RidgeRunner22: One issue I see is the problem of handheld 42mp shoots. Without any form of IS I think this was meant for the tripod.
Photato, you have been posted idiotic comments all day. Are you retarded or something? Photographers have been taking photos without tripods for decades. Are you telling us you can't take sharp photos without a tripod?
Are you speaking for experience or just speculating? There is absolutely no reason why you can't take sharp images with if you are using faster shutter speeds.
shoevarek: If that is how 4K video looks like then I do not understand what is the fuss about.
You need a a very large 4K TV and sit close to see a difference. Seriously, it's just a hype. It's not the same difference as there was between SD and HD (which was real visible difference)
There is one real plus to 4K though. That is cropping ability during editing.
Zakzoezie: I try to figure who will buy this toy. If photography is your hobby or profession you invest in a long term camera that gives you the flexibility to click-on any lens that you need for certain purposes, even if you start with 1 lens you have the flexibility to extend lenses later. In case you want a compact camera just to take decent family pictures, you expect it to be priced somewhere between $50 and $300 because other compacts are priced like that and because it's simply not worth more. And in case its a really high quality compact, you might even go to around $500 max. Another possibility is that you are a rich hipster that likes to show off anytime anywhere to friends & family you can also do photography with a nice & sexy looking compact camera. Well in that case there are very interesting brands on the market to do that, but believe me, it is not going to be this Sony. I mean, can you imagine your friends and family look at you and say: "OMG, pffff, he's holding a Sony ..."
How do you know how a rich hipster thinks? And this camera isn't just for rich hipsters. A lot of professional videographers who use cameras like FS7 will buy this too.
Want to bet? Philip Bloom and Andrew Reid both have RX1 and will buy RX1RII .. and several thousand other videographers like that.
"serious brands with the right reputation"
LOL @ serious brand. Sony builds cameras that are used in Holywood. F55 was used to broadcast FIFA world cup. There is nothing more serious than that.
By the way, guys, Zakzoezie, is a obviously a sock puppet account created only to troll Sony cameras. Poor guy is jealous.
Why don't you post with your regular ID? Ashamed?
You don't need tripod if you keep shutter speed higher than 1/35. which should be no problem with this sensor given ISO performance.
Beckler8: What's the reason again for this NOT having interchangeable lenses?
abortaborm, she is canon fangirl and usually rants incoherently like that. She is complaining about shutter shock on Sony cameras despite the fact that EFCS eliminated that issue . She just put that part in parenthesis.
Zvonimir Tosic: As some suggested, I shall too; with this insane resolution, they could have gone wider, 28mm or 24mm lens. And for this relatively small camera with nothing to grab on, how increased number of pixels will affect image quality? This camera will register even smallest hand or camera shake — is the lens stabilised?
Increase in pixels improve image quality. Given it's FF, pixel density isn't that different than APSC Ricoh GR. No, there is no IS on either camera
JeanPierre Thibaudeau: 220 shots per battery charge for a $3,299 camera? My, my! I hope they give a bunch of spare ones with it. My $350 Fuji F30 produces 590 shots per charge. No 4k video either. Nope, you can't have it all. Even if you pay big bucks.
"The battery life is substantially lower than other EVF cameras. "
Most canon EVF cameras, even the new G5X, has similar battery life despite the fact that RX1R2 has much larger sensor.
Price is high compared to what? No one else makes FF fixed lens cameras, except Leica is more expensive.
JeanPierre, why are you comparing CIPA rating vs reported to have "400 shots per charge". I am pretty sure you can shoot well over 500 with RX1 depending on the shooting style. What's the CIPA rating for Leica Q?
"Sony may be king of sensor technology but they should definitely invest in some research for battery performance."
Sony cameras actually have better battery performance with similar size/sensor Canon/Nikon cameras. Compare for example RX100 series with Canon variants with the same sensor body style cameras
It's not one of the most expensive. To claim that this is one of the most expensive cameras, you have to compare it with other FF cameras with built in lens. Oh let me guess, there are no such cameras except Leica and Sony.
The original RXRI was close to $3000 with only 24 MP sensor back in 2013. Leica Q is more expensive with even less battery life.
Don't tell me your tiny sensor Fuji is a competitor to RXRII
It's expensive compared to what?
Richard Murdey, a fundamental flaw according to who? It's not a DSLR. The battery live is about average for all EVF cameras. The price is not high. It's significantly cheaper than FF camera like D810 with 35mm F2.0 lens. The difference is that RX1 is much smaller with better sensor than D10
The camera price is related to the size of sensor. Larger sensor also means larger more expensive lens, in this case 35mm full frame F2.0 lens
"220 shots per battery charge for a $3,299 camera? "
Since when price and battery are related? It's a small camera with small battery but very large sensor and FF lens/glass and motor in it. Price and battery have no relationship. The camera size and battery does.
Why Toi: Cool! But why doesn't it have an E mount with interchangeable lenses? So close.
They can't shrank it the same size. E-mount has a flange distance. The builtin lens on RX1 is way deeper just few mm above the sensor.
The E-mount version is called A7RII
JS Burnie: If only Sony had put at least a moderate zoom on this, e.g. 35-70mm. Maybe RX1R III?
A very slow zoom vs F2 prime. You can always use your feet to zoom.
nandbytes, the OP of course wouldn't be expecting F2 zom,, but something like F4-F6.3
roustabout66: I would not feel very comfortable owning a Sony camera now. My understanding is that most of any profits generated were by sensors not cameras.
No, thanks, fanboy. I am not interested in Canon's subpar cameras. Shame on you fanboy.
You still haven't answered the question, fanboy. How many years will it take for Canon to match the performance of Sony's 12 MP sensor from 2007? Do you think they would do it by the end of this decade? That will make it 13 years. Shame on you fanboy.
Your ass is hurting bad now, obviously, when presented with the facts that Canon still hasn't matched the performance of 12 MP sensor from 2007. Shame on Canon. Do you need paper towel to wipe those tears?