rjx: To all those bitching about about the price ... don't buy one then. Simple.
Leica M-E ($5450 @ BH) + Leica 35mm 1.4 Summilux-M Aspherical ($4995 @ BH) is a grand total of $10,445RX1 ($2798 @ BH) + OVF ($599 DPR) + Hood ($179 DPR) totals $3577. That's a savings of $6868.
A few "inexpensive options:"
M-E ($5450 @ BH) + Leica 35mm f/2.5 Summarit ($1895 @ BH) = $7345. $3768 more than the RX1 combo.
M-E ($5450 @ BH) + Voigtlander Nokton Aspherical 35mm f/1.2 II ($1399 @ BH) = $6849. $3272 more than the RX1 combo.
While you will NOT have the same shooting experience with the RX1 as you would with the M9, the RX1 will provide those wanting a very discrete FF camera that can't afford a Leica an affordable option. The RX1 is VERY affordable compared to a Leica M9, M-E, or M, as long as you're only interested in shooting @ 35mm, which is the primary focal length of many Leica users.
The RX1 will likely blow away the flare prone X100 in all respects including shot to shot time, auto-focus speed and accuracy, noise at higher sensitivity levels, and of course image quality. Plus the firmware for the RX1 will probably be release quality unlike the X100 which only as of the recently released V2.0, issued more than a year after the introduction of the X100, finally fixed some of the larger bugs (AF speed, aperture happy dance / shutter lag being principle issues) that made the X100 unusable for so many users. Those issues should have been addressed before the cameras shipped unit number 1.
Given the poor state of the firmware and the impact on handling, I sold mine due to usability issues and flare, not to mention concerns over the sticky aperture problem (mine suffered this) coming back again in the future.
Lunar? No, a better name: Lunarcy
When possible DPReview should pop some M lenses on an adapter and check them out. The sensor implementation even though it lacks an anti-alias filter seems to do more poorly with most wider (under 50mm) lenses. To my eye, this isn't a go-to camera for the dedicated M lens shooter - with or without focus peaking.
sroute: While the NEX-5N is a worthy camera to host M lenses on, the NEX-7 flagship camera is somewhat less so, especially for certain wide angle lenses.
The Fujifilm X-Pro 1 despite being marketed by Fujifilm as being a host for M lenses (they announced but have not shipped their own dumb M to X mount adapter), early adopters using a Kippon adapter have proved the cameras to be a less than able host for M lenses, showing significant smearing of detail progressively away from the centre of the image. Maybe there is a reason Fujifilm decided not to release their own M adapter at the product launch.
Now not every photographer demands edge to edge perfection even from lenses that can actually deliver, but plenty of us do need this capability at times if not all the time.
See next comment
For those with a stable of high quality rangefinder lenses, currently the best currently produced or supportable hosts for them on crop or full frame cameras are:
Leica M9 (full frame)Leica M8 (crop) | Ricoh GXR (crop) - yes, I put them on parNEX-5N (crop)NEX-7 (crop) with limitations
From what I've seen the X-Pro 1 shouldn't even be on the list unless it's only to be used for fast lens shooters working in close, wide open, where edges truly do not matter; or to be used by those who'd buy a $1600 camera and slap a 1 - 3 K$ (or more) M lens on it only to get mediocre IQ and be happy with it.
In that light, given the GXR is right up there with the M9 and M8 in terms of usability and image quality from M lenses... ought not there be a more fulsome review of this camera? It's the only Digital M camera after all that isn't made by Leica, no small distinction.
What might Ricoh have coming down the road one wonders, after having executed the GXR Mount A12 so well?
While the NEX-5N is a worthy camera to host M lenses on, the NEX-7 flagship camera is somewhat less so, especially for certain wide angle lenses.
JacobSR: I don't understand this statement: "we find the only comfortable option when holding the camera is to support the bulk of its weight with your left hand holding the lens barrel".Well isn't that how you'r supposed to hold the camera when taking photos? Maybe I'm old school but I was always taught that the proper way to hold a camera is to use both hands for stability, even more so when using the LCD at arm's length, and anytime you press the shutter you need your left hand to hold and support the camera.
Probably what the author is stating here is that the camera offers no comfortable and secure way to hold it -- even when you aren't taking a photo. That's my read of the quoted sentence.
In other words, you won't want to carry it in hand for very long. Pity.
dylanbarnhart: Nobody praised Pentax for having the thinnest pancake lens? If they can make all future lenses thinner, perhaps by protruding the rear glass elements deep into the lens mount, then we will start seeing a system that makes sense.
Sony NEX tricked everyone by having a tiny body but ridiculously large lens. I much rather have the reverse, because the large body is easy to hold and large surface areas allow room for top buttons, flash, etc.
Here's a review that suggests the large pound-of-butter shaped camera is /not/ easy to hold yet you insist that it is. Have you held one yet?
Have you held a NEX? Shot one for a few days or weeks or months?
I did not keep my NEX for a variety of reasons but uncomfortable it was not. Button ergonomics could be improved and the NEX-7 in fact is better. But hand-holding, using with even a heavy all metal lens - the NEX balance well and are great all day carry everywhere cameras.
The K-01 is more expensive than a NEX-5N by a good margin and not that much less than a Pentax DSLR which is a nice, ergonomic package.
I can't help but think Pentax really messed up on this one and it makes me worry about how the Pentax-Ricoh imaging division merger will affect the GXR, a camera which is well thought out in most respects.
Gale Bizet: I liked Bibble.. I am very happy with Aftershot pro.Best of luck and great innovation to Corel..
Knock Adobe of thier high horse, really bad customer service and high prices.
Anyone ever hear that there is money in volume. Lower prices more volume...
X Adobe user for now.. Thier last trick did it for me...
Adobe slashed prices. Supports more cameras. Doesn't always support them well however... so there is room for improvement.
I hope AfterShot does well - having a native Linux app is great.
Jeff Stephens: Hi everyone: I'm Jeff Stephens, previously the president of Bibble Labs and now I run product development for the new Corel AfterShot Pro. Yesterday was an exciting day for us, launching AfterShot Pro at CES. I hope this answers some of your questions about Corel's purchase of Bibble Labs and the new product. The Corel team is committed and are excited about our technology and processing power, and the opportunities we see to take the product forward. Corel is eager to invest even more in development and in bringing our technology to even more users -- something that Bibble Labs simply couldn’t afford to do on our own. All of us at Bibble have joined the Corel team. We're keeping Mac and Linux support. Thanks for your enthusiasm. I look forward to hearing your feedback.Jeff
Ricoh GXR (and other Ricoh products) DNG file support.
Oh and it'd be nice if you guys listed what you do support in some obvious easy to find place so that people like me who are willing to give your product a try won't blow the one chance at a free trial period to look at the product only to find that our camera(s) are not supported.
Is the definitive solution a lens cap?
X100, sticky aperture blade problems.
X10, white orbs of hell.
X-Pro1? What do you have in store for buyers? Hopefully nothing but good photographs but, speaking as a former X100 owner whose camera fell victim to the SAB issue, it is hard to put these experiences out of mind when considering the latest offering.
Made our outdoor lights (which are quite boring in and of themselves) slightly more interesting looking by panning across them with a 1/5 second shutter speed. GXR with manual focus 35/2 lens.
carpediem007: And again, no Ricoh GXR... :-(
More specifically Ricoh GXR with Mount A12
Having now worked with the X100 (rather extensively), the NEX-5N (1600 images, only six with a Sony E mount lens) and the GXR Mount A12, it is clear to me that the GXR with Mount A12 is either an enthusiast or specialist's camera. It has an excellent UI and for me has delivered image quality, at lower ISO sensitivity, that exceeds what I was getting from the NEX or X100 and of course I can use my M mount lenses on the GXR (or NEX) where that wasn't possible with the X100.
Ricoh's decision to eschew the anti-alias filter on the GXR Mount A12 has paid off handsomely. The company appears to be getting ready to release the Mount A12 with the same 16MP sensor the NEX sports, but again without an anti-alias filter.
Hopefully if/when that happens early in the new year, the GXR / Mount A16 won't remain unreviewed much longer.
It'd be interesting to know if Fujifilm - globally, no just the US operation - will be extending the warranty on cameras with the X100's sticky aperture blade issue.
The pace of failure reports is picking up.
Great job, looks and sounds great in HD.
Oh yeah, the NEX-7 just looks... perfect. My expectations keep getting ratcheted higher. Please stop teasing me, I don't believe I've been this excited waiting for a camera debut... ever. Highly irrational I know, and yes, I have one on order sight unseen which is also equally irrational.
Here's to hoping your detailed review also includes a look at some legacy lenses. It would be most useful to scores of prospective users to have a look at some manual ex SLR lenses as well as rangefinder variants (like the Zeiss ZM 25, for example) and how they behave, and how focus peaking and magnification behaves for those of us who are not already NEX users.