Blockmania: All this talk about being ground breaking. Didn't the Sigma DP cameras already achieve most of this already? Certainly the latest DP Merrill cameras produce incredible shots. Amazing how consistently Sigma is overlooked in these sorts of puff pieces.
People want convenience, which the Sigma cameras don't offer. Also, you can use this Sony at high ISOs which is not an option with Sigma.
offtheback: Barney-Save yourself a lot of time re arguments+next time issue a report on your favorite religion and why it is the only true religion.OY!
Thank you, Barney. Without question, the most thoughtful post here.
2005magnum: I am surprised that the Fujifilm X10 is not included in this group.
Fuji will replace older X10 sensors for free so it's not an issue with any X10 camera. On the other hand, if your main concern is pixel peeping for fine detail the X10 doesn't equal the RX100.
"Anyone unwilling to sacrifice image quality for convenience." That about covers it. Notihng wrong with this trade-off, so long as you're aware of it, and the same could be said of numerous pocket cameras, "super" zooms and wide angle zooms. Now that we have digital correction of barrel/pincushion distortion, they make lenses they wouldn't have in the days of film.
my username was already taken: Wow, my old D700 smokes this toy! Clearly, if you're moving up to full frame and have a limited investment in glass or if you're just starting out, buying a D600 over the 6D is the only smart thing to do.
Thank you for passing judgement on who is smart and who isn't. I must be both since I have a D700 and a 5D3.
JDThomas: I just saw the pricing for this lens. $1300?!? Not for a Tamron, no way. Drive this baby off the lot and it depreciates by 40%. I'll keep the Nikon thanks. VC is nice to have, but it's not a necessity especially with the way Nikons perform in low-light these days.
The Nikon 24-70 is a killer lens, with a better build and IQ, and you always know that you can resell your Nikon lens without losing too much.
I think it's a mistake to assume a non-OEM lens will be a poor performer. If the optical "task" is simple, like making a sharp macro lens, even Sigma can do it. Tamron lenses are frequently good and most Tokinas are outstanding. The only drawback I can see to this Tamron is resale value but it still might be worth it, to save money, upfront.
Great photo op. I just wish they would referain from "staging" things, like the chair or the telephone perfectly positioned next to the TV, as if these were natural occurances.
Richard Franiec: I'm saddened seeing so much negativity and hate posted in reply to the news regarding my new grip but on the other hand I'm not shocked.
The idea behind my accessories always concentrate on the voids left by original equipment manufacturers: be that poor handling characteristics or adding missing functions like implementing remote shutter release adapters.
Maybe my press releases published by DPReview (as well as other prominent photo sites) are not newsworthy for some but welcomed by others who look for the solutions that my accessories provide. My experience based on actual users feedback clearly shows that the balance is overwhelmingly positive.
Accusations about business relationship between myself and DPReview (as well as other photo related sites) are utterly baseless, tasteless and untrue.What I do provide is the news press release, that's all. It is up to the publisher of the news to decide if it is worthy publication or not.
Not even worth discussing. Keep up the good work, Richard and ignore the nabobs of negativity. Let them concentrate on being "pros" (as if taking a high quality image with current cameras requires years of study.)
It would be interesting to take a lens that's good but not great like the 24-85, 24-120 or 70-300 and see if things look better, worse or the same on a D600, D800 or even a D700.
Depending on the results, the same thing could also be done with a lens like the 14-24 or 24-70 to see if a really first class lens beneifts from 36mp, although I presume it does.
ForeignerOnEarth: Nikkor 24-85 is terrible lens, not for 24MPx. Nikkor 24-120/4 has big center-edge difference in sharpness too. Only heavy and expensive zoom 24-70/2.8 is suitable for this FX low-end body. Canon has the best 24-70/2.8 II now, amazing 24-70/4 IS and much better 24-105/4 than Nikkkor lenses. Nikon had better lenses, but last two years every new FX zoom lens is worse than Canon lenses. 70-200/2.8 II is worse than Canon too. Canon full frame lenses are amazing, the last amazing Nikkor FX zoom was 14-24/2.8. Why, Nikon????
The Nikon 24-85 isn't terrible but you're correct that the type of person who feels they need 24mp will be a lot happier with the 24-70. I have both and unfortunately, you get what you pay for and are willing to lug around.
NDT0001: After years of watching compact cameras being replaced by newer models, i have concluded that, a small sensor compact is a small sensor compact is a small sensor compact. The marginal improvements in these cameras from model to model are really not worth worrying about.
Amen. And the inherent limitations of small sensors make it even more difficult to evaluate the illustrations in these tests.
Octane: I don't understand the obsession with who manufactures the sensor. Looking at the DxO tests Nikon has 6 cameras in the top 10 list. Canon, who makes their own sensor, has one in 10th place. And that one camera is their most expensive one, while the D600 is the most affordable full frame camera today. Nikon is smart, they pick the best from different suppliers and put it together as an amazing camera. That's what made the difference for them in the past 6 years where people thought they were hopelessly behind to now being the top quality SLR producer.
The way I look at it, Nikon is fortunate they don't have the ability to make a state of the art sensor on their own. Having to rely on Sony seems to be working out just fine.
Simon97: It is quite normal for a product to have parts sourced from many different companies. Thank about the different types of plastics, glass, metals, motors, microphones and other electronic components that make up a camera.
In some cases the only thing a company will do is to put their name on it (and it was probably stamped on in a factory somewhere else.
I do small scale manufacturing. I design and do a lot of my own manufacturing to get my final product, but I still had to source parts and materials from other companies. It is how this stuff works.
And this level of cooperation has always been common in Japan, especially with lower-end cameras which are cranked out like cell phones.
exifnotfound: Would love to get one of these, beats the crap out of lugging DSLR and lenses around all day!
The light weight and small size are great, until you find a subject that's not suited to a 35mm lens.
Sdaniella: if only it were 24mm instead of 35mm !!!:(
An RX1-WA would be cool but with a 24mm, more expensive, slower and short of a miracle, softer in the corners.
I get flack when I question if an expensive item is made in Japan. Now, even Sigma is eager to reassure you it is. There's nothing wrong with China or Thailand but at these prices you're paying for Japan. Not a fan of Sigma but it does look like the are trying to improve the QC.
Franka T.L.: Finally a more sane mid range lens from Canon. Ok now we need a corresponding IS equipped wide zoom also to complete a f/4.0 trio, instead of trying to made it 17-40 again I would say making it something like 18-28/4.0 being more realistic and likely able to maintain a price point where it counts. Not to mention that it would made a good complement to the APS-C bodies too.
And the new slew of not so exotic fix focals as demonstrated by the 24 & 28/2.8 IS and now the 35/2.0 IS is good news. Not each and everyone need the bevy 1.4
Yes. A slower16-35 that's the size/weight of the 17-40, but sharp.
Seems we are going through a period where Canon and Nikon will test consumers to see how much they'll pay. The 5D3 is a good example of something that's too expensive and not worth the money that people buy anyway. I have the 24-85 Nikon and it's decent, but it wouldn't be hard to improve on it--for a price, of course.
intensity studios: When I need to know about technology, TIME Magazine is always my first source of information. LOL!!!
Amen. When I need to know the nuances of a new camera, first I ask an outstanding photographer like David Pogue, then I read Time Magazine and if I'm still not sure, I check with Ken Rockwell.
Fox Fisher: No matter how much people complain, it won't change the fact that its the best camera on this size. Sony saw an empty segment on the market and filled it and they succeded. Where was canon or nikon for all these years?
Why people are so afraid of the change? Why people are scared shitless about it? People said the same thing about SLT system too but it works out justs as fine. If you don't like it just don't buy it but respect the ones who buy it because they dared something you could not, went ahead and bought it.
Truly, a profile in courage. I took a walk on the wild side and bought one, too. Ok, I returned it but at least I was brave enough to give it a shot.