RX1 not really that expensive

Started Sep 10, 2012 | Discussions thread
Masterbrew
Regular MemberPosts: 496
Like?
Re: RX1 not really that expensive
In reply to GuyMcKie, Sep 10, 2012

GuyMcKie wrote:

True.

But the camera is an electronic device that ever dies. Then you have an expensive and useless lens.

I agree, and I don't agree.

The Leica Digilux 2 has an awesome lens, but all the digital stuff is so outdated that it's nearly worthless now.

However, I'm not sure the people who would consider a camera like the RX1 have the same budget considerations as someone like me. When they ponder the RX1 purchasing decision, they compare the $2799 to other full frame bodies that will give similar quality.

Such full frame bodies are expensive. D800 body only costs $2999, 5D mk3 body only costs $3400, Leica M9 body only costs $6300.

Those bodies are gonna depreciate at the same rate as the RX1.

Then add in the fact that you get a $1500 value 35mm f2 Zeiss.

So if you have that kind of money to spend, and all you care about is getting the best darn possible image quality for the next 2-4 years, the RX1 looks like a pretty good deal.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow