New sony FF mirrorless ?

Started Sep 9, 2012 | Discussions thread
FeedMe
Senior MemberPosts: 2,474
Like?
Re: New sony FF mirrorless ?
In reply to T3, Sep 14, 2012

Why do you insist on trying to get me to adhere to your views?

All of your posting are about ridiculing my opinions and trying to substitute your own.

It's interesting that you feel the need to defend this camera so much anyway.. I wonder, why?

(actually, no I don't - your whole attitude of "only this viewpoint and opinion is the valid one" smacks of elitism, so I don't really care why you insist on ridiculing me or my opinions).

Your repeated use of the 'little old man' thing shows that..

I don't like the look of this camera and I don't like it's usage styling. All of your ridiculing won't change that opinion.

For some reason you feel the need to make anyone else reading my opinion feel that it's worthless through your ridicule - again, this means nothing to me, I don't care if anyone else agrees with me or not (and I see, already, that some do!).

By the same token, I (unlike you) don't feel upset or threatened if people love this camera. There will be people who love it and people who don't, I'm one of the latter.. It's just a bleeding camera after all!

-- hide signature --

Only a sad fool invests their self-worth in a camera! You know who you are...

T3 wrote:

FeedMe wrote:

Alex Mazur wrote:

I like Bugatti analogy. But... 1000+ HP without being able to tow my boat or carry lots of groceries... What a waste...

Exactly - your comment is also a good analogy.

The Bugatti is a superb car, a marvel of technology, and it's also an elitist's plaything, a million pound CarPeen toy.

I feel the same about this camera; what was it, $3000? For THAT??

Back in the film days...

Contax T3 with fixed Carl Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 lens: $700
Canon √Član 7 (EOS 30) SLR: $400
The premium fixed compact was 1.75x more expensive than the SLR.

Today...

Sony RX1 with fixed Carl Zeiss 35mm f/2 lens: $2800
Sony RX1 with optional EVF: $3100
Canon 5D MKII: $2000
The premium fixed compact is 1.7x more expensive than the DSLR.

So the proportional price increase is basically the same as in the film era.

Plus, comparing any RX1 to a Bugatti is plain ridiculous. A more appropriate comparison is a premium two seat sport coupe like an Audi TT to an SUV or minivan. Or a Porsche Boxster to an SUV or minivan. Yeah, you can pay less and get more practicality from buying an SUV or minivan...but not everyone wants to drive something that's "practical." So an RX1 is much akin to a $40K sport coupe relative to a more "practical" like a Honda Odyssey. To compare an RX1 to a Bugatti is just plain idiotic. Save that comparison for something like a Leica M9 ($6500) plus Summicron-M 35mm f/2 ($3200), which adds up to $9700. A full featured camera like the RX1, with Carl Zeiss 35mm f/2 lens, optical image stabilization, FF, video, built-in flash, etc, is actually a fair value, for less than the price of a Summicron-M 35mm f/2 alone.

Keep angrily shaking your cane at the world, FeedMe! LOL.

--
Only a sad fool invests their self-worth in a camera! You know who you are...

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