you don't rely on his stuff.

Thanks for the frank assessment on the RX1. I'm keeping track of the camera but only from a distance. Maybe in 2-3 years when it's selling used for closer to $1000 I'll take another look, but at its current new price I'd much rather have a full m4/3 kit. Unfortunately for some of us it's an either/or situation :smile:

Argh.. Do you guys mean that this Steve "we know who" has some reason to promote some products and to talk down others?
His omd reviews have always been great though.

 

[usayit]

It's too much of a PnS daytime holiday camera and it is very good at that.

Since this is a thread about the RX1,
Elaborate what you mean by "PnS daytime holiday camera"?

It can mean many different things to different people. Honestly, I've had many people say the similar things about Micro 4/3rds.

 

[littleMT]

Well to be fair nothing is as good as Steve "you know who" makes it out to be Fair play to him for parlaying his enthusiasm into a successful camera review business, but if you want level headed reviews you don't rely on his stuff.

Yet he labeled the e-pl1 as possible the greatest jpg shooter ever..

I scoffed at first.... then later bought a e-pl1, a refurb from Cameta...

I have never shot raw with my (now 2) e-pl1's. I find Mr. Huff to be spot on, the jpg's that come out of the e-pl1 are incredible, mucher nicer then my Canon 40d, T2i and T4i.... so much so that I got rid of the canons (actaully buying the OMD was the final nail in Canons coffin for me)

Anyways, point is, he nailed it on two reviews which I have 1st hand experience with, the e-pl1 and the OMD Em-5..

I suspect the RX1 is as good as he claims, I will soon find out, I can leave a 14mm on my e-pl1 and shoot all day, likewise my 35mm f/1.8 on my Sony A65, I am rather certian with the Rx1 and 35mm f/2.0, some magic can and will happen.

signed,
Steve Huff fangirl.

 

[zapatista]

The RX1 is freakin' awesome!!!!!!!111!!! {In my best Huffman internet angst}. The truth is that I've used it 90% of the time thus far vacationing in Ecuador and Colombia--brought an OM-D and some lenses as well.

 

[jloden]

Having shot the RX1 a little side by side with the D600 (which is purported to be possibly the same sensor), I think the RX1 actually has an edge in IQ and possibly noise performance. I suspect the IQ differences and pleasing rendering are from the excellent 35mm lens on the RX1 versus the 50mm f/1.4 on the D600 but regardless, the IQ on the RX1 doesn't disappoint, at least not for me :smile: I'm really happy with the RX1 as my take anywhere camera and despite f/2.0 max aperture it's proved to be plenty for low light indoor shooting as well.

About the only real gripes I can come up with so far are the lack of viewfinder (still out of stock on the add-on EVF), and the slow AF in some scenarios. In low light it can hunt or get confused at times and generally reminds me of using the Panasonic 20mm instead of the lightning quick response on modern m4/3 bodies & lenses. I'd like to be able to customize display elements on the LCD too, but that's not a deal breaker.

 

[RT_Panther]

It appears that the folks over at Luminous Landscapes love the RX-1. So what does that say about Huff's perspectives...?

 

[Yohan Pamudji]

Argh.. Do you guys mean that this Steve "we know who" has some reason to promote some products and to talk down others?

No, not at all. I prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he's just a naturally enthusiastic person and it comes out in his reviews. But the fact that everything I've read from him puts every product in the best light possible means I prefer to get my reviews elsewhere.

Anyways, point is, he nailed it on two reviews which I have 1st hand experience with, the e-pl1 and the OMD Em-5..

He has reviewed a lot of other camera gear too, and AFAIK it's all been positive. My point is that he isn't necessarily wrong. It's just that it takes more work to cut through the exuberance to get to the meat of the review than it does with other sites. Some don't mind that and more power to them.

I do read his reviews sometimes and appreciate the work he puts into them. But when it comes to actually deciding on a piece of gear I usually don't weigh his reviews very heavily. Just my opinion; YMMV.

I suspect the RX1 is as good as he claims, I will soon find out, I can leave a 14mm on my e-pl1 and shoot all day, likewise my 35mm f/1.8 on my Sony A65, I am rather certian with the Rx1 and 35mm f/2.0, some magic can and will happen.

No doubt the RX1 will produce some magical pictures regardless of whether Steve says so or not. Seeing the many photos you've posted here I reckon in your case it will be down to your ability much more than the camera.

The RX1 is a very exciting camera. If I had the scratch I'd definitely try one out, but alas mere financial mortals like me have to restrain themselves especially when they're already invested in 2 full systems (DSLR and m4/3)

 

[Yohan Pamudji]

It appears that the folks over at Luminous Landscapes love the RX-1. So what does that say about Huff's perspectives...?

Nothing. Comparing reviews of 1 camera don't give you an overall picture of the relative review approaches of LL vs. SH, but even in this one instance I find LL to offer a more measured approach to reviewing whereas SH's is more "ra ra ra". For me it's about trends and full bodies of work. A site builds its reputation on being fair and level-headed over all of its reviews. Again just my opinion and YMMV.

 

[RT_Panther]

Nothing. Comparing reviews of 1 camera don't give you an overall picture of the relative review approaches of LL vs. SH, but even in this one instance I find LL to offer a more measured approach to reviewing whereas SH's is more "ra ra ra". For me it's about trends and full bodies of work. A site builds its reputation on being fair and level-headed over all of its reviews. Again just my opinion and YMMV.

Understood but....
Remember some of the negative comments across the 'net about the OM-D? Judging by some of the reactions here on this very forum, a negative comment towards the OM-D could've been compared to blasphemy!

 

[Yohan Pamudji]

Understood but....
Remember some of the negative comments across the 'net about the OM-D? Judging by some of the reactions here on this very forum, a negative comment towards the OM-D could've been compared to blasphemy!

True, true. But I don't hold regular Joes to the same standard as reviewers

 

[jloden]

Steve has specifically stated in at least one review on his site that he only reviews items he's interested in and likes. In other words, he doesn't DO negative reviews; if you see it on his site, it's a safe bet he likes it.

On the one hand, that's not as useful from an objective standpoint as a site like say DPReview or DxOMark that's ostensibly trying to review everything from an objective standpoint. On the other hand, if you like Steve's work, and you like other gear he likes, then if he gives something a good review it might be something you would also be interested in. Now obviously, that's not going to suit everyone and it's no surprise that some people dislike Steve's reviews for the same reason. But given that he's not claiming or trying to be objective and balanced, I don't have a problem with his enthusiasm.

 

[littleMT]

No, not at all. I prefer to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he's just a naturally enthusiastic person and it comes out in his reviews. But the fact that everything I've read from him puts every product in the best light possible means I prefer to get my reviews elsewhere.



He has reviewed a lot of other camera gear too, and AFAIK it's all been positive. My point is that he isn't necessarily wrong. It's just that it takes more work to cut through the exuberance to get to the meat of the review than it does with other sites. Some don't mind that and more power to them.

Mr. Huff says over and over, that he only reviews things he likes, therefore they will all be positive, if he doesn't review something, he doesn't like it.

He does favor the little mirrorless cameras, so you don't really find DSLR reviews on his site.

 

[sueifong]

the slow AF in some scenarios. In low light it can hunt or get confused at times .

The AF is my main issue too especially in low light situation. Sometimes I have to resort to MF and it's MF is no joy to use either. It's Multiple Points AF is a mystery to me, it seems to be always focus on something other then the object of interest. It you try to use flexible spot then you better hope the object won't move other wise by the time you press the button to the right spot the object has moved on to somewhere else.

It's AE in many cases seem to be on the lower side except on sunny day and well lit rooms. But it's easily adjustable in LR, no big deal, just a PItA.
But when the RX1 nails the focus the imaging it produce is outstanding, although I have seen better with Sigma's DP Merrill, and Nex7 plus CZS 1.8/24 is not too far off for me at least.

One other thing I am not happy about is the asterism RX1 produced. It's uneven in size, degree, and not sharp at the end of points. It really is a shame because when you shoot a night city scape you would want to see perfect asterism, with a fixed lens, you are stuck with what you got.

Having said all the above, I am sure most of the issues I encountered are down to my lack of understanding of the camera and photography in general. It's my personal experience with the RX1 and should only be treated as such. So, please don't let me view stop you buying this camera. At the end of the day, the RX1 can produce outstanding pictures and that's the main thing.

 

[usayit]

Steve has specifically stated in at least one review on his site that he only reviews items he's interested in and likes. In other words, he doesn't DO negative reviews; if you see it on his site, it's a safe bet he likes it.

.

just quoting for reiteration.... Steve has said on multiple occasions and people here have still used this as an indication of bias.

Personally, I have found each review on SH site on the mark.... wrapped around an enthusiasm, personal opinion and usage that it makes other review sites as interesting as reading the Manual to a VCR.


I find that he doesnt always follow the mainstream which is nice..... it appeals to me... then again I am not one to follow the main public opinion either.


RX1 is no doubt not for the general public appeal... its not an SLR.. its not interchangeable mount. Then again, In other forums I frequent neither is micro 4/3 from members perspective.... Thats why I asked sueilong what he meant by "PnS daytime holiday camera".... kinda sounds like something some would also describe micro 43 Oly PENs.

 

[RT_Panther]

The AF is my main issue too especially in low light situation.

I'm going to make guess here & state that low-light hunting *appears* to a tough nut to crack for Sony.

Why do I say the above?

Well,
I took the image below in low light with my E-PL5 & my Leica 25mm ƒ1.4. Took all of about 1 second for this combination to focus & get the shot.

HOWEVER - When I tried the same with my NEX-F3 & SEL 50mm ƒ1.8, it would not focus. Endless hunting & the only way for me to have been able to get the shot would have been to switch to manual mode.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Things Go Better With Coke by RedTail_Panther, on Flickr

 

[Luckypenguin]

^^ The same is true for Samsung as well as Sony. Hunting and missed focus in less than ideal conditions, including those where I have come to expect a Panasonic or Olympus to just work.

 

[jloden]

My opinion is that AF in general is a tough problem. Every new camera system seems to struggle with it at one level or another, and it's easy to forget that we're enjoying the fruits of several years worth of development for contrast AF systems in m4/3.

I will say the RX1 is better than some (it's better or at least equal to the latest iteration of Fuji X cameras for example, and this is version 1.0 for the RX1). I've had trouble with it hunting in the dark but usually it is able to focus eventually, and I haven't really had to resort to manual focus yet. I agree about selectable point AF - it takes way too long to maneuver without a touch screen or a grid type pattern of selectable points. I also wish focus peaking was available without having to engage the focus assist magnification. Not sure why they chose to tie those two together.