468 отзывов пользователей o Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R
Пользовались
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R?
Поделитесь своим опытом и помогите другим сделать правильный выбор
Bondarenko Oleg
10.02.2017
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
- + Полный кадр, Отлично подогнанный под камеру объектив, великолепное качество картинки, компактность, отсутствие оптического фильтра
- - Нет видоискателя и стабилизатора
Когда берешь в руки камеру и снимаешь, понимаешь что это твое. Указанные недостатки можно простить. Для меня из-за ухудшившегося зрения был важен видоискатель. Я его докупил вместе с блендой и поляризационным фильтром Цейс и провел "следственный эксперимент". Я снимал один и тот же сюжет с тремя разными настройками: ИСО, диафрагма и выдержка. Фото умышленно сохранял в jpg причем не самого высокого качества а следующего по настройкам который кстати стоял по умолчанию. Я думаю Сони специально оптимизировала алгоритм обработки jpg для получения фото такого качества. Результат превзошел все ожидания.
Я вообще любитель камер Сони по причине того что мне просто нравится картинка больше чем у других марок (пожалуй исключение составляет мой старенький Olympus). Так вот, я теперь в точности могу сказать что эта та камера, которую я искал по совокупности свойств. Мне...
Я вообще любитель камер Сони по причине того что мне просто нравится картинка больше чем у других марок (пожалуй исключение составляет мой старенький Olympus). Так вот, я теперь в точности могу сказать что эта та камера, которую я искал по совокупности свойств. Мне...
Скроменый эксперт
14.08.2014
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
- + полноразмерная матрица, светосильная оптика, относительная компактность, металлический корпус, качество сборки
- - дорогие аксессуары, отсутствие зарядки в комплекте
Искал одно универсальное решение на замену громоздким зеркалкам, данный прибор считаю идеальным сочетанием компактности и потенциала, заложенного в него.
Аппарат крепко сбит, основные регулировки вынесены на корпус - не надо лезть в меню, все крутится как надо. В руке такое хорошее "аналоговое" ощущение, как будто держишь в руках камеру не из 2000-х годов.
Очень высокое разрешение снимков, разнообразные режимы съемки, из которых особенно радует несколько вариантов режима "дешевый фотоаппарат". Другие творческие режимы тоже весьма и весьма неплохи - например, акцент на цвете, ретро или hdr с 3мя степенями.
Светосильная оптика, довольно шустрый фокус. Есть три варианта автофокуса - авто, ручной и гибрид ручного и авто.
В комплекте нет ни чехла, ни зарядки, но есть тряпица и довольно экономичный для такой камеры ремешок, можно найти в иностранных интернетах отличные кожаные, включая оригинальный сони.
Нет в продаже металлической крышки, так что берегите оригинальную.
Т.к. в комплекте нет зарядки, на амазоне был куплен зарядник wasabi power с 2мя аккамуляторами (и автозарядкой бонусом), и полностью идентичная оригинальной бленда jjp (похоже, делают там же, где и сони, но во внеурочное время). Так же рекомендую пленку на экран.
Примеры снимков
https://flic.kr/p/nwQYSa iso 100
https://flic.kr/p/nR7J9i iso 10000
https://flic.kr/p/oeuwT2 iso 50
https://flic.kr/p/nQr5XP iso 4000
Все снимки этой камерой https://www.flickr.com/search/?tags=sonyrx1&sort=relevance&user_id=79913750%40N00
Апдейт касательно батареек: при активном использовании крошечная батарейка живет очень недолго, запасная заряженная с собой просто необходима. Точно не замерял, но за 5-6 часов суммарно менял на полностью заряженную, но и она сдулась "наполовину" за пару часов максимум.
Аппарат крепко сбит, основные регулировки вынесены на корпус - не надо лезть в меню, все крутится как надо. В руке такое хорошее "аналоговое" ощущение, как будто держишь в руках камеру не из 2000-х годов.
Очень высокое разрешение снимков, разнообразные режимы съемки, из которых особенно радует несколько вариантов режима "дешевый фотоаппарат". Другие творческие режимы тоже весьма и весьма неплохи - например, акцент на цвете, ретро или hdr с 3мя степенями.
Светосильная оптика, довольно шустрый фокус. Есть три варианта автофокуса - авто, ручной и гибрид ручного и авто.
В комплекте нет ни чехла, ни зарядки, но есть тряпица и довольно экономичный для такой камеры ремешок, можно найти в иностранных интернетах отличные кожаные, включая оригинальный сони.
Нет в продаже металлической крышки, так что берегите оригинальную.
Т.к. в комплекте нет зарядки, на амазоне был куплен зарядник wasabi power с 2мя аккамуляторами (и автозарядкой бонусом), и полностью идентичная оригинальной бленда jjp (похоже, делают там же, где и сони, но во внеурочное время). Так же рекомендую пленку на экран.
Примеры снимков
https://flic.kr/p/nwQYSa iso 100
https://flic.kr/p/nR7J9i iso 10000
https://flic.kr/p/oeuwT2 iso 50
https://flic.kr/p/nQr5XP iso 4000
Все снимки этой камерой https://www.flickr.com/search/?tags=sonyrx1&sort=relevance&user_id=79913750%40N00
Апдейт касательно батареек: при активном использовании крошечная батарейка живет очень недолго, запасная заряженная с собой просто необходима. Точно не замерял, но за 5-6 часов суммарно менял на полностью заряженную, но и она сдулась "наполовину" за пару часов максимум.
Анюта Радужная
23.02.2016
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
отличная модель
Очень переживала, что мои материальные вложения не найдут художественного отклика в жизни. Знакомство прошла на УРА! Легкий, компактный, в руках ложится припрекрасно, с настройками все понятно, интерфейс руссифицирован, менюшка логичная, множество автоматики, для профи есть ручные настройки, для творческих личностей есть ассортимент корректирующих фишек. В общем с этой камерой можно создавать любительские, профессиональные, авангардные снимки высокого качества. Резкая, точная, правдивая. Цвета передает натуральные, четкие детали, безошибочно выделяет основной момент съемки, при недостаточном свете вспышка мощно бьет. В общем техника по лучшим японским стандартам))
Скроменый эксперт
26.06.2014
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
- + полноразмерная матрица, светосильная оптика, относительная компактность, металлический корпус, качество сборки
- - дорогие аксессуары, отсутствие зарядки в комплекте
Искал одно универсальное решение на замену громоздким зеркалкам, данный прибор считаю идеальным сочетанием компактности и потенциала, заложенного в него.
Аппарат крепко сбит, основные регулировки вынесены на корпус - не надо лезть в меню, все крутится как надо. В руке такое хорошее "аналоговое" ощущение, как будто держишь в руках камеру не из 2000-х годов.
Очень высокое разрешение снимков, разнообразные режимы съемки, из которых особенно радует несколько вариантов режима "дешевый фотоаппарат". Другие творческие режимы тоже весьма и весьма неплохи - например, акцент на цвете, ретро или hdr с 3мя степенями.
Светосильная оптика, довольно шустрый фокус. Есть три варианта автофокуса - авто, ручной и гибрид ручного и авто.
В комплекте нет ни чехла, ни зарядки, но есть тряпица и довольно экономичный для такой камеры ремешок, можно найти в иностранных интернетах отличные кожаные, включая оригинальный сони.
Нет в продаже металлической крышки, так что берегите оригинальную.
Т.к. в комплекте нет зарядки, на амазоне был куплен зарядник wasabi power с 2мя аккамуляторами (и автозарядкой бонусом), и полностью идентичная оригинальной бленда jjp (похоже, делают там же, где и сони, но во внеурочное время). Так же рекомендую пленку на экран.
Примеры снимков
https://flic.kr/p/nwQYSa iso 100
https://flic.kr/p/nR7J9i iso 10000
Апдейт касательно батареек: при активном использовании крошечная батарейка живет очень недолго, запасная заряженная с собой просто необходима. Точно не замерял, но за 5-6 часов суммарно менял на полностью заряженную, но и она сдулась "наполовину" за пару часов максимум.
Аппарат крепко сбит, основные регулировки вынесены на корпус - не надо лезть в меню, все крутится как надо. В руке такое хорошее "аналоговое" ощущение, как будто держишь в руках камеру не из 2000-х годов.
Очень высокое разрешение снимков, разнообразные режимы съемки, из которых особенно радует несколько вариантов режима "дешевый фотоаппарат". Другие творческие режимы тоже весьма и весьма неплохи - например, акцент на цвете, ретро или hdr с 3мя степенями.
Светосильная оптика, довольно шустрый фокус. Есть три варианта автофокуса - авто, ручной и гибрид ручного и авто.
В комплекте нет ни чехла, ни зарядки, но есть тряпица и довольно экономичный для такой камеры ремешок, можно найти в иностранных интернетах отличные кожаные, включая оригинальный сони.
Нет в продаже металлической крышки, так что берегите оригинальную.
Т.к. в комплекте нет зарядки, на амазоне был куплен зарядник wasabi power с 2мя аккамуляторами (и автозарядкой бонусом), и полностью идентичная оригинальной бленда jjp (похоже, делают там же, где и сони, но во внеурочное время). Так же рекомендую пленку на экран.
Примеры снимков
https://flic.kr/p/nwQYSa iso 100
https://flic.kr/p/nR7J9i iso 10000
Апдейт касательно батареек: при активном использовании крошечная батарейка живет очень недолго, запасная заряженная с собой просто необходима. Точно не замерял, но за 5-6 часов суммарно менял на полностью заряженную, но и она сдулась "наполовину" за пару часов максимум.
Ирина Лазарева
13.01.2016
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
отличная модель
Технику Сони очень люблю, фотоаппарат был долгожданной покупкой, хотела купить легкую портативную камеру, чтобы не занимала много места, а фотографии были качественными, как у профессиональных камер. Давно наслышана про оптику Карл Зеисс , и не зря. У камеры 24.3 МПикс. Фото очень насыщенные, очень много опций, еще разбираться и разбираться. Больше всего нравятся панорамные снимки, печатаем и разбавляем интерьер. Мне кажется, что у камеры есть своя особенность - синие оттенки очень насыщенные, нам нравится!
Скроменый эксперт
07.06.2014
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
- + полноразмерная матрица, светосильная оптика, относительная компактность, металлический корпус, качество сборки
- - дорогие аксессуары, отсутствие зарядки в комплекте
Искал одно универсальное решение на замену громоздким зеркалкам, данный прибор считаю идеальным сочетанием компактности и потенциала, заложенного в него.
Аппарат крепко сбит, основные регулировки вынесены на корпус - не надо лезть в меню, все крутится как надо. В руке такое хорошее "аналоговое" ощущение, как будто держишь в руках камеру не из 2000-х годов.
Очень высокое разрешение снимков, разнообразные режимы съемки, из которых особенно радует несколько вариантов режима "дешевый фотоаппарат". Светосильная оптика, довольно шустрый фокус - впрочем, пока не пробовал снимать что-то быстро движущееся. Есть три варианта - авто, ручной и гибрид ручного и авто.
В комплекте нет ни чехла, ни зарядки, но есть тряпица и довольно экономичный для такой камеры ремешок, можно найти в иностранных интернетах отличные кожаные, включая оригинальный сони.
Нет в продаже металлической крышки, так что берегите оригинальную.
Т.к. в комплекте нет зарядки, на амазоне был куплен зарядник wasabi power с 2мя аккамуляторами (и автозарядкой бонусом), и полностью идентичная оригинальной бленда jjp (похоже, делают там же, где и сони, но во внеурочное время). Так же рекомендую пленку на экран.
Примеры снимков
https://flic.kr/p/nwQYSa iso 100
https://flic.kr/p/nR7J9i iso 10000
Аппарат крепко сбит, основные регулировки вынесены на корпус - не надо лезть в меню, все крутится как надо. В руке такое хорошее "аналоговое" ощущение, как будто держишь в руках камеру не из 2000-х годов.
Очень высокое разрешение снимков, разнообразные режимы съемки, из которых особенно радует несколько вариантов режима "дешевый фотоаппарат". Светосильная оптика, довольно шустрый фокус - впрочем, пока не пробовал снимать что-то быстро движущееся. Есть три варианта - авто, ручной и гибрид ручного и авто.
В комплекте нет ни чехла, ни зарядки, но есть тряпица и довольно экономичный для такой камеры ремешок, можно найти в иностранных интернетах отличные кожаные, включая оригинальный сони.
Нет в продаже металлической крышки, так что берегите оригинальную.
Т.к. в комплекте нет зарядки, на амазоне был куплен зарядник wasabi power с 2мя аккамуляторами (и автозарядкой бонусом), и полностью идентичная оригинальной бленда jjp (похоже, делают там же, где и сони, но во внеурочное время). Так же рекомендую пленку на экран.
Примеры снимков
https://flic.kr/p/nwQYSa iso 100
https://flic.kr/p/nR7J9i iso 10000
Bada Dee
11.10.2014
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
- + полноразмерная матрица, светосильная оптика, относительная компактность, металлический и крепкий корпус, качество сборки
- - дорогие аксессуары, отсутствие зарядки в комплекте
Искал одно универсальное решение на замену громоздким зеркалкам, данный прибор считаю идеальным сочетанием компактности и потенциала, заложенного в него.
Аппарат крепко сбит, основные регулировки вынесены на корпус - не надо лезть в меню, все крутится как надо. В руке такое хорошее "аналоговое" ощущение, как будто держишь в руках камеру не из 2000-х годов.
Очень высокое разрешение снимков, разнообразные режимы съемки, из которых особенно радует несколько вариантов режима "дешевый фотоаппарат". Другие творческие режимы тоже весьма и весьма неплохи - например, акцент на цвете, ретро или hdr с 3мя степенями.
Светосильная оптика, довольно шустрый фокус. Есть три варианта автофокуса - авто, ручной и гибрид ручного и авто.
В комплекте нет ни чехла, ни зарядки, но есть тряпица и довольно экономичный...
Аппарат крепко сбит, основные регулировки вынесены на корпус - не надо лезть в меню, все крутится как надо. В руке такое хорошее "аналоговое" ощущение, как будто держишь в руках камеру не из 2000-х годов.
Очень высокое разрешение снимков, разнообразные режимы съемки, из которых особенно радует несколько вариантов режима "дешевый фотоаппарат". Другие творческие режимы тоже весьма и весьма неплохи - например, акцент на цвете, ретро или hdr с 3мя степенями.
Светосильная оптика, довольно шустрый фокус. Есть три варианта автофокуса - авто, ручной и гибрид ручного и авто.
В комплекте нет ни чехла, ни зарядки, но есть тряпица и довольно экономичный...
Скроменый эксперт
26.09.2013
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
- + Качество фото и видео, удобный софт, быстрый АФ, есть горячий башмак, есть порт для микрофона (полезно для видео)
- - Цена, экран не откидывается, оптика не заменяемая, встроенная вспышка на уровне обычных "сайбершотов"
Пробовал RX1R в разных режимах.
Для портретной съемки, съемки в городе или на природе, предметной съемки (без крупных планов) - здесь камера ведет себя очень и очень хорошо. Во-первых, даже на низких значениях ISO мы получаем достаточно светлую картинку. Во-вторых, ISO 3200 вполне рабочая. В-третьих, у камеры действительно широкий динамический диапазон, если сравнивать с моей старой 600D + EF-S 17-55. В общем, во всех ситуациях, когда зум не нужен, получаем вполне достойный результат.
Пробовал снимать концерт без вспышки - вот здесь зума уже очень не хватает. Приходится постоянно перемещаться. Навестись на прыгающего музыканта с ручным фокусом не так то просто. Не спасает и автомат. Так что, единственный вариант - сжать диафрагму и использовать вспышку либо же задирать ISO.
Как вывод, камера, конечно, не универсальная. И на роль основного и единственного рабочего инструмента профессионала RX1R не тянет. С другой стороны, ни одна беззеркалка, из всех, что я пробовал, и близко не может приблизиться к тому результату, который выдает Sony RX1R на f/2.0. Фото получаются просто потрясающие.
Для портретной съемки, съемки в городе или на природе, предметной съемки (без крупных планов) - здесь камера ведет себя очень и очень хорошо. Во-первых, даже на низких значениях ISO мы получаем достаточно светлую картинку. Во-вторых, ISO 3200 вполне рабочая. В-третьих, у камеры действительно широкий динамический диапазон, если сравнивать с моей старой 600D + EF-S 17-55. В общем, во всех ситуациях, когда зум не нужен, получаем вполне достойный результат.
Пробовал снимать концерт без вспышки - вот здесь зума уже очень не хватает. Приходится постоянно перемещаться. Навестись на прыгающего музыканта с ручным фокусом не так то просто. Не спасает и автомат. Так что, единственный вариант - сжать диафрагму и использовать вспышку либо же задирать ISO.
Как вывод, камера, конечно, не универсальная. И на роль основного и единственного рабочего инструмента профессионала RX1R не тянет. С другой стороны, ни одна беззеркалка, из всех, что я пробовал, и близко не может приблизиться к тому результату, который выдает Sony RX1R на f/2.0. Фото получаются просто потрясающие.
Корнейчук Илья
14.12.2013
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
- + Качество фото и видео, удобный софт, есть горячий башмак, есть порт для микрофона (полезно для видео)
- - Цена, экран не откидывается, оптика не заменяемая, встроенная вспышка на уровне обычных "сайбершотов", тормозной и неточный автофокус
Пробовал RX1R в разных режимах.
Для портретной съемки, съемки в городе или на природе, предметной съемки (без крупных планов) - здесь камера ведет себя очень и очень хорошо. Во-первых, даже на низких значениях ISO мы получаем достаточно светлую картинку. Во-вторых, ISO 3200 вполне рабочая. В-третьих, у камеры действительно широкий динамический диапазон, если сравнивать с моей старой 600D + EF-S 17-55. В общем, во всех ситуациях, когда зум не нужен, получаем...
Для портретной съемки, съемки в городе или на природе, предметной съемки (без крупных планов) - здесь камера ведет себя очень и очень хорошо. Во-первых, даже на низких значениях ISO мы получаем достаточно светлую картинку. Во-вторых, ISO 3200 вполне рабочая. В-третьих, у камеры действительно широкий динамический диапазон, если сравнивать с моей старой 600D + EF-S 17-55. В общем, во всех ситуациях, когда зум не нужен, получаем...
Aleksei Rasskazov
07.01.2019
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
Отличная модель
- + Очень хорошие фотоаппарат,советую всем.,Всегда жду отпуска чтоб пофлтографировать
- - Нет,вайфай,экран меняющий наклон.Тогда...
Скроменый эксперт
12.02.2014
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I'm an amateur photographer and probably have an unhealthy lust for cameras. I've worked with and owned Zeiss Ikon ZE film cameras, Sony NEX 7, NEX VG-900, Canon 5d Mk2, 7D, XTi, Minolta rangefinder, Sony RX100, A7r, Canon XL2, and a few others. I've gone through a fair share of cameras to know what works for me.
I must say that the RX1 is a beautiful camera, aesthetically speaking. It is crafted with care and devotion. Everything the Sony A series DSLR's are not aesthetically, the RX1 is. The controls have a chunky, robust feeling. They are placed in the proper positions for an average hand. The flash (although quite inadequate for a professional shoot) is something you aren't forced to see when put away. The size of the RX1 is just right. It fits in a coat pocket, and isn't overwhelming when you try to photographs others (compared to the DSLR brethren). In short, this camera scores 5 out of 5 in this area.
I was disappointed that a viewfinder did not come with the camera. In fact, I would have loved for the camera to have come with an optical viewfinder. But I suppose that Sony had already planned the A7 series, and because this camera is supposed to be the high-end of the non-professional series of cameras, Sony assumed that leaving out an EVF or OVF was appropriate. I disagree with this decision. I tried using the camera with the screen, but it just isn't for me. I ended up purchasing the external EVF. It was an additional expense, but worth it for me. The EVF is very good, and recommend it for anyone who is thinking of purchasing this camera. Overall, the lack of a viewfinder was a very unhappy situation.
The Zeiss lens is a masterpiece. You may recall that Sony recently purchased Zeiss when it released the NEX generation of cameras. One of the first dedicated lenses for the NEX from Zeiss was the 24mm, which I purchased for my NEX-7. That glass is beautiful. The 35mm lens attached to the RX1 is a step above any other lens I've purchased to date. I have had the opportunity to use some very nice glass, and the lens on the RX1 is sharp as anything I've seen.
Of course the overwhelming complaints out there about the RX1 is its slow focus speed. It's absolutely true. It is a pig when it comes to focus time. Indeed, sometimes it refuses to focus on the appropriate subject, even in bright light. But when that happens, switch to manual focus and you can overcome this problem.
That raises a very big concern for me. Sony: Why have you refused to provide any firmware updates for this camera? Those of us who paid $2800.00 deserve regular updates, particularly with common issues like focusing. Why is this so problematic for Sony? Fuji addressed a similar issue with its X-series cameras. Canon updates even its point and shoot cameras. It appears that all other types of cameras get updates, but the RX1 and RX100 are left to rot.
I suppose this is a good time to rant. I have no issue with respect to the pictures this camera takes. They are gorgeous. In all other aspects, this camera is a gem. But the focus issue is unacceptable. When you charge premium prices for a camera, you should be prepared to update the software when necessary. Sony: THIS IS NECESSARY. We've been waiting patiently since last year for you to get off your high horse and fix the problem. You've refused. Why? Don't your customers mean enough to you to at least provide some sort of conciliation? Surely we're not asking for the impossible. You know what the problem is--you're getting enough feedback to narrow down the culprit in the machine. Have someone go through the firmware and patch a fix.
People who buy your cameras are doing so knowing that they're buying into a relatively new camera company. You're not Canon, Nikon, Minolta, Ricoh. You're not Zeiss (even though you've purchased them) and you're no Fuji or Leica. You're Sony. You're a company we've come to trust and appreciate. We love your dedication to perfection. We like how you think and feel about your products. You put out some beautiful machines, from TV's to PlayStation's, to BluRay players. You make a bold statement with each product. Just as you made with the RX1.
So why drop the ball now? You've asked people to put down $3,000.00 for a camera, to ignore long-standing companies mentioned above, to buy into a completely new type of camera design and brand. Now that you've got us, why can't you keep us? I'm not saying that people are going to leave you for not putting out firmware for the RX1 and RX100. But it's only time before the other companies catch up to you.
Look, Fuji has already released the X-T1. It directly competes with your lineup, believe it or not. No, there's no other full frame mirrorless out there. I get that. But so does everyone else. How much longer until the rest catch up and provide us with the same fe
I must say that the RX1 is a beautiful camera, aesthetically speaking. It is crafted with care and devotion. Everything the Sony A series DSLR's are not aesthetically, the RX1 is. The controls have a chunky, robust feeling. They are placed in the proper positions for an average hand. The flash (although quite inadequate for a professional shoot) is something you aren't forced to see when put away. The size of the RX1 is just right. It fits in a coat pocket, and isn't overwhelming when you try to photographs others (compared to the DSLR brethren). In short, this camera scores 5 out of 5 in this area.
I was disappointed that a viewfinder did not come with the camera. In fact, I would have loved for the camera to have come with an optical viewfinder. But I suppose that Sony had already planned the A7 series, and because this camera is supposed to be the high-end of the non-professional series of cameras, Sony assumed that leaving out an EVF or OVF was appropriate. I disagree with this decision. I tried using the camera with the screen, but it just isn't for me. I ended up purchasing the external EVF. It was an additional expense, but worth it for me. The EVF is very good, and recommend it for anyone who is thinking of purchasing this camera. Overall, the lack of a viewfinder was a very unhappy situation.
The Zeiss lens is a masterpiece. You may recall that Sony recently purchased Zeiss when it released the NEX generation of cameras. One of the first dedicated lenses for the NEX from Zeiss was the 24mm, which I purchased for my NEX-7. That glass is beautiful. The 35mm lens attached to the RX1 is a step above any other lens I've purchased to date. I have had the opportunity to use some very nice glass, and the lens on the RX1 is sharp as anything I've seen.
Of course the overwhelming complaints out there about the RX1 is its slow focus speed. It's absolutely true. It is a pig when it comes to focus time. Indeed, sometimes it refuses to focus on the appropriate subject, even in bright light. But when that happens, switch to manual focus and you can overcome this problem.
That raises a very big concern for me. Sony: Why have you refused to provide any firmware updates for this camera? Those of us who paid $2800.00 deserve regular updates, particularly with common issues like focusing. Why is this so problematic for Sony? Fuji addressed a similar issue with its X-series cameras. Canon updates even its point and shoot cameras. It appears that all other types of cameras get updates, but the RX1 and RX100 are left to rot.
I suppose this is a good time to rant. I have no issue with respect to the pictures this camera takes. They are gorgeous. In all other aspects, this camera is a gem. But the focus issue is unacceptable. When you charge premium prices for a camera, you should be prepared to update the software when necessary. Sony: THIS IS NECESSARY. We've been waiting patiently since last year for you to get off your high horse and fix the problem. You've refused. Why? Don't your customers mean enough to you to at least provide some sort of conciliation? Surely we're not asking for the impossible. You know what the problem is--you're getting enough feedback to narrow down the culprit in the machine. Have someone go through the firmware and patch a fix.
People who buy your cameras are doing so knowing that they're buying into a relatively new camera company. You're not Canon, Nikon, Minolta, Ricoh. You're not Zeiss (even though you've purchased them) and you're no Fuji or Leica. You're Sony. You're a company we've come to trust and appreciate. We love your dedication to perfection. We like how you think and feel about your products. You put out some beautiful machines, from TV's to PlayStation's, to BluRay players. You make a bold statement with each product. Just as you made with the RX1.
So why drop the ball now? You've asked people to put down $3,000.00 for a camera, to ignore long-standing companies mentioned above, to buy into a completely new type of camera design and brand. Now that you've got us, why can't you keep us? I'm not saying that people are going to leave you for not putting out firmware for the RX1 and RX100. But it's only time before the other companies catch up to you.
Look, Fuji has already released the X-T1. It directly competes with your lineup, believe it or not. No, there's no other full frame mirrorless out there. I get that. But so does everyone else. How much longer until the rest catch up and provide us with the same fe
Скроменый эксперт
11.04.2015
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I've shot with a wide variety of digital cameras since switching from film to digital almost 14 years ago. I shoot professionally and for my own personal satisfaction. The Sony RX1 is one of those few cameras that satisfies BOTH my professional and personal desires while I'm shooting.
For starters, the RX1 is compact without being too small and the controls and menu interface are easy to use without being too simple for serious control. You might think it's easy to make a camera that does those things, but trust me, it isn't. Sony struck an almost perfect balance in terms of form and function.
The biggest advantage to shooting with this little camera rather than another small "mirrorless" camera is image quality. There are many, many ways to define "image quality" but in this case I define it as images with the greatest possible detail (high ratio of actual image data rather than "noise") combined with an extraordinary dynamic range (detail recorded in both highlight and shadow) and a smooth transition between in-focus and out-of-focus areas (butter smooth bokeh that isn't harsh and distracting).
I've shot with a number of full-frame cameras including the Sony A99, A7, A7r, Nikon D700, D600 and Canon 5D mkII. Those cameras are all great, but none of those other cameras (at least not with the lenses I used) deliver the same combination of rich details and insane amount of exposure latitude that comes from the RX1 and its 35mm Zeiss Sonnar T lens with f/2 aperture.
I know most people interested in small full-frame cameras are turning to the Sony A7 series and interchangeable lenses, but if you are content with a 35mm lens then the RX1 will not disappoint. The price of the RX1 is higher than it should be now that there are more affordable full-frame cameras on the market, but it still delivers fantastic value when you consider the full frame sensor and the amazing 35mm lens. I've shot side-by-side with RX1 and the Sony A7 and Sony 35mm f/2.8 Zeiss Sonnar T FE ZA lens ... and I personally prefer the images from the RX1.
I also own and shoot with several DSLRs and mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras for work, but I enjoy shooting with the RX1 because it has everything I care about in a small package. I bought into cameras like the Olympus OM-D and PEN cameras and Sony NEX cameras because I wanted something small, but as soon as I added multiple lenses they where basically small DSLRs with less image quality. The RX1 is small but doesn't compromise on image quality. The Sony A7 series deliver similar quality, but as soon as you start adding lenses you might as well be using a DSLR kit. I'll stick with a full-frame camera that fits in my jacket pocket.
Bottom line, if you are a serious (professional) photographer and can afford this camera (and you don't mind being "stuck" at 35mm) then there is no better camera than the RX1 in terms of delivering great results in a relatively small package.
For starters, the RX1 is compact without being too small and the controls and menu interface are easy to use without being too simple for serious control. You might think it's easy to make a camera that does those things, but trust me, it isn't. Sony struck an almost perfect balance in terms of form and function.
The biggest advantage to shooting with this little camera rather than another small "mirrorless" camera is image quality. There are many, many ways to define "image quality" but in this case I define it as images with the greatest possible detail (high ratio of actual image data rather than "noise") combined with an extraordinary dynamic range (detail recorded in both highlight and shadow) and a smooth transition between in-focus and out-of-focus areas (butter smooth bokeh that isn't harsh and distracting).
I've shot with a number of full-frame cameras including the Sony A99, A7, A7r, Nikon D700, D600 and Canon 5D mkII. Those cameras are all great, but none of those other cameras (at least not with the lenses I used) deliver the same combination of rich details and insane amount of exposure latitude that comes from the RX1 and its 35mm Zeiss Sonnar T lens with f/2 aperture.
I know most people interested in small full-frame cameras are turning to the Sony A7 series and interchangeable lenses, but if you are content with a 35mm lens then the RX1 will not disappoint. The price of the RX1 is higher than it should be now that there are more affordable full-frame cameras on the market, but it still delivers fantastic value when you consider the full frame sensor and the amazing 35mm lens. I've shot side-by-side with RX1 and the Sony A7 and Sony 35mm f/2.8 Zeiss Sonnar T FE ZA lens ... and I personally prefer the images from the RX1.
I also own and shoot with several DSLRs and mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras for work, but I enjoy shooting with the RX1 because it has everything I care about in a small package. I bought into cameras like the Olympus OM-D and PEN cameras and Sony NEX cameras because I wanted something small, but as soon as I added multiple lenses they where basically small DSLRs with less image quality. The RX1 is small but doesn't compromise on image quality. The Sony A7 series deliver similar quality, but as soon as you start adding lenses you might as well be using a DSLR kit. I'll stick with a full-frame camera that fits in my jacket pocket.
Bottom line, if you are a serious (professional) photographer and can afford this camera (and you don't mind being "stuck" at 35mm) then there is no better camera than the RX1 in terms of delivering great results in a relatively small package.
Скроменый эксперт
12.08.2013
6/10
Оценка пользователя
Плохо
As a frame of reference I'm comparing the Sony RX1R with my Sony a65 (with a f1.8/50mm lens mounted).
SUMMARY
Landscape Shots: Excellent
Building Shots: Excellent
Inanimate Object Shots: Excelent
Portrait Shots (adults): Superb! Details are insane!
Baby Shots: Epic Failure
Video Recording: Epic Failure
I'll start with the bad, and if you feel that this camera is still for you, then the good stuff follows in the end.
-
THE BAD
======
Focusing
In a perfectly well lit indoor house, with at least 10 recess lights in the ceiling, the Sony RX1R is very slow to acquire focus. So much so that if you plan to use this camera as a way to take pictures of your young baby/toddler indoors, you can basically forget it. Things will come out of focus (due to the slow contrast-based focusing system) or just simply blurry as this camera does not have image stabilization (IS).
You need a camera with phase detection, like the Sony a65, to capture those baby moments (which gives you instant focus and instant shot). Otherwise, if you use the Sony RX1R, by the time it acquires focus, it's too late. That perfect "Kodak moment" has come and gone.
Even in a bright sunny day, out at a park, this camera did not perform. I took 178 pictures of my wife and daughter just playing at the park and I could count in one hand the pictures the came out "okay", none of them had that "Kodak moment" since the camera was often a fraction of a second late in taking the picture leading to shots where my baby's eyes were closed, or she was turned slightly the wrong way, or just out of focus.
My Sony a65 never had this problem. We often capture lots of those "Kodak moments" even in the Auto settings. I tried to take pictures with the Sony RX1R and set the Shutter priority (S), setting it to a good ISO to allow enough light in, but the lack of image stabilization really hurts the camera in taking pictures if both the photographer and subject are moving. The pictures just come out blurry or the camera just mis-focuses and often takes pictures of the background (yes I did set the focus to be at the center and the metering to be at the center....that did not help).
2-Star for very poor focusing system. Sony needs to add phase detection or reengineer this.
_
Baby Pictures / Portrait Shots
Because this is a full-frame camera with a wider-angled lens [compared to my Sony a65], it's not really as suited for taking baby portrait pictures. You are better off with an APS-C camera, like the Sony a65. Otherwise, with the Sony RX1R you really have to be in-your-face close with your subject to get that good portrait shot. Literally, I would have to be 6 inches to 12 inches in front of my daughter's face in order to capture a good head/portrait shot whereas on my Sony a65 I could be 4 or 5 feet away (using a f1.8/50mm lens that's without any zoom).
I'm not saying the lens that comes with the Sony RX1R is bad...oh dear god it is sooo good for landscapes and adult portraits (people who can stay still for the picture), again just not for baby pictures.
1-Star for not being able to keep up with a 15 month old baby who can't even walk by herself yet. The Sony a65 never had issues keeping up with our baby.
_
Weight / Compactness
The camera definitely has some weight to it. Its definitely lighter than a Sony a65 with a f1.8/50mm lens mounted, but since the Sony RX1R comes in such a compact package, that weight is concentrated on a smaller area, specifically towards the front where the lens is. It is a little awkward and takes a little getting used to operating such a compact camera [again compared to my Sony a65]. The Sony RX1R always feels like it's going to tip forward.
We used this camera during our car window shopping and for 6 hours it hanged around my neck. At times, I even forgot it was on me. At the end of the day my neck wasn't tired and it felt great to have such a high-quality camera readily available to take some pictures of cars that interested us.
3-Star for the un-even weight distribution of the camera that can make it awkward to use at times.
_
Video Recording
The video recording/quality of this camera is sooo bad that if you buy a $200 camcorder like my Sony HDR-CX150, the cheaper camcorder will outperform this camera in every scenario--no exception! It is that bad!!!
I've played with the Sony RX1R's video settings for hours trying the lower-end MP4 format, to the higher-end 1080p 60p at 28MBits setting. The moire pattern that the camera capture makes the videos unusable--its really really bad. The moire patterns are everywhere from the sidings of houses, roofing of houses, to window blinds, to clothing patterns, even on our b
SUMMARY
Landscape Shots: Excellent
Building Shots: Excellent
Inanimate Object Shots: Excelent
Portrait Shots (adults): Superb! Details are insane!
Baby Shots: Epic Failure
Video Recording: Epic Failure
I'll start with the bad, and if you feel that this camera is still for you, then the good stuff follows in the end.
-
THE BAD
======
Focusing
In a perfectly well lit indoor house, with at least 10 recess lights in the ceiling, the Sony RX1R is very slow to acquire focus. So much so that if you plan to use this camera as a way to take pictures of your young baby/toddler indoors, you can basically forget it. Things will come out of focus (due to the slow contrast-based focusing system) or just simply blurry as this camera does not have image stabilization (IS).
You need a camera with phase detection, like the Sony a65, to capture those baby moments (which gives you instant focus and instant shot). Otherwise, if you use the Sony RX1R, by the time it acquires focus, it's too late. That perfect "Kodak moment" has come and gone.
Even in a bright sunny day, out at a park, this camera did not perform. I took 178 pictures of my wife and daughter just playing at the park and I could count in one hand the pictures the came out "okay", none of them had that "Kodak moment" since the camera was often a fraction of a second late in taking the picture leading to shots where my baby's eyes were closed, or she was turned slightly the wrong way, or just out of focus.
My Sony a65 never had this problem. We often capture lots of those "Kodak moments" even in the Auto settings. I tried to take pictures with the Sony RX1R and set the Shutter priority (S), setting it to a good ISO to allow enough light in, but the lack of image stabilization really hurts the camera in taking pictures if both the photographer and subject are moving. The pictures just come out blurry or the camera just mis-focuses and often takes pictures of the background (yes I did set the focus to be at the center and the metering to be at the center....that did not help).
2-Star for very poor focusing system. Sony needs to add phase detection or reengineer this.
_
Baby Pictures / Portrait Shots
Because this is a full-frame camera with a wider-angled lens [compared to my Sony a65], it's not really as suited for taking baby portrait pictures. You are better off with an APS-C camera, like the Sony a65. Otherwise, with the Sony RX1R you really have to be in-your-face close with your subject to get that good portrait shot. Literally, I would have to be 6 inches to 12 inches in front of my daughter's face in order to capture a good head/portrait shot whereas on my Sony a65 I could be 4 or 5 feet away (using a f1.8/50mm lens that's without any zoom).
I'm not saying the lens that comes with the Sony RX1R is bad...oh dear god it is sooo good for landscapes and adult portraits (people who can stay still for the picture), again just not for baby pictures.
1-Star for not being able to keep up with a 15 month old baby who can't even walk by herself yet. The Sony a65 never had issues keeping up with our baby.
_
Weight / Compactness
The camera definitely has some weight to it. Its definitely lighter than a Sony a65 with a f1.8/50mm lens mounted, but since the Sony RX1R comes in such a compact package, that weight is concentrated on a smaller area, specifically towards the front where the lens is. It is a little awkward and takes a little getting used to operating such a compact camera [again compared to my Sony a65]. The Sony RX1R always feels like it's going to tip forward.
We used this camera during our car window shopping and for 6 hours it hanged around my neck. At times, I even forgot it was on me. At the end of the day my neck wasn't tired and it felt great to have such a high-quality camera readily available to take some pictures of cars that interested us.
3-Star for the un-even weight distribution of the camera that can make it awkward to use at times.
_
Video Recording
The video recording/quality of this camera is sooo bad that if you buy a $200 camcorder like my Sony HDR-CX150, the cheaper camcorder will outperform this camera in every scenario--no exception! It is that bad!!!
I've played with the Sony RX1R's video settings for hours trying the lower-end MP4 format, to the higher-end 1080p 60p at 28MBits setting. The moire pattern that the camera capture makes the videos unusable--its really really bad. The moire patterns are everywhere from the sidings of houses, roofing of houses, to window blinds, to clothing patterns, even on our b
Скроменый эксперт
05.08.2013
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
If you are reading this review then you probably already know about the RX1r, so no need to give all the details because you can simply read that in the description. What I will be putting here would be my thoughts of the product in terms of performance, ergonomics, and ease of use.
To start off, I have not used the RX1 before so it's really hard for me to have any objective findings to differentiate this from the previous model. Comparing to my D800, this little beast really packs a punch. ISO 3200 still produces relatively clean images. ISO 6400 show noticeable grain but can easily be remedied with post processing. And this will be obvious if you're pixel peeping. However if you only need a regular size print or plan to upload to FB, then post processing will take care of the excess noise. I honestly have not been able to find the need to push beyond ISO 6400 yet so I may need to update this review in the future.
The amount of detail from every shot is just insane. I previously used a Fuji X100s and was impressed with that but the details produced by the RX1r is even more impressive. The 24 MP full frame sensor without the AA filter really makes a difference. My D800 produces tons of details but that's expected because of the 36 MP sensor. So considering that this is 12 MP less, the amount of detail with every shot is still worth mentioning.
Also, the reviews about the camera hunting in low light is noticeable, but comparing that to the X100s, I feel that this camera is faster. I have not had issues regarding misfocus so far, and that's in my dimly lit room. It's just slow when there is minimal light source but I found that it was still able to lock on the subject. With a generous light source it will lock on fast. I have read of reviews saying that the RX1/RX1r is not for those quick candid moments... and to some extent it may not be, but if you know how and when to anticipate the shot, these moments are still possible to capture.
My main purpose for this camera is for street photography. I'm just busy with work right now but I plan on going around to use this beast one of these days and see how it performs out there. I'm still deciding between the EVF vs. OVF because I always find myself looking for a viewfinder... something that I truly miss from my X100s. I'm used to an OVF and even while using the X100s, I stuck with the OVF and just adjusted for parallax errors. I'm not too excited about lag although I heard that the EVF for the RX1/RX1r works real well. Maybe in the future Sony will consider adding a viewfinder to the next model.
I also got used to the thumbs up grip before so this is something that is definitely killing me right now. I guess if I push through with the OVF (Zeiss vs. Voigtlander???) then maybe I could get Match Technical's CSEP-2, which is a more reasonable alternative than Sony's version. I only wish that they (Sony or any 3rd party company) would make a thumbs up grip with a functional hot shoe so that the EVF could still work. Oh well...
I know I have a few comments about the camera but after weighing all the good vs bad points, I still think that the RX1r is a great product. Yes it is expensive, but you really get what you pay for. Full frame + 35 mm Zeiss + small form factor = a product worth $2800 to me. Some might disagree, but this is why I initially said this camera is not for everyone.
Me... I'm really happy about mine!
UPDATE (8/10/2013):
Still amazed by this beast! I tried comparing this with my D800 side by side. Here are 2 shots that I took a while ago... The 1st one using the D800, the 2nd with the RX1r. I was trying to get a good match between the 2. Shots were taken in my bathroom, trying to focus on the upper right corner of the metallic object with mesh (don't know what to call it). I chose this object to test just how good the AF really is since I was thinking that there is a possibility that it might focus behind the mesh (perfumes, boxes, etc). I was also trying to push both cameras to the limit to check how they handle noise. The door to my right side is slightly open to allow just enough light. Both cameras were set to matrix metering and both were 1 stop below 0 (meaning -1).
For the D800, I used the Nikon 24-70 mm 2.8 lens (which everyone knows to be a brilliant lens) to try and even out the playing field.
Settings: ISO 6400, f/2.8, 1/60 sec, 35 mm, TRIPOD mounted.
flickr.com/photos/rex360hype/9481529474/sizes/k/in/photostream/
For the RX1r, similar settings were used.
Settings: ISO 6400, f/2.8, 1/60 sec, 35 mm (duh), HANDHELD!!!
flickr.com/photos/rex360hype/9478731171/sizes/k/in/photostream/
Now... Call me crazy... And I know that I don't have the sharpest eye but the RX1r was shot handheld... And the details were still crisper than the D800. Although, I do have to point out that the D800 has an AA filter while
To start off, I have not used the RX1 before so it's really hard for me to have any objective findings to differentiate this from the previous model. Comparing to my D800, this little beast really packs a punch. ISO 3200 still produces relatively clean images. ISO 6400 show noticeable grain but can easily be remedied with post processing. And this will be obvious if you're pixel peeping. However if you only need a regular size print or plan to upload to FB, then post processing will take care of the excess noise. I honestly have not been able to find the need to push beyond ISO 6400 yet so I may need to update this review in the future.
The amount of detail from every shot is just insane. I previously used a Fuji X100s and was impressed with that but the details produced by the RX1r is even more impressive. The 24 MP full frame sensor without the AA filter really makes a difference. My D800 produces tons of details but that's expected because of the 36 MP sensor. So considering that this is 12 MP less, the amount of detail with every shot is still worth mentioning.
Also, the reviews about the camera hunting in low light is noticeable, but comparing that to the X100s, I feel that this camera is faster. I have not had issues regarding misfocus so far, and that's in my dimly lit room. It's just slow when there is minimal light source but I found that it was still able to lock on the subject. With a generous light source it will lock on fast. I have read of reviews saying that the RX1/RX1r is not for those quick candid moments... and to some extent it may not be, but if you know how and when to anticipate the shot, these moments are still possible to capture.
My main purpose for this camera is for street photography. I'm just busy with work right now but I plan on going around to use this beast one of these days and see how it performs out there. I'm still deciding between the EVF vs. OVF because I always find myself looking for a viewfinder... something that I truly miss from my X100s. I'm used to an OVF and even while using the X100s, I stuck with the OVF and just adjusted for parallax errors. I'm not too excited about lag although I heard that the EVF for the RX1/RX1r works real well. Maybe in the future Sony will consider adding a viewfinder to the next model.
I also got used to the thumbs up grip before so this is something that is definitely killing me right now. I guess if I push through with the OVF (Zeiss vs. Voigtlander???) then maybe I could get Match Technical's CSEP-2, which is a more reasonable alternative than Sony's version. I only wish that they (Sony or any 3rd party company) would make a thumbs up grip with a functional hot shoe so that the EVF could still work. Oh well...
I know I have a few comments about the camera but after weighing all the good vs bad points, I still think that the RX1r is a great product. Yes it is expensive, but you really get what you pay for. Full frame + 35 mm Zeiss + small form factor = a product worth $2800 to me. Some might disagree, but this is why I initially said this camera is not for everyone.
Me... I'm really happy about mine!
UPDATE (8/10/2013):
Still amazed by this beast! I tried comparing this with my D800 side by side. Here are 2 shots that I took a while ago... The 1st one using the D800, the 2nd with the RX1r. I was trying to get a good match between the 2. Shots were taken in my bathroom, trying to focus on the upper right corner of the metallic object with mesh (don't know what to call it). I chose this object to test just how good the AF really is since I was thinking that there is a possibility that it might focus behind the mesh (perfumes, boxes, etc). I was also trying to push both cameras to the limit to check how they handle noise. The door to my right side is slightly open to allow just enough light. Both cameras were set to matrix metering and both were 1 stop below 0 (meaning -1).
For the D800, I used the Nikon 24-70 mm 2.8 lens (which everyone knows to be a brilliant lens) to try and even out the playing field.
Settings: ISO 6400, f/2.8, 1/60 sec, 35 mm, TRIPOD mounted.
flickr.com/photos/rex360hype/9481529474/sizes/k/in/photostream/
For the RX1r, similar settings were used.
Settings: ISO 6400, f/2.8, 1/60 sec, 35 mm (duh), HANDHELD!!!
flickr.com/photos/rex360hype/9478731171/sizes/k/in/photostream/
Now... Call me crazy... And I know that I don't have the sharpest eye but the RX1r was shot handheld... And the details were still crisper than the D800. Although, I do have to point out that the D800 has an AA filter while
Скроменый эксперт
26.10.2014
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I purchased the RX1 a while back primarily as a compact "carry-around" alternative to my DSLR. The selling point, for me, was the full-frame sensor. This was the first Sony camera product I've owned, so I was going into this experience with my mind wide open.
Image quality is exceptional. Side-by-side, color rendering is on par with my Leica M-E and Summilux 35mm 1.4 attached. Color saturation and micro contrast are a thing of beauty...and minimizing of CA when wide open is splendid.
The size and weight of this camera is nothing short of exceptional, considering it's full-frame sensor and processing power. It's very easy to grip in my hands (I have average sized hands), and the buttons on the back of the camera are well-spaced so that I am not accidentally hitting the wrong button.
Carrying the camera around is a joy if you're used the relative bulk of a DSLR at your hip. It's not as light as an Olympus OM5, but it also feels sturdier and stronger than micro four-thirds (and most other mirror-less) cameras. You don't get the impression that anything is made of cheap plastic...the camera feels like it was hewn out of a magnificent chunk of magnesium alloy.
I've never met an electronic viewfinder I've liked, so my thoughts on it aren't worth much to anyone who likes using them. To me, I always feel detached from the scene when peering through one. But, nonetheless, as far as EVFs go, this one works seamlessly with the camera body...and it should if it's going to be sold as an accessory.
I've got no complaints with the Zeiss 35mm fixed lens. As stated previously, CA is well corrected, and while there might be some slight vignetting wide-open (especially with a filter attached), it dissipates very quickly stopped down. No significant lens distortion from what I have been able to tell.
Auto-focus is fast enough in situations with ample light to track random people along a city street. As light drops off, so does the speed of the auto focus...rather steeply. In low light, the AF will dance with you...so if you plan on following your 5 year old nephew around indoors, bring your patience with you. Outdoors, it's a piece of cake, although focus speed and accuracy is not close to full frame professional DSLRs like the Nikon D4s. The RX1 is not a replacement for sports photography.
There are a few items I wish Sony would improve with this camera: The battery life is relatively short. I routinely get about 200 to 220 shots with a fully charged battery. Taking an extra (or two) batteries is not an option with this camera, I'd consider it a requirement. Furthermore, in colder weather, the battery life decreases substantially in my experience.
I wish the buffer size in the camera were larger, so I would be able to fire off more RAW photographs in succession without having to wait for the buffer to clear. This isn't an issue if I'm only shooting jpegs...but when I'm working in RAW, it can be a nuisance.
In sum, whether you're a pro looking for a high quality reportage camera, or you are a serious hobbyist, this camera is a joy to operate. And, once you get a little accustomed to the menus (not a difficult task), walking around with this little guy is just plain fun.
Image quality is exceptional. Side-by-side, color rendering is on par with my Leica M-E and Summilux 35mm 1.4 attached. Color saturation and micro contrast are a thing of beauty...and minimizing of CA when wide open is splendid.
The size and weight of this camera is nothing short of exceptional, considering it's full-frame sensor and processing power. It's very easy to grip in my hands (I have average sized hands), and the buttons on the back of the camera are well-spaced so that I am not accidentally hitting the wrong button.
Carrying the camera around is a joy if you're used the relative bulk of a DSLR at your hip. It's not as light as an Olympus OM5, but it also feels sturdier and stronger than micro four-thirds (and most other mirror-less) cameras. You don't get the impression that anything is made of cheap plastic...the camera feels like it was hewn out of a magnificent chunk of magnesium alloy.
I've never met an electronic viewfinder I've liked, so my thoughts on it aren't worth much to anyone who likes using them. To me, I always feel detached from the scene when peering through one. But, nonetheless, as far as EVFs go, this one works seamlessly with the camera body...and it should if it's going to be sold as an accessory.
I've got no complaints with the Zeiss 35mm fixed lens. As stated previously, CA is well corrected, and while there might be some slight vignetting wide-open (especially with a filter attached), it dissipates very quickly stopped down. No significant lens distortion from what I have been able to tell.
Auto-focus is fast enough in situations with ample light to track random people along a city street. As light drops off, so does the speed of the auto focus...rather steeply. In low light, the AF will dance with you...so if you plan on following your 5 year old nephew around indoors, bring your patience with you. Outdoors, it's a piece of cake, although focus speed and accuracy is not close to full frame professional DSLRs like the Nikon D4s. The RX1 is not a replacement for sports photography.
There are a few items I wish Sony would improve with this camera: The battery life is relatively short. I routinely get about 200 to 220 shots with a fully charged battery. Taking an extra (or two) batteries is not an option with this camera, I'd consider it a requirement. Furthermore, in colder weather, the battery life decreases substantially in my experience.
I wish the buffer size in the camera were larger, so I would be able to fire off more RAW photographs in succession without having to wait for the buffer to clear. This isn't an issue if I'm only shooting jpegs...but when I'm working in RAW, it can be a nuisance.
In sum, whether you're a pro looking for a high quality reportage camera, or you are a serious hobbyist, this camera is a joy to operate. And, once you get a little accustomed to the menus (not a difficult task), walking around with this little guy is just plain fun.
Скроменый эксперт
09.05.2013
4/10
Оценка пользователя
Ужасно
I bought this camera Dec 2012, and have used it in a variety of circumstances. If I had it to over again, I would not buy it.
I generally like the camera. Its small and light, and fairly efficient. It turns on quickly and captures images quickly. Its a great camera to carry daily and capture the things you would miss. The image quality is very good.
For reference, I normally use/used Nikon D800, D700, D3s, Hasselblad H3d-31, H4d-40, Phaseone P65+. Compared to those the focus is much slower but the weight is much less. I also have a Canon G11 for a pocket camera - which is paintfully slow to record each image. So the Sony is a pretty ideal 'every day carry camera', albeit with a wide angle view on everything.
I read the blog reviews by Steve Huff, Lloyd Chambers, and Ken Rockwell. I pretty much agree with all of them, but feel Steve loves the camera, the other two liked it but ultimately rejected it. All point out the good image quality, but Ken pointed out there is a slight greenish tint - I agree but its somewhat subtle and can be compensated for in lightroom but colors still don't look quite right. Lloyd felt the camera didn't have a comfortable ease of use even after weeks of usage. I don't think its too bad, but there is a huge ton of menu options to wade through. I think everyone agrees that it can be slow to focus, but generally I don't think its too bad - it might take 5 seconds to rack back and forth to get the focus at twilight or in darker situations. The focus peaking feature is very helpful and I wish professional cameras had this - but still some of my images were not sharp using this, so not sure what is up with that.
There are several things very significantly negative about this camera in addition to those issues. First of all its fragile. I dropped a D700 3 feet onto concrete and there was no damage at all. The sony was around my neck on a very short neck strap and as I bent over to pick something up, it swung left to right, knocked something, and the glass over the LCD shattered. I was unhappy about that, but it worked fine and thought I would just live with it. Then two weeks later the focus system went out - and it was impossible to focus using auto focus or manual focus.
The second problem is that Sony is unreasonable. I took the camera to a Sony store and they said the focus problem was clearly a warranty issue since the camera was only 3 months old. However, the Sony repair center said that the entire warranty was void. They presented me with a bill for $950 to repair both the focus problem and the cracked glass.
By comparison, I have had $3000-$5000 Nikon's repaired by Nikon for never more than $225. I have had two $12,000 used Hasselblad's repaired by Hasselblad for about $450 each. I have personally put a Schott glass screen cover on a Nikon D3s for $20 and there were instructions for removing it by heating it up to losen the glue. And in years of photography I have never seen a glass screen crack or break before this despite all kinds of abuse in the field. So $950 for a repair on a new camera point and shoot is just out of control. Its more than the price of a new Sony Nex-6 or Nex-7 (and keep in mind the problems were not with the expensive RX-1 sensor - they were with mundane parts of the camera). They also refused to fix just the focus problem without fixing the cracked glass. Essentially they had a set of rules that were all to their benefit and I had no options at all. So this camera has now cost me $3500 for the camera alone. It might cost me more if I buy hazard insurance, or a heavy duty leave-on case that takes away from the qualities of being small and light.
A third negative is that Sony charges astronomical fees for every accessory with this camera. Want a charger for your battery? Thats a fee. You want a lens shade for the lens, $200. You want a view finder, $450. Everything about this camera is out of control in price. The feeling I have, is that this camera is geared toward rich people with big pockets, and Sony is out to fleece them as much as possible - as evidenced by the out of control accessory prices and out of this world repair costs - and how easily they voided their warranty.
I am nervous to use this camera now that I see how easily it breaks. I also read another reviewer who mentioned the lack of weather sealing. We know the focus system is subpar. Yes, it has the same size sensor as the $1800 Nikon D600, but why exactly is this simple camera with a lack of pro features so expensive?
I would also say that dealing with Sony's support staff was no piece of cake. I spent over 4 hours on the phone over 10 days - either on hold or shuffled off to another person. A supervisor promised to ask an engineer if the cracked glass was related to the focus problems that developed later, and would call back in "an hour" - that hour turned out to be 10 days. I have had much
I generally like the camera. Its small and light, and fairly efficient. It turns on quickly and captures images quickly. Its a great camera to carry daily and capture the things you would miss. The image quality is very good.
For reference, I normally use/used Nikon D800, D700, D3s, Hasselblad H3d-31, H4d-40, Phaseone P65+. Compared to those the focus is much slower but the weight is much less. I also have a Canon G11 for a pocket camera - which is paintfully slow to record each image. So the Sony is a pretty ideal 'every day carry camera', albeit with a wide angle view on everything.
I read the blog reviews by Steve Huff, Lloyd Chambers, and Ken Rockwell. I pretty much agree with all of them, but feel Steve loves the camera, the other two liked it but ultimately rejected it. All point out the good image quality, but Ken pointed out there is a slight greenish tint - I agree but its somewhat subtle and can be compensated for in lightroom but colors still don't look quite right. Lloyd felt the camera didn't have a comfortable ease of use even after weeks of usage. I don't think its too bad, but there is a huge ton of menu options to wade through. I think everyone agrees that it can be slow to focus, but generally I don't think its too bad - it might take 5 seconds to rack back and forth to get the focus at twilight or in darker situations. The focus peaking feature is very helpful and I wish professional cameras had this - but still some of my images were not sharp using this, so not sure what is up with that.
There are several things very significantly negative about this camera in addition to those issues. First of all its fragile. I dropped a D700 3 feet onto concrete and there was no damage at all. The sony was around my neck on a very short neck strap and as I bent over to pick something up, it swung left to right, knocked something, and the glass over the LCD shattered. I was unhappy about that, but it worked fine and thought I would just live with it. Then two weeks later the focus system went out - and it was impossible to focus using auto focus or manual focus.
The second problem is that Sony is unreasonable. I took the camera to a Sony store and they said the focus problem was clearly a warranty issue since the camera was only 3 months old. However, the Sony repair center said that the entire warranty was void. They presented me with a bill for $950 to repair both the focus problem and the cracked glass.
By comparison, I have had $3000-$5000 Nikon's repaired by Nikon for never more than $225. I have had two $12,000 used Hasselblad's repaired by Hasselblad for about $450 each. I have personally put a Schott glass screen cover on a Nikon D3s for $20 and there were instructions for removing it by heating it up to losen the glue. And in years of photography I have never seen a glass screen crack or break before this despite all kinds of abuse in the field. So $950 for a repair on a new camera point and shoot is just out of control. Its more than the price of a new Sony Nex-6 or Nex-7 (and keep in mind the problems were not with the expensive RX-1 sensor - they were with mundane parts of the camera). They also refused to fix just the focus problem without fixing the cracked glass. Essentially they had a set of rules that were all to their benefit and I had no options at all. So this camera has now cost me $3500 for the camera alone. It might cost me more if I buy hazard insurance, or a heavy duty leave-on case that takes away from the qualities of being small and light.
A third negative is that Sony charges astronomical fees for every accessory with this camera. Want a charger for your battery? Thats a fee. You want a lens shade for the lens, $200. You want a view finder, $450. Everything about this camera is out of control in price. The feeling I have, is that this camera is geared toward rich people with big pockets, and Sony is out to fleece them as much as possible - as evidenced by the out of control accessory prices and out of this world repair costs - and how easily they voided their warranty.
I am nervous to use this camera now that I see how easily it breaks. I also read another reviewer who mentioned the lack of weather sealing. We know the focus system is subpar. Yes, it has the same size sensor as the $1800 Nikon D600, but why exactly is this simple camera with a lack of pro features so expensive?
I would also say that dealing with Sony's support staff was no piece of cake. I spent over 4 hours on the phone over 10 days - either on hold or shuffled off to another person. A supervisor promised to ask an engineer if the cracked glass was related to the focus problems that developed later, and would call back in "an hour" - that hour turned out to be 10 days. I have had much
Скроменый эксперт
20.04.2013
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
Recently purchased this camera as I have been searching for quite some time for the ultimate carry-around body. To provide perspective, I am a photographer that has done some pro work (mainly weddings), but the majority of my time is spent in serious amateur mode. In addition, 35mm has always been my preferred focal length (enables enough background to give perspective to the subject while not having the subject get lost in the background or requiring the photographer to get uncomfortably close).
I have spent the last 2 years evaluating many different camera systems to find something that best meets my needs. In addition to some travel, I have 2 children (4 and 2) and capturing their lives is of the utmost importance for me. This means I need something that has fast focus, can be easily carried around, has great imagine quality, shallow DOF, and take great photos indoors (in low light). In addition, I prefer shooting with a viewfinder so that I can really view the image prior to capture. Lastly, while I'm no videographer, I ideally would like to have a camera that take really good video (maybe not movie-quality, but much better than typical home movie quality).
My evaluation set has been:
Nikon D700 (which I had for years with many pro-grade lenses)
Olympus E-M5
Fuji X100
Fuji X-Pro (with all 3 lenses)
Sony RX-1 (most recent)
Panasonic GH2
I have purchased and owned all of those cameras, each for more than a year (i.e. I didn't buy and play for a weekend, then send them back - I really used them actively). I'll cut to the chase - I have sold every one of those cameras and lenses on eBay in the last 2 weeks except for the Sony, and the E-M5. However, my day-to-day is now the RX-1. The only reason I kept the E-M5 was to use the 45 1.8 and the 75 1.8 for longer focal lengths when needed. The RX-1 is (for the most part) the camera I have been waiting for.
Instead of writing a long review, let me explain the cons of the cameras above that caused me to make a different choice. EVERY SINGLE CAMERA ON THAT LIST HAS ALMOST TOO MANY POSITIVES TO NAME. I don't want you to think they are poor cameras; they are all fine photographic devices. A good photographer could make great images with any of them. So, I'll list why I didn't pick each one and opted for the RX1. D700 (Rendering is incredible, but body and lenses too big for casual use and in no way pocketable), X100 (very strong with latest firmware, but not as good at high ISO or as shallow DOF as Sony), X-Pro (focusing not quick enough to keep up with kids, and not really pocketable, even though images are great), GH2 (Great video but no Image Stabilization built in (via by body or software) but never impressed by stills).
The RX-1 is my choice b/c:
- The image quality has the same amazing dynamic range (or better) than D700 with greater resolution
- Incredibly sharp 35mm F2 lens
- Same shallow DOF as D700 with F2 lens
- Incredible high ISO (I can't seem to make 6400 noisy enough to even matter, and have actually used up to 25600 with some reduction and been comfortable)
- Relatively pocketable (more on this in a minute)
- Video quality that is extremely usable, with IS built in (via software)
- Dial-based system much like X100
- AF system, while not super fast, is quick enough for use with kids (and the issue isn't so much the focusing speed, which is fine, but the occasionally back and forth lens racking as it tries to lock on to something, which happens even for stationary objects in some cases)
But, the RX-1 isn't a slam dunk b/c:
- NO VIEWFINDER! This is my biggest issue with the camera (and why I really give it a 4.5 and not the 5). A photography machine of this caliber needs a viewfinder. So then you say, get the hot shoe finder....
- The Hot Shoe finder doesn't lock into the hot shoe, and slides in and out with relative ease. I learned this the hard way today as a LOST the finder in the park - $500 down the DRAIN. SO FRUSTRATING! Next time I'll be gaffers taping it to the body somehow.
- This depth of the camera makes it a little dense for a jack pocket. In addition, with the added Hot Shoe finder, it's still pocketable but not easy to get in and out. Something like an X100 or X100s would be WAY more functional in terms of very quick access. But, the camera does technically fit in a jacket pocket even with the viewfinder installed.
- Focus distance could be better, but flipping to macro mode is well done. BUT, the camera hunts much more in macro mode, even with direct sunlight.
There are other pros (like panorama mode, button placement, and menu system) and cons (like no external charger) but those aren't as critical to me. What I wrote matters most.
Notice in this write-up how I never mentioned price? Yes, it's expensive. But, until now I have had
I have spent the last 2 years evaluating many different camera systems to find something that best meets my needs. In addition to some travel, I have 2 children (4 and 2) and capturing their lives is of the utmost importance for me. This means I need something that has fast focus, can be easily carried around, has great imagine quality, shallow DOF, and take great photos indoors (in low light). In addition, I prefer shooting with a viewfinder so that I can really view the image prior to capture. Lastly, while I'm no videographer, I ideally would like to have a camera that take really good video (maybe not movie-quality, but much better than typical home movie quality).
My evaluation set has been:
Nikon D700 (which I had for years with many pro-grade lenses)
Olympus E-M5
Fuji X100
Fuji X-Pro (with all 3 lenses)
Sony RX-1 (most recent)
Panasonic GH2
I have purchased and owned all of those cameras, each for more than a year (i.e. I didn't buy and play for a weekend, then send them back - I really used them actively). I'll cut to the chase - I have sold every one of those cameras and lenses on eBay in the last 2 weeks except for the Sony, and the E-M5. However, my day-to-day is now the RX-1. The only reason I kept the E-M5 was to use the 45 1.8 and the 75 1.8 for longer focal lengths when needed. The RX-1 is (for the most part) the camera I have been waiting for.
Instead of writing a long review, let me explain the cons of the cameras above that caused me to make a different choice. EVERY SINGLE CAMERA ON THAT LIST HAS ALMOST TOO MANY POSITIVES TO NAME. I don't want you to think they are poor cameras; they are all fine photographic devices. A good photographer could make great images with any of them. So, I'll list why I didn't pick each one and opted for the RX1. D700 (Rendering is incredible, but body and lenses too big for casual use and in no way pocketable), X100 (very strong with latest firmware, but not as good at high ISO or as shallow DOF as Sony), X-Pro (focusing not quick enough to keep up with kids, and not really pocketable, even though images are great), GH2 (Great video but no Image Stabilization built in (via by body or software) but never impressed by stills).
The RX-1 is my choice b/c:
- The image quality has the same amazing dynamic range (or better) than D700 with greater resolution
- Incredibly sharp 35mm F2 lens
- Same shallow DOF as D700 with F2 lens
- Incredible high ISO (I can't seem to make 6400 noisy enough to even matter, and have actually used up to 25600 with some reduction and been comfortable)
- Relatively pocketable (more on this in a minute)
- Video quality that is extremely usable, with IS built in (via software)
- Dial-based system much like X100
- AF system, while not super fast, is quick enough for use with kids (and the issue isn't so much the focusing speed, which is fine, but the occasionally back and forth lens racking as it tries to lock on to something, which happens even for stationary objects in some cases)
But, the RX-1 isn't a slam dunk b/c:
- NO VIEWFINDER! This is my biggest issue with the camera (and why I really give it a 4.5 and not the 5). A photography machine of this caliber needs a viewfinder. So then you say, get the hot shoe finder....
- The Hot Shoe finder doesn't lock into the hot shoe, and slides in and out with relative ease. I learned this the hard way today as a LOST the finder in the park - $500 down the DRAIN. SO FRUSTRATING! Next time I'll be gaffers taping it to the body somehow.
- This depth of the camera makes it a little dense for a jack pocket. In addition, with the added Hot Shoe finder, it's still pocketable but not easy to get in and out. Something like an X100 or X100s would be WAY more functional in terms of very quick access. But, the camera does technically fit in a jacket pocket even with the viewfinder installed.
- Focus distance could be better, but flipping to macro mode is well done. BUT, the camera hunts much more in macro mode, even with direct sunlight.
There are other pros (like panorama mode, button placement, and menu system) and cons (like no external charger) but those aren't as critical to me. What I wrote matters most.
Notice in this write-up how I never mentioned price? Yes, it's expensive. But, until now I have had
Скроменый эксперт
31.07.2015
8/10
Оценка пользователя
Хорошо
The box had been opened. Items were missing from the box which are being replaced by Sony after my phone call. The camera was sold to
Me as a new item although it should have been sold to
Me as a used item.
The camera itself is well built and appears to be a winner. After several strolls around the menus, it is clear that the menus were not developed by anyone who is a photographer. The menus are logical although contrary to what one normally encounters. They make sense once you spend some " quality time " playing with the camera.
The camera is light weight and easy to carry and use. The controls on the rear of digital cameras have always been problematic for me. Typically, I accidentally hit these buttons while shooting and have to spend time disengaging the functions I have accidentally set off. Sony has averted this by allowing you the option of not assigning functions to the buttons and controls. Wow ! This is great.
Also, The SONY RX1 sees in the dark in comparison to other cameras. It is a low light shooter.
The Raw files are HUGE and and my poor MacBook Pro keeps freezing and choking. I have learned that the Mac buffers fill up quickly and I empty them inelegantly by restarting the computer.This works and the flow of image processing goes forward if I allow the computer to reboot after having processed a series of files.
I have a Fuji X100s APS-C camera which is a wonderful camera which does most of what the RX1 does. The image quality is very comparable to the RX1R in average shooting conditions. The RX1r and the X100s are of similar construction, handling, and Image Quality. However, if want to shoot decent images in near darkness with high ISOs, The Sony is the clear winner.
If you are an OCD personality, as I am, the Sony RX1R will make you smile.
Just be prepared for the headaches associated with dealing with such large image files. My processing programs, Adobe ACR , Iridient RAW Converter, etc. operate SLOWLY and require regular reboots.
My two cents with ,,,
Me as a new item although it should have been sold to
Me as a used item.
The camera itself is well built and appears to be a winner. After several strolls around the menus, it is clear that the menus were not developed by anyone who is a photographer. The menus are logical although contrary to what one normally encounters. They make sense once you spend some " quality time " playing with the camera.
The camera is light weight and easy to carry and use. The controls on the rear of digital cameras have always been problematic for me. Typically, I accidentally hit these buttons while shooting and have to spend time disengaging the functions I have accidentally set off. Sony has averted this by allowing you the option of not assigning functions to the buttons and controls. Wow ! This is great.
Also, The SONY RX1 sees in the dark in comparison to other cameras. It is a low light shooter.
The Raw files are HUGE and and my poor MacBook Pro keeps freezing and choking. I have learned that the Mac buffers fill up quickly and I empty them inelegantly by restarting the computer.This works and the flow of image processing goes forward if I allow the computer to reboot after having processed a series of files.
I have a Fuji X100s APS-C camera which is a wonderful camera which does most of what the RX1 does. The image quality is very comparable to the RX1R in average shooting conditions. The RX1r and the X100s are of similar construction, handling, and Image Quality. However, if want to shoot decent images in near darkness with high ISOs, The Sony is the clear winner.
If you are an OCD personality, as I am, the Sony RX1R will make you smile.
Just be prepared for the headaches associated with dealing with such large image files. My processing programs, Adobe ACR , Iridient RAW Converter, etc. operate SLOWLY and require regular reboots.
My two cents with ,,,
Скроменый эксперт
22.09.2014
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I've shot with a wide variety of digital cameras since switching from film to digital almost 14 years ago. I shoot professionally and for my own personal satisfaction. The Sony RX1 is one of those few cameras that satisfies BOTH my professional and personal desires while I'm shooting.
For starters, the RX1 is compact without being too small and the controls and menu interface are easy to use without being too simple for serious control. You might think it's easy to make a camera that does those things, but trust me, it isn't. Sony struck an almost perfect balance in terms of form and function.
The biggest advantage to shooting with this little camera rather than another small "mirrorless" camera is image quality. There are many, many ways to define "image quality" but in this case I define it as images with the greatest possible detail (high ratio of actual image data rather than "noise") combined with an extraordinary dynamic range (detail recorded in both highlight and shadow) and a smooth transition between in-focus and out-of-focus areas (butter smooth bokeh that isn't harsh and distracting).
I've shot with a number of full-frame cameras including the Sony A99, A7, A7r, Nikon D700, D600 and Canon 5D mkII. Those cameras are all great, but none of those other cameras (at least not with the lenses I used) deliver the same combination of rich details and insane amount of exposure latitude that comes from the RX1 and its 35mm Zeiss Sonnar T lens with f/2 aperture.
I know most people interested in small full-frame cameras are turning to the Sony A7 series and interchangeable lenses, but if you are content with a 35mm lens then the RX1 will not disappoint. The price of the RX1 is higher than it should be now that there are more affordable full-frame cameras on the market, but it still delivers fantastic value when you consider the full frame sensor and the amazing 35mm lens. I've shot side-by-side with RX1 and the Sony A7 and Sony 35mm f/2.8 Zeiss Sonnar T FE ZA lens ... and I personally prefer the images from the RX1.
I also own and shoot with several DSLRs and mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras for work, but I enjoy shooting with the RX1 because it has everything I care about in a small package. I bought into cameras like the Olympus OM-D and PEN cameras and Sony NEX cameras because I wanted something small, but as soon as I added multiple lenses they where basically small DSLRs with less image quality. The RX1 is small but doesn't compromise on image quality. The Sony A7 series deliver similar quality, but as soon as you start adding lenses you might as well be using a DSLR kit. I'll stick with a full-frame camera that fits in my jacket pocket.
Bottom line, if you are a serious (professional) photographer and can afford this camera (and you don't mind being "stuck" at 35mm) then there is no better camera than the RX1 in terms of delivering great results in a relatively small package.
For starters, the RX1 is compact without being too small and the controls and menu interface are easy to use without being too simple for serious control. You might think it's easy to make a camera that does those things, but trust me, it isn't. Sony struck an almost perfect balance in terms of form and function.
The biggest advantage to shooting with this little camera rather than another small "mirrorless" camera is image quality. There are many, many ways to define "image quality" but in this case I define it as images with the greatest possible detail (high ratio of actual image data rather than "noise") combined with an extraordinary dynamic range (detail recorded in both highlight and shadow) and a smooth transition between in-focus and out-of-focus areas (butter smooth bokeh that isn't harsh and distracting).
I've shot with a number of full-frame cameras including the Sony A99, A7, A7r, Nikon D700, D600 and Canon 5D mkII. Those cameras are all great, but none of those other cameras (at least not with the lenses I used) deliver the same combination of rich details and insane amount of exposure latitude that comes from the RX1 and its 35mm Zeiss Sonnar T lens with f/2 aperture.
I know most people interested in small full-frame cameras are turning to the Sony A7 series and interchangeable lenses, but if you are content with a 35mm lens then the RX1 will not disappoint. The price of the RX1 is higher than it should be now that there are more affordable full-frame cameras on the market, but it still delivers fantastic value when you consider the full frame sensor and the amazing 35mm lens. I've shot side-by-side with RX1 and the Sony A7 and Sony 35mm f/2.8 Zeiss Sonnar T FE ZA lens ... and I personally prefer the images from the RX1.
I also own and shoot with several DSLRs and mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras for work, but I enjoy shooting with the RX1 because it has everything I care about in a small package. I bought into cameras like the Olympus OM-D and PEN cameras and Sony NEX cameras because I wanted something small, but as soon as I added multiple lenses they where basically small DSLRs with less image quality. The RX1 is small but doesn't compromise on image quality. The Sony A7 series deliver similar quality, but as soon as you start adding lenses you might as well be using a DSLR kit. I'll stick with a full-frame camera that fits in my jacket pocket.
Bottom line, if you are a serious (professional) photographer and can afford this camera (and you don't mind being "stuck" at 35mm) then there is no better camera than the RX1 in terms of delivering great results in a relatively small package.
Скроменый эксперт
11.02.2013
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I went from a P&S to the APS-C sensor NEX C3 to the full frame sensor RX1 in the span of a year. Quite an ambitious upgrade path, and one without any mention of a traditional DSLR. Light, unintimidating, and easily portable are critical factors that I look for in my camera gear, and I've shied away from purchasing any camera that lacked those features. While I love the autofocus performance and sheer amount of accessories for Canon and Nikon, an afternoon spent with a friend's 5DIII and D7000 quickly dissuaded me of buying into the system. They were simply too heavy and bulky for me, not to mention that for some reason, subjects would become hyperaware whenever the lens pointed their way, and they would become stiff and unnatural.
I'd continuously changed cameras due to a never ending pursuit of better image quality. I was continually frustrated by low light and high ISO performance, as I take a lot of pictures in those environments. I lean heavily towards taking pictures of friends and families (capturing memories as I like to put it), landscape, artistic, and food photography. I like to view my pictures on a 20 inch monitor and print them out for photo books. The RX1 takes superb photos for my purposes.
With the full frame sensor, low light performance is absolutely astounding. I can render sharp details and accurate colors in dim bar environments, and a surprising amount of depth in pitch black night. Low light performance is so good that sometimes I have to dial the exposure down, since the camera portrayed the scene with too much light! Coupled with the Zeiss lens, bokeh is absolutely beautiful. I love shooting wide open and have actually ventured into taking more portrait shots as the camera does such a good job with them. I also had the SEL24F18Z with my C3, and find that the two lenses are similar in terms of sharpness, but with the RX1 a much better sensor and lens combo as a whole. Despite many comments to the contrary, I still find the lens to be sharp at infinity. In fact, I love shooting landscapes even more so now thanks to the level of detail and colors rendered in images. Who says this can't be a landscape camera? :)
However, autofocus is a bit lacking in low light. This is one of the few complaints I have about the camera. It slows in low light, and hunts quite a bit in dim bar environments. I do have to experiment more with shutter speed and ISO, instead of simply raising and shooting. But this is a limitation I'm happy to work with and around. Focus in good light is snappy and accurate. When frustrated by the autofocus, I switch a dial to MF. I really like how Sony has implemented manual focus on their cameras. Focus peaking is wonderful, making it so easy to frame a beautiful shot.
Speaking of the hardware, this is one of the reasons why the camera is such a joy to use. All knobs and dials are solid and turn stiffly with a satisfying click into place. I've taken to calling my camera the "little monster" as the full frame sensor seems to suck in light like a black hole, and it feels so solidly built that it could withstand the end of the world.
I shoot JPG only, and I really like the output from this camera. I shoot JPG only because I take way too many photos due to always having the camera with me, and cannot fathom spending more time than I currently do on photo selection and organization. I do engage in a tiny bit of very basic PP, but shoot JPG only. The white balance is dead on accurate, the colors are nicely saturated. I particularly appreciate the various filters that Sony has crammed into the tiny package. All of this combined just makes the entire picture taking process a joy, and a form of art. I also prefer to compose with the screen, as I'm accustomed to this style of shooting. The LCD is truly "White Magic", it's one of the best I've seen from any camera. (And it should be, with this price tag!).
This camera has really redefined my photography skills. Thanks to its easy manual controls, I am constantly experimenting with S, A, and M modes. I'm much more creative, since aperture, exposure and shutter speed are a mere finger flick away. I really appreciate that I don't have to menu dive to change anything, which was one of the most frustrating points of my old C3. My technique has grown by leaps and bounds in the mere two months that I've had it, and I take it anywhere and everywhere. It's so portable and light for me, even when compared to my C3, that I barely use the camera on my cellphone. I have it with me everywhere I go, always ready for that perfect moment to raise the camera and snap a shot.
This camera has been an utter joy to use, and I cannot imagine using anything else. The combination of image quality, portability, subtlety, and versatility are unmatched by any other. Thus, for me, the price is right. I often go shooting with friends that own XE-1, 5DIII, and T3i, and they've started compl
I'd continuously changed cameras due to a never ending pursuit of better image quality. I was continually frustrated by low light and high ISO performance, as I take a lot of pictures in those environments. I lean heavily towards taking pictures of friends and families (capturing memories as I like to put it), landscape, artistic, and food photography. I like to view my pictures on a 20 inch monitor and print them out for photo books. The RX1 takes superb photos for my purposes.
With the full frame sensor, low light performance is absolutely astounding. I can render sharp details and accurate colors in dim bar environments, and a surprising amount of depth in pitch black night. Low light performance is so good that sometimes I have to dial the exposure down, since the camera portrayed the scene with too much light! Coupled with the Zeiss lens, bokeh is absolutely beautiful. I love shooting wide open and have actually ventured into taking more portrait shots as the camera does such a good job with them. I also had the SEL24F18Z with my C3, and find that the two lenses are similar in terms of sharpness, but with the RX1 a much better sensor and lens combo as a whole. Despite many comments to the contrary, I still find the lens to be sharp at infinity. In fact, I love shooting landscapes even more so now thanks to the level of detail and colors rendered in images. Who says this can't be a landscape camera? :)
However, autofocus is a bit lacking in low light. This is one of the few complaints I have about the camera. It slows in low light, and hunts quite a bit in dim bar environments. I do have to experiment more with shutter speed and ISO, instead of simply raising and shooting. But this is a limitation I'm happy to work with and around. Focus in good light is snappy and accurate. When frustrated by the autofocus, I switch a dial to MF. I really like how Sony has implemented manual focus on their cameras. Focus peaking is wonderful, making it so easy to frame a beautiful shot.
Speaking of the hardware, this is one of the reasons why the camera is such a joy to use. All knobs and dials are solid and turn stiffly with a satisfying click into place. I've taken to calling my camera the "little monster" as the full frame sensor seems to suck in light like a black hole, and it feels so solidly built that it could withstand the end of the world.
I shoot JPG only, and I really like the output from this camera. I shoot JPG only because I take way too many photos due to always having the camera with me, and cannot fathom spending more time than I currently do on photo selection and organization. I do engage in a tiny bit of very basic PP, but shoot JPG only. The white balance is dead on accurate, the colors are nicely saturated. I particularly appreciate the various filters that Sony has crammed into the tiny package. All of this combined just makes the entire picture taking process a joy, and a form of art. I also prefer to compose with the screen, as I'm accustomed to this style of shooting. The LCD is truly "White Magic", it's one of the best I've seen from any camera. (And it should be, with this price tag!).
This camera has really redefined my photography skills. Thanks to its easy manual controls, I am constantly experimenting with S, A, and M modes. I'm much more creative, since aperture, exposure and shutter speed are a mere finger flick away. I really appreciate that I don't have to menu dive to change anything, which was one of the most frustrating points of my old C3. My technique has grown by leaps and bounds in the mere two months that I've had it, and I take it anywhere and everywhere. It's so portable and light for me, even when compared to my C3, that I barely use the camera on my cellphone. I have it with me everywhere I go, always ready for that perfect moment to raise the camera and snap a shot.
This camera has been an utter joy to use, and I cannot imagine using anything else. The combination of image quality, portability, subtlety, and versatility are unmatched by any other. Thus, for me, the price is right. I often go shooting with friends that own XE-1, 5DIII, and T3i, and they've started compl
Скроменый эксперт
06.02.2013
8/10
Оценка пользователя
Хорошо
If you managed to get this far through the enormous number of reviews of the camera, you're either a glutton for punishment, are you really are a researcher and aficionado of high-end digital photography. Let's assume it's the latter and get to the really interesting stuff.
This camera is in a class of one. There's really nothing like it anywhere in the marketplace. It's absurdly expensive for a point-and-shoot, and yet it takes pictures that rival in overall image quality - and in many cases equal or even exceed - what the very best full frame professional cameras are capable of generating . . . . . while fitting fairly comfortably in your jacket pocket. It looks like your neighbor's point-and-shoot $350 Canon, but costs more than your last vacation. It doesn't even have a viewfinder, either optical or electronic - although you can get a great electronic one, if you don't mind being soaked for another $450 on top of what you've already shelled out for this expensive but marvelous piece of technology. Or you can get really hosed by Zeiss, and get an optical viewfinder for another $650 - easily the most overpriced accessory in digital photography. It isn't the fastest focusing, and it requires you to move closer or farther to get the shot that you want instead of zooming in or out given the fixed focal length lens. It can be both maddening to struggle with under the wrong circumstances . . . and at the same time a breeze to use like any other point-and-shoot. It seems wildly overpriced in some sense (compared to any other compact?), but is a genuine bargain in terms of what you are getting (best current 35mm 2.0 lens, best 24MP FF sensor in tiny package with highly customizable operating system).
It's like nothing else really. Its high ISO performance is equal to anything and I do mean anything out there (UPDATE - ALMOST anything - it is a big step behind its cousin, the Sony A7S, and the new Nikon D4S, which is close to Sony's A7S low light performance - but it's right there with most other FF cameras). It's capable of taking low noise images at ISO 6400, and with a little bit of cleanup and working in RAW, you can easily salvage fairly high quality pictures at ISO 12,800 with lots of detail and little loss of information due to noise. This competes with some of the most expensive FF models in terms of low light ability (the Canon 1Dx, 6D, 5DIII, Nikon D4 and D600 - at worst, it is very close to those benchmark systems in terms of low light ability - at best it is equal to any of them).
Overall, the camera is something of a walking contradiction in terms in many ways (a full frame compact), and at the same time, it's a camera that's capable of inspiring enormous loyalty and will likely generate a truly cult-like following, while many other people may simply shake their heads at what they see as Sony's foolishness. People will complain about the cost, but it's really a good value and you get what you pay for.
Pros:
1) Remarkable compactness and portability for such enormous low light capabilities w/full frame sensor - an engineering tour de force in terms of cramming full frame capabilities into a point-and-shoot size and form factor (achievable only with a fixed lens).
2) Capable of remarkable detail due to its 24 megapixel full frame sensor with excellent color and dynamic range. DxO sensor score of 93 (4th highest of any tested camera including some medium format sensors).
3) Superb Carl Zeiss 35mm F 2.0 fixed lens that is sharp edge-to-edge (which for FF camera might cost $1200 or so by itself). (F4-f8 offers sharpest pictures edge to edge but f2 is still impressive). Highest rated 35mm lens available by DxO testing.
4) As good high ISO as virtually any full frame camera.
5) Intuitive but deep operating system and menu structures, immediately familiar to those coming from Sony Alpha background. Easy to run as full manual camera (excellent manual control dials for exposure, lens aperture, etc) . . . or put on full AUTO, and all shades in between. Good aperture priority mode operation (my personal fav).
6) Capable of shooting 1080 at 60p and taking good video in low light, and with full IS (image stabilization) but see cons.
7) Macro functionality in CZ lens (but see cons). Macro mode works well with built-in flash (not always the case suggesting they paid attention to this issue).
8) Customizable buttons and other nice user config operating system features.
9) Crop/zoom functionality of x1.4 and x2.0 partially mitigates fixed lens restrictions (equivalent to 50 and 70 mm lens but with obvious loss of resolution).
10) High build quality w/ nice magnesium chassis - has very solid feel (it ought to for this much $!).
11) Decent flash.
12) Nice JPEGs vs. the competition - Sony's stay fairly sharp to 3200 at least, while Nikon and (to a much lesser extent) Canon default JPEGs are losi
This camera is in a class of one. There's really nothing like it anywhere in the marketplace. It's absurdly expensive for a point-and-shoot, and yet it takes pictures that rival in overall image quality - and in many cases equal or even exceed - what the very best full frame professional cameras are capable of generating . . . . . while fitting fairly comfortably in your jacket pocket. It looks like your neighbor's point-and-shoot $350 Canon, but costs more than your last vacation. It doesn't even have a viewfinder, either optical or electronic - although you can get a great electronic one, if you don't mind being soaked for another $450 on top of what you've already shelled out for this expensive but marvelous piece of technology. Or you can get really hosed by Zeiss, and get an optical viewfinder for another $650 - easily the most overpriced accessory in digital photography. It isn't the fastest focusing, and it requires you to move closer or farther to get the shot that you want instead of zooming in or out given the fixed focal length lens. It can be both maddening to struggle with under the wrong circumstances . . . and at the same time a breeze to use like any other point-and-shoot. It seems wildly overpriced in some sense (compared to any other compact?), but is a genuine bargain in terms of what you are getting (best current 35mm 2.0 lens, best 24MP FF sensor in tiny package with highly customizable operating system).
It's like nothing else really. Its high ISO performance is equal to anything and I do mean anything out there (UPDATE - ALMOST anything - it is a big step behind its cousin, the Sony A7S, and the new Nikon D4S, which is close to Sony's A7S low light performance - but it's right there with most other FF cameras). It's capable of taking low noise images at ISO 6400, and with a little bit of cleanup and working in RAW, you can easily salvage fairly high quality pictures at ISO 12,800 with lots of detail and little loss of information due to noise. This competes with some of the most expensive FF models in terms of low light ability (the Canon 1Dx, 6D, 5DIII, Nikon D4 and D600 - at worst, it is very close to those benchmark systems in terms of low light ability - at best it is equal to any of them).
Overall, the camera is something of a walking contradiction in terms in many ways (a full frame compact), and at the same time, it's a camera that's capable of inspiring enormous loyalty and will likely generate a truly cult-like following, while many other people may simply shake their heads at what they see as Sony's foolishness. People will complain about the cost, but it's really a good value and you get what you pay for.
Pros:
1) Remarkable compactness and portability for such enormous low light capabilities w/full frame sensor - an engineering tour de force in terms of cramming full frame capabilities into a point-and-shoot size and form factor (achievable only with a fixed lens).
2) Capable of remarkable detail due to its 24 megapixel full frame sensor with excellent color and dynamic range. DxO sensor score of 93 (4th highest of any tested camera including some medium format sensors).
3) Superb Carl Zeiss 35mm F 2.0 fixed lens that is sharp edge-to-edge (which for FF camera might cost $1200 or so by itself). (F4-f8 offers sharpest pictures edge to edge but f2 is still impressive). Highest rated 35mm lens available by DxO testing.
4) As good high ISO as virtually any full frame camera.
5) Intuitive but deep operating system and menu structures, immediately familiar to those coming from Sony Alpha background. Easy to run as full manual camera (excellent manual control dials for exposure, lens aperture, etc) . . . or put on full AUTO, and all shades in between. Good aperture priority mode operation (my personal fav).
6) Capable of shooting 1080 at 60p and taking good video in low light, and with full IS (image stabilization) but see cons.
7) Macro functionality in CZ lens (but see cons). Macro mode works well with built-in flash (not always the case suggesting they paid attention to this issue).
8) Customizable buttons and other nice user config operating system features.
9) Crop/zoom functionality of x1.4 and x2.0 partially mitigates fixed lens restrictions (equivalent to 50 and 70 mm lens but with obvious loss of resolution).
10) High build quality w/ nice magnesium chassis - has very solid feel (it ought to for this much $!).
11) Decent flash.
12) Nice JPEGs vs. the competition - Sony's stay fairly sharp to 3200 at least, while Nikon and (to a much lesser extent) Canon default JPEGs are losi
Скроменый эксперт
28.12.2012
10/10
Оценка пользователя
Великолепно
I received my RX1 recently. Now my RX100 and NEX-6 have a big brother. I tend to do a lot of low light stuff and, since there are many excellent reviews here already on general characteristics of the RX1, I thought I would focus (no pun intended) on the low light performance. Things like a single shaded 15 watt lamp across a 12 foot room in an otherwise dark room revealed a wealth of detail on wall plaster, etc. A crop of the darkest areas throughout the scene revealed no noticeable noise to my eyes. Likewise with night scenes one to two hours before sunrise with no street lights except for a few distant gas lamps in a quaint park ... No noise, rich blacks but still plenty of detail in the darkest areas, colors were dead on as long as i did not have competing wavelenghts present ... ie. 6,000K (flourescent store window lights) and 2,800-3,200K (incandescent lights) present in the same area. I chalk this incredible low noise performance up to the RX1's superior upper ISO processing. Here is a very telling link that compares crops of the RX1 to the A99, NEX-7, D600, D800 and the Canon 5D Mark III. In nearly 70 to 80 percent of the comparisons for resolution and color accuracy the RX1 either met or bested the other cameras. That is huge if you think about it ... A Mark III work-alike in a small block of magnesium alloy! Amazing. The link I am refering to is at the imaging-resource site under their RX1 preview.
The key thing here is that this lens and sensor were made specifically and precisely for each other. This is true for those items and the processor as well. And that is very important. These are not just a collection of parts. They were MATCHED in function and performance to each other. The obvious benefit in that approach is that the performance can exceed a "sum of the parts" approach. No, you cannot change out lenses, but that is the very characteristic that gives the RX1 its uncompromised image quality and a slight advantage over some of todays best dslrs in ISO spanning image quality.
Now onto the low light focusing. I'm just a hack, and forgive me if this is common knowledge, but here's what I found ... In low light auto focusing, my RX1 is rougly equivalent to my RX100 which is a champ. Does that mean that low light focusing is comparably fast to bright light focusing? No, I don't know of too many cameras that do not suffer some in focusing speed as the light goes down. But I still am not seeing any auto focus attempts that take longer than a half to three-quarters of a second. I suspect that is because I always seek edges to center focus on ... vertical or horizontal ... But always edges. The RX1 does not give us phase detect focusing like my NEX-6 (on certain lenses) ... We only have contrast detect to auto focus with. It's okay to grab a center focus on a contrast area then recompose but we gotta have some contrast in a small area to get it. Otherwise we're stuck with manual focus and peaking ... but peaking also needs at least some semblance of an edge. So by looking for a few pixels in the scene that have some contrast and grabbing focus on them, I simply don't have the low light focus issues I read about. It's a work around but it's quick.
At any rate, I am very happy with this camera. If you check out the link I referenced above, you can see the exact differences in crops from the RX1 and the current leading dslrs ... at escalating ISOs. Very revealing just how mighty this little guy is. Words cannot express what those image comparisons show through the ISO range. After seeing those, I personally did not mind so much that a viewfinder was not included, etc. Besides the LCD on the RX1 uses the same "White Magic" high contrast technology as the RX100, and I have never had a problem in sunlight seeing that display clearly. Not saying this is adequate for everyone, but it's enough for me. I also would prefer an EVF like my NEX-6, but I will do what I have to do in order to get the images the RX1 produces.
On build quality, the RX1 is built like a tank. I have been a design engineer for products like these most of my life, and I can tell they threw away all the restrictions when they designed this unit and selected its materials. But the thing that sealed it for me was the image comparisons with those reigning champion dslrs on the imaging-resources review. It's still like I'm in a dream ... How is it possible that that small chunk of metal can get better IQ than those cameras at so many ISOs. This is one of those rare buys where I think I am only going to feel better about this as time goes by. I am a street photographer so the permanently affixed f2 is not a problem for me .... I just use my Nike sneakers "zoom control" to get the shot I'm after. Very pleased with this camera. It may not have every box checked for your list, but if a combination of superb image quality, uncompromised engineering and portability are important to you then it doesn
The key thing here is that this lens and sensor were made specifically and precisely for each other. This is true for those items and the processor as well. And that is very important. These are not just a collection of parts. They were MATCHED in function and performance to each other. The obvious benefit in that approach is that the performance can exceed a "sum of the parts" approach. No, you cannot change out lenses, but that is the very characteristic that gives the RX1 its uncompromised image quality and a slight advantage over some of todays best dslrs in ISO spanning image quality.
Now onto the low light focusing. I'm just a hack, and forgive me if this is common knowledge, but here's what I found ... In low light auto focusing, my RX1 is rougly equivalent to my RX100 which is a champ. Does that mean that low light focusing is comparably fast to bright light focusing? No, I don't know of too many cameras that do not suffer some in focusing speed as the light goes down. But I still am not seeing any auto focus attempts that take longer than a half to three-quarters of a second. I suspect that is because I always seek edges to center focus on ... vertical or horizontal ... But always edges. The RX1 does not give us phase detect focusing like my NEX-6 (on certain lenses) ... We only have contrast detect to auto focus with. It's okay to grab a center focus on a contrast area then recompose but we gotta have some contrast in a small area to get it. Otherwise we're stuck with manual focus and peaking ... but peaking also needs at least some semblance of an edge. So by looking for a few pixels in the scene that have some contrast and grabbing focus on them, I simply don't have the low light focus issues I read about. It's a work around but it's quick.
At any rate, I am very happy with this camera. If you check out the link I referenced above, you can see the exact differences in crops from the RX1 and the current leading dslrs ... at escalating ISOs. Very revealing just how mighty this little guy is. Words cannot express what those image comparisons show through the ISO range. After seeing those, I personally did not mind so much that a viewfinder was not included, etc. Besides the LCD on the RX1 uses the same "White Magic" high contrast technology as the RX100, and I have never had a problem in sunlight seeing that display clearly. Not saying this is adequate for everyone, but it's enough for me. I also would prefer an EVF like my NEX-6, but I will do what I have to do in order to get the images the RX1 produces.
On build quality, the RX1 is built like a tank. I have been a design engineer for products like these most of my life, and I can tell they threw away all the restrictions when they designed this unit and selected its materials. But the thing that sealed it for me was the image comparisons with those reigning champion dslrs on the imaging-resources review. It's still like I'm in a dream ... How is it possible that that small chunk of metal can get better IQ than those cameras at so many ISOs. This is one of those rare buys where I think I am only going to feel better about this as time goes by. I am a street photographer so the permanently affixed f2 is not a problem for me .... I just use my Nike sneakers "zoom control" to get the shot I'm after. Very pleased with this camera. It may not have every box checked for your list, but if a combination of superb image quality, uncompromised engineering and portability are important to you then it doesn
Скроменый эксперт
12.12.2012
8/10
Оценка пользователя
Хорошо
I have used my Sony DSC-RX1 for over a week now, and taken nearly a thousand pictures. In a nutshell, the RX1 is like the Fuji X100 with better image quality and without the insufferable performance problems. The RX1 has superior image quality and good performance, but it lacks the magic of the X100 because it's controls are awkward and it has the compromised ergonomics of a point-and-shoot.
The X100 has great controls - a lens aperture ring with an "A" setting for automatic and a top shutter speed dial with an "A" setting for automatic. So no need for a shooting mode dial to choose between program mode, shutter priority, aperture priority, or full manual. In most situations, you can keep your left hand on the lens aperture ring and your right thumb on the top shutter speed dial and never need to take your eyes off your subject.
The RX1 has awkward controls. There's a lens aperture ring but no dedicated shutter speed dial. Instead, there's a plastic wheel that you can use to change the shutter speed with your thumb but you have to look at the screen to see what shutter speed you're at. And it has a very awkward mode dial, that lets you choose program/shutter/aperture/manual for stills, but these choices have no effect on movies. So if you want to switch operating modes in movies, you have to use the mode dial to set the camera to movie mode, and then access the menu to choose your shooting mode for movies. There are many examples like that where the camera makes you hit a few more buttons, turn a few more dials, or navigate a few more menus that you really should have to. Let's say you're shooting a static scene in aperture priority mode f5.6 and now the scene has become dynamic so you want to set the shutter speed to 1/125 to avoid motion blur but don't want the ISO to get out of hand. With the X100, you could make that adjustment without repositioning your hands or taking your eyes off your composition. On the RX1, you have to move your hands multiple times and take your eyes off your composition to look at the controls. First you have to change the mode dial from aperture priority to shutter priority with your thumb and finger and then you have adjust your shutter speed with your thumb while looking at the LCD. It's slow and awkward and takes you away from the scene. I'd give the RX1 5 stars if it had a built-in EVF and the controls of the Fuji X100.
In exchange for the awkward controls, you get outstanding image quality and excellent performance. The RX1 contrast-detect autofocus is reasonably fast and accurate even in lowish light. (It's not as fast to choose autofocus points or achieve focus as the Panasonic micro 43rds cameras, but it is much faster than the X100 and certainly fast enough for most uses.) Autofocus tracking is easy to engage and works very well for focus-and-recompose. Manual focus is workable. The rear display has no noticeable lag so you can time your shots. The continuous burst mode is excellent. And best of all, unlike the X100, the camera continues to operate even when it is saving images! So, unlike the X100, you can easily use the RX1 to get excellent pictures of both static and dynamic scenes. Bottom line - I think performance problems render the X100 nearly unusable while the RX1 is entirely useable despite its ergonomic flaws.
Do not get this camera for it's video. The specs are impressive (1080p60 at 28Mbps for action or 1080p24 at 24Mbps for cinema) but the measured resolution is clearly less than my Nikon D4, my hacked Panasonic GH1, and my Panasonic TM700 camcorder. The 1080p24 footage from the GH1 only measures 630 lines, and I'd be surprised if the RX1 video exceeds 480 lines of measured resolution (ie., standard definition). The footage is prone to moire, so stay away from patterns. You can use the RX1 movies for close ups of people talking but for anything else you would be better served by a camcorder.
The RX1 is expensive and I don't think it is a good value. For the same cost, you can likely get as good pictures with the Nikon D600 (same sensor) and the outstanding new Sigma A 35mm f1.4 lens. You'd get more flexibility with the Nikon D600 because you can change lenses for different situations but the RX1 is significantly more compact and nearly silent in operation due to its leaf shutter. The RX1 is smaller and lighter than the Sigma 35mm f1.4 lens alone! So if you already have a full-frame camera, then the RX1 has something to offer. Otherwise, I'd recommend you get a full-frame DSLR first.
Bottom line: the Sony RX1 is small and quiet and ideally suited as a travel camera. It can take outstanding pictures. I'm keeping mine.
Update: I've had my RX1 for four months now and wanted to pass on some advice to other RX1 owners. The RX1 lens cap is heavy and does not attach firmly to the camera. Previous to owning the RX1, I'd never lost a lens cap in my life,
The X100 has great controls - a lens aperture ring with an "A" setting for automatic and a top shutter speed dial with an "A" setting for automatic. So no need for a shooting mode dial to choose between program mode, shutter priority, aperture priority, or full manual. In most situations, you can keep your left hand on the lens aperture ring and your right thumb on the top shutter speed dial and never need to take your eyes off your subject.
The RX1 has awkward controls. There's a lens aperture ring but no dedicated shutter speed dial. Instead, there's a plastic wheel that you can use to change the shutter speed with your thumb but you have to look at the screen to see what shutter speed you're at. And it has a very awkward mode dial, that lets you choose program/shutter/aperture/manual for stills, but these choices have no effect on movies. So if you want to switch operating modes in movies, you have to use the mode dial to set the camera to movie mode, and then access the menu to choose your shooting mode for movies. There are many examples like that where the camera makes you hit a few more buttons, turn a few more dials, or navigate a few more menus that you really should have to. Let's say you're shooting a static scene in aperture priority mode f5.6 and now the scene has become dynamic so you want to set the shutter speed to 1/125 to avoid motion blur but don't want the ISO to get out of hand. With the X100, you could make that adjustment without repositioning your hands or taking your eyes off your composition. On the RX1, you have to move your hands multiple times and take your eyes off your composition to look at the controls. First you have to change the mode dial from aperture priority to shutter priority with your thumb and finger and then you have adjust your shutter speed with your thumb while looking at the LCD. It's slow and awkward and takes you away from the scene. I'd give the RX1 5 stars if it had a built-in EVF and the controls of the Fuji X100.
In exchange for the awkward controls, you get outstanding image quality and excellent performance. The RX1 contrast-detect autofocus is reasonably fast and accurate even in lowish light. (It's not as fast to choose autofocus points or achieve focus as the Panasonic micro 43rds cameras, but it is much faster than the X100 and certainly fast enough for most uses.) Autofocus tracking is easy to engage and works very well for focus-and-recompose. Manual focus is workable. The rear display has no noticeable lag so you can time your shots. The continuous burst mode is excellent. And best of all, unlike the X100, the camera continues to operate even when it is saving images! So, unlike the X100, you can easily use the RX1 to get excellent pictures of both static and dynamic scenes. Bottom line - I think performance problems render the X100 nearly unusable while the RX1 is entirely useable despite its ergonomic flaws.
Do not get this camera for it's video. The specs are impressive (1080p60 at 28Mbps for action or 1080p24 at 24Mbps for cinema) but the measured resolution is clearly less than my Nikon D4, my hacked Panasonic GH1, and my Panasonic TM700 camcorder. The 1080p24 footage from the GH1 only measures 630 lines, and I'd be surprised if the RX1 video exceeds 480 lines of measured resolution (ie., standard definition). The footage is prone to moire, so stay away from patterns. You can use the RX1 movies for close ups of people talking but for anything else you would be better served by a camcorder.
The RX1 is expensive and I don't think it is a good value. For the same cost, you can likely get as good pictures with the Nikon D600 (same sensor) and the outstanding new Sigma A 35mm f1.4 lens. You'd get more flexibility with the Nikon D600 because you can change lenses for different situations but the RX1 is significantly more compact and nearly silent in operation due to its leaf shutter. The RX1 is smaller and lighter than the Sigma 35mm f1.4 lens alone! So if you already have a full-frame camera, then the RX1 has something to offer. Otherwise, I'd recommend you get a full-frame DSLR first.
Bottom line: the Sony RX1 is small and quiet and ideally suited as a travel camera. It can take outstanding pictures. I'm keeping mine.
Update: I've had my RX1 for four months now and wanted to pass on some advice to other RX1 owners. The RX1 lens cap is heavy and does not attach firmly to the camera. Previous to owning the RX1, I'd never lost a lens cap in my life,
Скроменый эксперт
08.12.2012
6/10
Оценка пользователя
Плохо
I ordered this camera on October 2 with high hopes given its full frame sensor, quality Zeiss 35mm lens and the favorable reviews (including one extremely glowing review). The camera arrived yesterday, December 7, and this morning I spent over three hours in a photo shoot, comparing it to my other cameras. Based on my comparison, I am rather disappointed and will probably return the camera. Here's why --
I have been an avid photographer for many years and shoot semi-professionally. My workflow is based entirely on the Adobe Creative Suite of products including Photoshop CS 6 and Lightroom 4.2. I use two large high-resolution professional monitors which allow me to view my images with great detail and in the correct color gamut. As a travel photographer my primary focus is on landscapes, buildings and other static objects. I always shoot in RAW format and rarely look at JPEGs until the final deliverable (in the case of an eBook). This review reflects those biases and accordingly my perspective on this camera may be very different from yours.
Currently I use a Nikon D800, Leica M9 and a Sony RX100. I had a Leica X2 that I sold in anticipation of receiving this camera believing that, with its full frame sensor, the RX1 would generate better images than the X2. I often find the D800 to be too large and bulky to carry, and I don't use it nearly as much as I thought I would. I love the M9 but have become spoiled by auto focus. With its full frame sensor and Zeiss lens I thought this camera might be a fine compromise -- after all, apparently Sony is targeting professionals who need a second, easy-to-carry camera with the RX1.
With the significant improvements in image quality that have occurred in the past few years, I now test every camera that I receive; I've found that not every camera or lens lives up to its reviews, and price is not always an accurate guide to image quality (although frequently it is). My tests are not scientific but they work for me. I first understand how the new camera works and adjust the settings for my workflow and needs. Then I set up a sturdy tripod on my deck and photograph the wooded area immediately in back of my house. There is a lot of detail in this space including hardwood trees, a wetland and prairie grasses. I always use the self timer and take several pictures of the same exact scene using all of my cameras so that I can compare them side by side. I did that this morning and actually repeated the test two more times to ensure that I was not drawing false conclusions. One caveat that could be important is that, at present, Adobe Lightroom does not yet support the RAW format used in the Sony RX-1 camera (although I'm sure they will shortly), so what I did was to use the RAW software supplied by Sony to create high-resolution TIFF files which I then imported into Lightroom along with the other shots.
Based on my purely unscientific test, the RX100 -- surprisingly -- appears to generate results almost as good as the RX1. Yet the RX100 is considerably smaller and lighter, fits into my pocket comfortably and comes with a zoom lens. Not to mention over $2,000 less expensive.
To be sure, the images produced by the RX1 are plenty sharp and crisp. In my opinion, however, they do not compare with those from the 24-70 mm AF-S Nikkor lens I use on my D800, and there is simply no comparison (at least in my opinion) between the results from the RX1 and the [far more expensive] 35mm Summilux-ASPH lens on my M9 (which interestingly shows some colors in the foliage that do not appear in the Nikon or Sony images).
Most disconcerting, and the primary reason I will likely return this camera, is the white chromatic fringing (or blooming?) that appeared in the images I took this morning. When using Lightroom to zoom in on tree branches, which this time of year are barren of leaves, the images from the RX1 under high magnification show a distinct white outline appearing around the branches. This outline, which does not appear in the shots I took with my other cameras, seems to have resulted from shooting upward into the morning sky. It is not apparent per se under normal viewing circumstances, only under high magnification, but is definitely there.
Although not a reason to return the RX1, I am also disappointed that it was not supplied with a wrist strap (which comes standard with the RX100) or an AC battery charger (which Sony does not supply with either camera). I wish I had not sold my Leica X2 in anticipation of receiving this camera. The RX1 makes me appreciate the RX100 even more -- for me the RX100 is the ideal pocketable camera. I also wonder if one of the Panasonic or Olympus micro 4/3 cameras with an interchangeable "pancake" lens would be a better choice than the RX1, at a considerably lower price.
I have been an avid photographer for many years and shoot semi-professionally. My workflow is based entirely on the Adobe Creative Suite of products including Photoshop CS 6 and Lightroom 4.2. I use two large high-resolution professional monitors which allow me to view my images with great detail and in the correct color gamut. As a travel photographer my primary focus is on landscapes, buildings and other static objects. I always shoot in RAW format and rarely look at JPEGs until the final deliverable (in the case of an eBook). This review reflects those biases and accordingly my perspective on this camera may be very different from yours.
Currently I use a Nikon D800, Leica M9 and a Sony RX100. I had a Leica X2 that I sold in anticipation of receiving this camera believing that, with its full frame sensor, the RX1 would generate better images than the X2. I often find the D800 to be too large and bulky to carry, and I don't use it nearly as much as I thought I would. I love the M9 but have become spoiled by auto focus. With its full frame sensor and Zeiss lens I thought this camera might be a fine compromise -- after all, apparently Sony is targeting professionals who need a second, easy-to-carry camera with the RX1.
With the significant improvements in image quality that have occurred in the past few years, I now test every camera that I receive; I've found that not every camera or lens lives up to its reviews, and price is not always an accurate guide to image quality (although frequently it is). My tests are not scientific but they work for me. I first understand how the new camera works and adjust the settings for my workflow and needs. Then I set up a sturdy tripod on my deck and photograph the wooded area immediately in back of my house. There is a lot of detail in this space including hardwood trees, a wetland and prairie grasses. I always use the self timer and take several pictures of the same exact scene using all of my cameras so that I can compare them side by side. I did that this morning and actually repeated the test two more times to ensure that I was not drawing false conclusions. One caveat that could be important is that, at present, Adobe Lightroom does not yet support the RAW format used in the Sony RX-1 camera (although I'm sure they will shortly), so what I did was to use the RAW software supplied by Sony to create high-resolution TIFF files which I then imported into Lightroom along with the other shots.
Based on my purely unscientific test, the RX100 -- surprisingly -- appears to generate results almost as good as the RX1. Yet the RX100 is considerably smaller and lighter, fits into my pocket comfortably and comes with a zoom lens. Not to mention over $2,000 less expensive.
To be sure, the images produced by the RX1 are plenty sharp and crisp. In my opinion, however, they do not compare with those from the 24-70 mm AF-S Nikkor lens I use on my D800, and there is simply no comparison (at least in my opinion) between the results from the RX1 and the [far more expensive] 35mm Summilux-ASPH lens on my M9 (which interestingly shows some colors in the foliage that do not appear in the Nikon or Sony images).
Most disconcerting, and the primary reason I will likely return this camera, is the white chromatic fringing (or blooming?) that appeared in the images I took this morning. When using Lightroom to zoom in on tree branches, which this time of year are barren of leaves, the images from the RX1 under high magnification show a distinct white outline appearing around the branches. This outline, which does not appear in the shots I took with my other cameras, seems to have resulted from shooting upward into the morning sky. It is not apparent per se under normal viewing circumstances, only under high magnification, but is definitely there.
Although not a reason to return the RX1, I am also disappointed that it was not supplied with a wrist strap (which comes standard with the RX100) or an AC battery charger (which Sony does not supply with either camera). I wish I had not sold my Leica X2 in anticipation of receiving this camera. The RX1 makes me appreciate the RX100 even more -- for me the RX100 is the ideal pocketable camera. I also wonder if one of the Panasonic or Olympus micro 4/3 cameras with an interchangeable "pancake" lens would be a better choice than the RX1, at a considerably lower price.
Показаны отзывы 1-24 из 468.
Лучшие цены сегодня на Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R
График изменения цены Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R
Обзоры и руководства на Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R
Характеристи Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R
Информация о характеристиках носит справочный характер.
Перед покупкой уточняйте характеристики и комплектацию товара у продавца
