Mildly interested photography amateur.Grew up with a Canon AE1.Now ponders how to be smart in the digital world.
cgarrard: Is it just me or is the grip sorely needing to be removed from both the xpro and the xe1? It looks superfluous and glued on to me, and unnecessary. It ruins the look of both cameras a little bit. I prefer the clean classic lines without the grip personally. I just want to pry it off with a screwdriver or something every time I see it and wipe off any excess sticky tab ... or something.
Carl, yes a textured material goes a long way to get a good hold on a camera.Still, IMO both smaller and bigger cameras benefit from as substantial a grip that is practically possible to design into a camera. Ricoh shows how to do it on small cameras. Sony shows how to do it with medium sized cameras.If you think that it is enough that the body is fat and chunky, then K-03 must be just right for you ;)
AllOtherNamesTaken: No phase detect AF, basically limits usage to static subjects....next please! Great camera otherwise. Nikon has had very good PDAF in their mirrorless for a year, and the new Sony NEX has it. Even the Canon EOS-M has it, albeit a very poor version. No reason why Fuji couldn't have incorporated it somehow.
So by that you disqualify all current Samsung, Ricoh, Olympus, Panasonic, Leica M and X, as well as all Fujifilm cameras.Yes, must be easy to make since even the giant Canon cant get it to work. Can se no reason at all. No sir, none at all.
Edmond Leung: The camera size is too big.Looks nothing special when compared with NEX7.Good but not outstanding.
X-E1's body is the size of X100 sans the lens. Not big at all.
Apart from that, X-E1s controls are fundamentally different to NEX7s controls. Dedicated vs. modal. Both are good, but they are different.
I would like to see the 35mm F1.4 as the "kit lens". Having to buy it separately at 600 USD is a bit steep for my pocket, even if is worth the price for what you get.X-E1 + 35mm F1.4 for say 1400 would be a killer combination.Think about that it has to compete against NEX6 and the announced 35mm F1.8 OSS lens.
PicOne: Does DPR have any Left-eyed shooters (like me) and perhaps comment on how well the EVF works with its current placement on the camera's back? Is the VF border removable and/or replaceable (if 3rd party vendor sells) with eg. another brand VF cup?
I would really like to have big classical rubber eye cup. I wouldnt mind if it even covers the LCD partially. Not being able to add a bigger eye cup is a disappointment. Especially on a retro classical styled camera like this one.
xlynx9: "In return its rear screen is slightly downgraded in terms of both size and resolution, to a still-respectable 2.8" 460k dot LCD - according to Fujifilm this is necessary to keep the camera's size down."
DPR, you are being way too soft on them.We have tiny cameras with bigger and MUCH higher res screens. 460k in late 2012 is pathetic, not respectable.
+1What whyamiherev said.
AnuragP: Here's another idea to reduce cost and size further. Remove the LCD. The eye-on-EVF method provides for more stability and is a more immersive experience. Yes, the flexibility to shoot from close to the ground or the camera held above the head is lost, but not much else. Many of us use the LCD just for chimping anyway. Removing it will also allow for a more discreet shooting experience. With high quality EVFs now available, why even bother with an LCD?
Btw, imaging resource has a very nice preview too.
rohmanueb, is there any EVF-enabled camera that does NOT allow you to review the images by the EVF ?
I would prefer MORE grip, rather than less.Would have liked that there was a more substantial grip, and with the trigger button integrated into the top of the grip, like Nex. Dont want to buy the addon grip.
Aestetically I can see what you mean. But to me function tops looks.
Craig Atkinson: have taken a few shots and compared them. I'm not going to post them here, they're just tests for me really, but in general:Upto 1600iso I prefer the GRD4 images, raw and jpeg. The sony Jpegs are too heavy on the red - over saturated. Like Canon - punchy but not real.Over 1600 is where the camera shines but I don't know if that's much of an argument any more.Back-lit / sun behind the subject / lens flare is all horrible with the Sony. The Ricoh manages it much better - not perfect, obviously, just bad with the sony. That's based on f4 / 400dpi in bright sun, so not an ideal setting but a test, like I said.
Indoors, kids being kids are really nice shots a little like the canon 50mm 1.8, just not as nice bokeh, but still very 'nice' if that's your thing.
Do you use auto WB.If you adjust WB manually, does it improve the colors as you see it ?
Craig Atkinson: charged. Playing with it now. First thoughts, very 'electronic' like the OMD. Very fast, very good. Not very organic feeling like the X100 or Ricohs. NO WAY of turning the screen off, big shame. DMF mode stops the annoying continuous focussing but stops the control ring being used for A.No charger - a bit of a downside. Actually, pretty annoying. It's too small, an extra inch wide and a grip [grd4 style] would really make this a beast. Shoot button and zoom lever are v plasticy and wobbly. Image quality is fantastic. Compared to X100 there is little / no difference unless peeping, and even then not so much. I love what this camera does but I don't like the camera, if that makes sense?
I have an S95, and it really is pocketable (shirt or jacket, not jeans). The idea is that you have the camera (almost) always, even when you dont plan on taking any pictures. However great I find the S95, I can see its limitations in the IQ department. RX100 basically being a much better S95 excites me.
breivogel: The idea of a $600 camera in your jeans pocket is pretty dumb - unless you have too much money. The life span under such conditions is probably pretty low (be sure to get an extended warranty covering accidental damage!) I always use a case, even for small cameras.
They compromised so much usability to get a small footprint is rather disappointing. A LX7 with a similar sensor would be a killer.
Those who think that no viewfinder is no big deal, don't shoot outdoors in bright sunlight. The lack of decent macro, crippled (28mm vs 24mm) wide angle, no provision for filters (e.g. polarizers), limits this for serious outdoor photographers. The loose control wheel sounds like a real bother. Cab you can really operate this camera with gloves on.
Maybe the target market is DINKs taking snaps of their friends in dark restaurants.
Hopefully a more usable version will follow.
Jeans pocket no.Shirt pocket yes.Jacket inner or outer pocket yes.
Lack of filter thread is because it has an integral lens cover. Do you want a lens cover that you have to remove and put back on every time ? I dont. .
"an extra inch wide and a grip [grd4 style] would really make this a beast."Agreed. And it wouldnt make it much less pocketable.
Justin Francis: An Olympus Pen with a 14mm pancake lens and 45mm 1.8 walks all over this cam. The slow tele on the RX kills it. It's not that small as well. Don't understand the hoo-haa.
"Not that small" ??It is the size as a Canon S100.When you turn the power off, how does your Pen camera plus two lenses compare against RX100.
Craig Atkinson: why do people get so excited? It's a camera, a good one, not a perfect one. I think a percentage rating is fine as long as it's read in context. I see it as being relevant today. Of course in six months it wont be the same, better cameras of the same type will be out. Today though the RX100 is best / second best [ricoh grd4] in its class. It might be the only camera of it's class, seems so.
Dpreview could develop two sliding scale systems. One which is the rating of the camera at the time of release and another which slides with time, so most likely will slide down as new tech is developed and released. 78% I think is fair. It's too small, it has no snap function or way of measuring distance. It has no real grip. It has no lens thread...A great camera but far from perfect. As far as the GRD4, they are both great cameras.
"I think a percentage rating is fine as long as it's read in context."The problem is that a "gold award" or "no gold award" is not read in context. The double system and sliding rating is way too complicated. It will confuse more than enlighten.
The way Dxomark gives points is the way to go. You can easily compare dissimilar cameras, even with many years between them. And it is easy to understand.
The rating system that tries to put cameras into "classes" is broken.There are many problems with having a percantage rating that can go to max 100%. Will there be an ultimate camera that will get 100% ? If that camera arrives someday, and another camera that is a little bit better comes, then what ?The tresholds that gives cameras bronze, silver and gold awards are truly idiotic. It puts far too much attention to if a camera gets gold or not.
If we accept DPRs way of rating in classes, then I think DPR made a mistake here by not acknowledging that RX100 is a landmark camera in the class of really pocketable enthusiast cameras.
A suggestion to DPR: Ditch the 0-100% rating system. If you must give ratings by a value, then adopt a reference camera that gets 100 points, and new reviewed cameras gets points higher than 100 if it they are better than the reference.It would also be good if viewers could generate their own ratings based on their personal preferences.
JesperMP: Didnt notice until now that the MSRP is 280 USD.
Some of the recent "affordable" super-zooms have ditched the EVF. Which is bad since a super-zoom really need an EVF.Also the lens being F3.1-F5.9 instead of the typical F3.5-F6.3 is a small step in the right direction.1080p@30 fps is allright if not exceptional.Tilting 460k LCD is not bad at all.Has an analog dial.And does the ring around the lens control focus or zoom ?
All in all, the price a quite reasonable for what you get.
Just for a sanity check the Pana Fz200 w. constant F2.8 aperture costs 600 USD at Amazon.
Didnt notice until now that the MSRP is 280 USD.
Cy Cheze: The good: 22mm equiv. wide angle, AA cells (no addiction to proprietary models)
Less good: f/3.1 aperture, mono mic, no time lapse (which Pentax DSLRs all have), MJPEG only video (must be a mistake).
It has an EVF, which uses space, but is probably not very usable in practice, since the limited resolution and small image make it hard to see details or control focus. I'd also fear that the mic pics up AF and zoom sound.
All the ultrazooms can benefit from an EVF.Due to the long reach of the zoom, you need all the stabilising you can get.Hence large grip for a firm hold, and OIS, and an EVF that aids keeping the camera still when you use your head as the "third arm".
Low res EVF simply comes with the teritory as a low price point is an important parameter in this segment.
X-5 ?? Forgive me for thinking it was a replacement for K-5.
I think that naming it X-5 is a stab at all the "X"-named cameras from the other camera brands.
Nothing wrong with this camera per se. It is not for me, but for everyone in the market for an ultra-zoom with a viewfinder, why not ?
MarkInSF: Twice as many dials and buttons as your average mirrorless model. In a sort-of compact. Wow! Did Nikon market research tell them people didn't like the Nikon 1 oversimplified controls? Hope so. Hard to explain six dials and a similar number of buttons any other way.
OK, this won't have the IQ of the RX100 and isn't as tiny. It's not an enthusiast's dream camera. But for almost anyone else this would be just great, especially for travel, where that longish, fastish zoom would be very nice. A sixty-something friend who recently bought a G12 for its sturdy feel and familiar controls would have loved this. I could have recommended it to my globe-trotting dad with confidence. Nikon just needs to market this correctly and I think they'll do very well.
It is the average mirrorless that has too few direct controls. It is not the P7700 that has too many.