bigdaddave: I cannot believe the 'Cons' section doesn't mention the elephant in the room - IT ONLY HAS ONE FOCAL LENGTH
In the days when even a compact camera the size of a pack of cigs has a reasonable zoom this 1950's throwback might appeal to the well-heeled but as an actual tool it's far far too limited
But DP love Fuji so they've overlooked the obvious again
Personally I think it depends on the type of photography, I can see where a quality zoom has it's place, however for street,landscape,studio work etc I think prime is the the first choice, more control, wider F-Stops, far lighter the only compromise is the lack of flexibility! But agree with your points on the X100T
Maybe because it is designed as a fixed lens prime, I think you will find most serious photographers far prefer a prime over a zoom due the lens quality and results! I think the only real minus point is probably the lack of an articulating screen, but even that is personal preference. I have an RX1R so wouldn't be interested in the X100T but Fuji are currently doing a great job with both their camera's and lenses.
JustinL01: I see we are still getting a load of comment from people that haven't tried the RX1 out and yet feel they know enough to dismiss and criticise it, once again the AF is not slow it is fine and accurate in normal usage.
The quality of the pictures rival the FF DSLR's such as the Nikon 800/800E etc etc without the bulk. As for the lens not resolving the same detail as a C3 and the serious flaw of vignetting easy to correct.
Read the reviews and what the professional photographers who are actually using the RX1 seem to be disagreeing with the internet reviewers, funny that!
Really Dedejr is that the best you could do, please point out where I am being "fanboyism" or is it yet just another throw away comment with someone who has nothing else better to do!
iaredatsun: Sony have tried, but that list of cons says a lot. An example of a company who have pressed all the right (consumer-led) designer-engineer buttons but haven't got their priorities quite right.
Aside from that, I've used it's smaller sister camera and Sony never feel like they quite understand how to make a camera that is good to use. I can only hope this one does better in that sense.
I'm waiting for that company who know how to make great cameras to step up before I buy an interchangeable compact.
Really so you are basing your statement on various "reviews" and it's sister camera the RX100. The RX100 has nothing in common with the RX1 so your comparison is baseless. As for the designers being consumer led, and Sony camera's not being good to use, very subjective and also for both the RX1 and RX100 totally incorrect.
1) Sorry most people will understand what "DSLR quality" means, I could say Full Frame quality for the RX1 but unlike you I don't want to play semantics.2) You are seriously misguided and inexperienced if thats all you think you are able to do with a 35mm - and No I am talking about professional people who far more than taking a few snaps of people! Obviously you have undertaken no proper research of your own and never used an RX1! 4) Once again you are showing your lack of experience and understanding! 5) I point to my answer in 4.
I understand you wouldn't buy a fixed lens camera, and unlike you I have no reason to either argue against your own put down a camera because it has a fixed lens!
Read Sony's transcripts and watch the videos where they discussed the challenges of putting together the RX1.
Princess Leia: No need to criticize an awesome camera according to many reviews. Just be honest and say "I cannot afford it"....
Sorry with this type of response all you are achieving is showing everyone your ignorance, well done!
Once again you are not seeing the point, it is DSLR QUALITY without the bulk, it is a fixed lens, whats the issue with that, if you don't want to shoot with a fixed lens don't buy it, however it doesn't lessen the quality of the camera! Just go and look at the quality of the pictures that the bloggers/professional photographers are achieving, the 35mm fov is a superb walk around and very versatile. The only stumbling block will be the person behind the lens!
IT is pointless marking this camera down as a fixed lens as that is what it has been designed to be and if you look at the characteristics of the lens and how close it is in relation to the sensor it couldn't be anything else but a fixed lens! Anyway I love it, I'll let the naysayers continue to moan and the rest to enjoy such a remarkable achievement. In my eyes this camera is destined to become a classic.
I see we are still getting a load of comment from people that haven't tried the RX1 out and yet feel they know enough to dismiss and criticise it, once again the AF is not slow it is fine and accurate in normal usage.
muju79: I sold my x100 and got a RX1 two days ago, but tomorrow I am going to bring this metal thing back to the shop and FAST.The WB capability of this camera is giving completely unreliable results compared to the x100. Sometimes it gets it right, but most of the times the color rendition is very poor, again compared to the x100.
Moreover, in some light conditions there is a nasty green-magenta shift which has been widely documented elsewhere. This not a "defective copy issue" as you can see the same bad color cast in many pictures produced by other RX1 so I am going to say it loud:
BEWARE IF YOU ARE CONSIDERING TO BUY THE RX1 !!!
Life is short, I'm not going to spend hours with LR to fix the WB/color cast issues of the RX1.
That said, quality build is excellent, lens is superb, whatever, who cares...it just makes me feel worse about the fact that I cannot keep it.
Sorry a bit of negative propaganda and scaremongering going on. I am not experiencing any of the issues you are. The WB has gven me NO issues at all, go on to the bloggers sites, photographers sites and for some reason no one is reporting issues with WB or this nasty green-magenta shift! Strange!
HowaboutRAW: I just handled a Sony RX1 again this afternoon. And I was reminded of a big annoyance: To mount a filter, say simply to protect the lens, one needs to purchase 180usd lens shade/filter mount.
Not cool, how like Leica, and well the RX100 which doesn't have an official filter mounting system. (Yes, I know there's an after market one that can be glued in place.)
HowaboutRAW are you really that stupid, there is one model for all regions. As I stated I am using a 49mm standard filter on the RX100, what don't you understand about that!
Sorry I think you have got the incorrect facts from somewhere any normal 49mm filter will fit I am using the b&w nano uv filter works perfectly.
jazzage: More comments form people who have never used the RX1 but hate it. Who says AF sucks? The consensus among those of us who actually own the thing is that is not as fast as a DLSR but to say it "sucks"? No way. I personally have had no issues with AF.
To compare the IQ with the OM-D is ludicrous. Please, do any of you naysayers actually own the RX1 or have had a chance to use the thing for any length if time? No, 10 minutes in a store doesn't count.
As far as the DPreview review, it did get gold, but in any case the reviews at most websites, DPreview included, need to be taken with a grain of salt. Real world use is what counts.
Actually you can take plenty of pictures of your children moving and fast moving are totally different. As for the 35mm fov for buildings sorry you have a pair of legs, I was in London on Wednesday taking shots, didn't find 35mm restrictive at all! Sorry you seem so be trying to come up with negatives that ARE just negatives to you, as my RX1 certainly hasn't stopped me taking pictures of either my children or buildings, but then what do I know as I actually own the camera and use it!
No Stevens37y you cannot find a much better camera, it has a CZ lens and state of the art full frame sensor, the camera is obviously not going to be used for fast moving sports/kids animals etc but that is just one small facet of photography. At the end of the day the image quality is up there with the best, the components are up there with the best, the lens is comparable to Leica. At the end of the day it is a camera aimed at a particular segment of the market, for that segment it is wonderful. Every camera has compromises, it's a personal opinion if you can live with them or not.
To say it's rubbish, slow AF, no integral VF etc, too expensive etc etc is to totally miss the point.
straylightrun: Haha, I love it how everyone who comments bashes it because they don't have enough money and can't afford one! Guys, just stick to your big bulky DSLRs :)
Guess what it isn't showy it actually looks very stealthy unless you know what you are looking for, so infact it's rather more inconspicuous than you make out! If you know about photography what does a excellent CZ lens and a FF sensor actually cost, I think you will find they are rather expensive! Spending £10000 on a rolex might be excessive and showy, or maybe 100,000 on a Ferarri I could go on, but spending £2600 on a game changer for a compact FF camera isn't however you dress it up!
IT's amazing what legs and cropping will do to help just 1 focus length! It is infact quite liberating just having an excellent prime on your camera you tend to concentrate on the shot more than the equipment.
JustinL01: Has anyone actually picked up and used the camera before slating it! The shortcomings are nothing compared to the quality that you can achieve. There is no point comparing it to the current nex range, Fuji or Olympus ranges as they can't touch either the sensor or lens.
This is not a cheap camera, it has a best in class FF sensor and a stunning CZ lens that has been designed to work together. The engineering is supreme and the build quality excellent. Just go and have a look what the professional photographers that are using it are saying, look at the results they speak for themselves. Read the interviews with Sony to understand why there is no viewfinder and how the camera was put together it might open some eyes. I'll let the naysayers enjoy slating the camera where I will be out enjoying taking shots with mine.
Vigness I responded to your reply regarding your comments on a lack of VF and you are echoing what I have said regarding actually using the camera as most people seem to be basing everything on reviews. I just suggested to look for the photographers who are actually using the camera not the reviewers, there are now plenty about!
Vigness there are plenty of samples around now have a quick search.
Vigness that is the most pointless reply I have read. The system is modular, if you want to add a viewfinder you can, you have a choice, you are not having to redesign the camera body to do so! Also there are benefits of a modular design such as it being both tilt able and upgradeable. If you have do have a integral vf don't buy the camera, simple really! Gets over the marketing bs doesn't t!
Croc of sh! really! Have you actually used the camera or basing it on reviews? Firstly you can put on a viewfinder if you actually read what I said? Secondly this is not an interchangeable camera system it is a fixed lens so why complain. It just happens to be on of the best 35mm lenses you can get hold of and as anyone knows F2 on this type of lens is more than fast enough! The IQ is far better than the em-5's of this world and yes I have used one and have an nex 6. As I said look at the results they speak for themselves.The camera is for a limited market as not everyone can afford it but in use it is superb and yes of course you have to make comprises as you do with every camera you buy!
_Federico_: Before starting to judge a camera you should use it.Intensely.This little gem is one of the most pleasant camera to use.And that Zeiss lens is a no match, except the best Leica.Maybe.
Totally agree until you have used it you have no idea how good it actually is and how it feels!