Отзывы о Фотоаппарат Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R
468 отзывов пользователей o Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R
Пользовались
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R?
Поделитесь своим опытом и помогите другим сделать правильный выбор





Taken separately, if buying official Sony parts, this package is worth about $80 (2 batteries + charger)... so why spend $80 when when you can spend less than $20 for quality that is just as good? Recommended!





I had been using a Fuji x100s and xPro1 but was disappointed with some of the images. This camera takes much better pictures for me. A RRS grip and base plate improve the handling and sticky filters help with white balancing the flash.
I especially like the pictures that it takes of people, flowers and sunsets.
The Sony HVL-F20M External Flash works very well on the camera and the Sony HVL-F43M TTL Shoe Mount Flash works well with a cord for off camera flash.
It's a bit of a battery hog so it is a good idea to have spares.
Overall, I am very pleased with this camera and would highly recommend it to anyone that likes a 35mm focal length.


Amazon refunded me the purchased price and I ordered another one from a different seller




I took pictures of differently lit rooms, including a really dark room (think of a movie house) with no light, just dim ambient light, to test the focusing ability. Did quick comparisons against S NEX7 with 18-55mm kit lens, S NEX6 with 16-50mm kit lens, S RX100, FF XE1 with 18-55mm kit lens, and N D700 (full frame) with 24-75 mm, all set at f/5.6 at their widest angle, except for D700, which was set at 35mm.
In a well lit room, here's my observed order of focusing speed (fast to slowest): D700, (NEX6, NEX7, RX100, XE1 - all pretty much the same - no hunting and not far off from D700), and lastly RX1. Rx1 was the slowest of them, and hunts in brightly lit room - now sure why that is. It's little brother RX100 did not have issue.
In the darkest room I've tested, here is my observed order of focusing speed (fast to slowest): D700, NEX6, NEX7/RX100, RX1, and XE1. RX1 seemed to focus faster at dim situations (when AF light was lit) than brightly lit room, but still seems slower than RX100. XE1 was not able to focus most of the time in the darkest room, even though RX1 was able to focus with no or occasional hunting. RX100 had no hunting issue at all. Perhaps blue AF light that XE1 emits is the culprit.
Shots with X1 at 6400-25,000 ISO for the darkest room: Pictures were all too dark below 25,000. At 25000, it was very dim but objects at least were visible, but the IQ was pretty bad. Frankly, the room was too dark. In a dim-normally lit room, the pictures shot at ISO 6400-10,000 at f/5.6 IQ was quite good. IS0 6400 images perhaps are more like ISO 1600 images from NEX6/7 and ISO 2500 from XE1. In comparison to the same images shot with D700 at iso 6400 and up, my eyes tell me that RX1 wins hand down in image cleanliness and IQ. D700 is ranked No. 7 (DxOMark) in the low-light ISO category. Will RX1 topple No. 1 ranked N D3s? It should be at least on par with No. 2 ranked N D600.
I will update as I have more shooting time with RX1.
Bottom line, RX1 rocks in the ISO and IQ category.
Update 1: I've downgraded to 4 stars from 5 based on slow/inaccurate autofocus. In indoor shootings, autofocus misses about 1/5. Don't know why this camera focuses slower than and is significantly less inaccurate than its little brother RX100. I'm hoping that the next firmware will fix this problem. Upside - the images are incredible.

1.There is no viewfinder
2.You cannot change lenses
3.It is not exactly pocketable due to the size of the lens
4.You cannot tilt the flash like you can of Sony RX100
5.Lightroom 4 does not support the raw format of RX1R though it does of RX1, you need to pay extra 57 pounds to get version 5.
6.It is expensive
Now that this lack of features is out of the way, the image quality in one word is superb. The skin tones are wonderfully neutral and accurate.
Buttery bokeh, sharp, great contrast, lovely colours as you can see from the pictures that I have posted here.
It focuses fast enough, I never had any issues focussing, unless it was really dark; agreed it is never as fast as olympus micro 4/3.
It is light enough to carry everywhere inspite of being a full-frame. Recently on a trip to Paris, I wondered how I would have coped with a bigger full-frame camera when climbing the steps of Notre Dame.
I was glad I was carrying RX1R.
The pictures do require some bit of processing to make them look at their best. You will be rewarded if you do some basic processing.
I had Fuji X100 before and that comes nowhere close to this, bearing in mind the cost difference, full-frame, APS etc.
If money and angle of view is no issue, please get this. You won't be disappointed.
If you need more reach, you could always buy a cheap m 4/3 body and olympus 45mm or the upcoming panny 42.5 1.2 in addition to RX1R.
Any questions, do let me know.




I compared these no-brand batteries I just got yesterday.
I set my camera to run on time-lapse mode, continuously taking pictures until it runs out of battery.
Results:
Sony Original NP-BX1 : 3 hours and 12 minutes
No Brand #1 : 2 hours and 56 minutes
No Brand #2 : 2 hours and 49 minutes.
All batteries are charged to full before testing with the charger that came with the package.
I wouldn`t say that is all too bad, but I have to say claimed 1600mAh capacity of these no-brand batteries are totally false advertisement. The sony original battery has capacity of 1240mAh. You do the math. :)
I give only three stars because the capacity is not 1600mAh. As always these no-brand batteries will deteriorate much sooner than the original ones.
PLUS:
FYI, mine came with a nice box package with grey batteries in it. The charger is slightly different. But they look nice and I`m not complaining about that.

There are a few problems with it, but I can live with them. Battery life is ridiculously poor - I always have an extra battery with me, otherwise RX1 will let me down when I need it most. Battery indicator is misleading - it shows battery full until shortly before the battery dies. It's a slow camera (for example much slower than Panasonic GF1). It needs ~3 seconds to zoom into an image, and a few seconds to wake up - I'm always waiting for it.
However, when I see the quality of the pictures it takes (high ISO, sharpness, bokeh), I forget about the problems.
These summarize my experience during the few months that I'm shooting with it.
You can find tons of details and measurements on the web, but for the purpose of this review it suffices to say that I'm very happy with it, and that the fame that this camera got is well deserved.
Sony has really good engineers and willing to change the world, so I'd expect interesting news from them in the next few years.

