Richard - could you folks report on (and shoot some sample images of course) the utility of the 1.4X "smart teleconverter"? The idea of having a virtual APS-C camera with a 50mm lens goes along way, if it works well, to making this an ideal carry-everywhere high IQ camera for me... and probably for many others.
I'm quite ok with 35mm on 35 only; but virtual 50 if the remaining resolution is sufficient certainly sweetens the deal.
Thanks for putting these first images up so quickly!
stuntmonkey: No continuous AF for stills but AF in movies? Inevitable comparison to the D600, which can do subject tracking in liveview. Sounds like Sony are rushing to market; it wouldn't likely be a good implementation but it's conceivable in the year 2012.
I wouldn't want a full frame NEX and be forced to use an adapter to put full frame lenses on it. At that point you might as well buy the smallest full frame DSLR.
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.
Sorry, meant as of the latest releases of the X100 firmware (1.30 is latest for X100); V2.0 relates to other comments I'd make about the X Pro 1.
Donald Chin: Highest shutter speed @ 1/4000s (F5.6) & 1/3200s (F4) is an incredible achievement for leaf shutter! Fill flash will never be so easy with the RX1!
To gl2k (post below)
The alternative to having a fixed minimum shutter speed across all apertures is to have a much slower minimum shutter speed like 1/1000 or 1/2000.
I have lenses which cost as much as this camera which have leaf shutters within them that can't even hit 1/2000th. One is limited to 1/500th of a second across all apertures. Yippee for constant shutter speed, that's such an improvement in your books, right?
Medium format lenses typically have even greater distances for the leaf shutter to cover and shutter speed with this type of shutter design is a function of that distance. The lenses in the X100 and RX1 have to deal with the same physics.
Laugh all you want, the leaf shutter provides real benefits. Like the X100 (which people said would never sell, but did), some buyers will pick up the RX1 specifically because it has a fast, virtually silent, flash-sync at all shutter settings, leaf shutter.
Jogger: Will pass and wait for that FF NEX9 to use as a digital back for my FF Nikkors.
Agree with Joe - My guess is there will be no full frame NEX anytime soon. NEX is doing just fine thanks very much, why introduce confusion into that line?
You want full frame compact, go RX1. Or A99. Or a competitors full frame DSLR. Or, at 3 times the cost or more, go Leica.
There is no competition for this camera at present, as the Leica M is a totally different type of camera, at a price point which puts it out of reach even more photographers.
If Sony believes they are unlikely to be challenged, at least until sales prove there is a demand for this sort of camera, Mike Weir's comment about the RX1 being a classic camera may well be borne out.
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
mcm49: What happens when Fuji perfects and releases a 4 x 5 medium format 36mm x 45mm 50+MP X-Trans sensor? The 35mm format will suddenly look "puny" by comparison, and their X-trans technology not needing an anti-aliasing filter interfering with the available light will make the current sensor technology look like P&S toy camera stuff? The size of the sensor could still fit in a camera the size of an X-Pro1, but to be perfectly linear, they would have to release a new line of lenses made for the larger format, and provide an adapter for their current X-series lenses, which work just fine but cause a multiplier effect as 35mm format lenses do with smaller sensors today. Even with all that, it would radically shake up the market, and possibly we're feeling the leading edge of that coming technology affecting the prices of sensors today, which is fueling the incentive to get the current stock of sensors on the market at competitive prices before the sensors lose their value by competition.
Fujifilm is having plenty of problems with X-Trans in APS-C format.
The tech sounded very interesting on paper but in production benefits are difficult to see while problems persist.
What's driving Sony to release the RX1 is a desire to create a new product category; as margins continue to contract in the increasingly populated APS-C DSLR and compact categories, what better way than to increase gross margins than to do what many have been begging someone to do for eons - bring out full frame compacts.
There are advantages to being first (second if you could Leica and the digital M) and for Sony, little risk given they own the sensor tech.
SLRist: The price could perhaps be justified if all the accessories were bundled, but Sony are clearly taking a huge gouge here. The price of the lens hood is a clear indication of that.
This kind of money is excessive for what is effectively a disposable camera. At least in the days of film, your high quality camera body wouldn't be rendered redundant every 5 years, and retained a reasonable resale value.
If they shaved off 30% of the price and included an EVF I might be interested, but I can't see enough benefit over my X100 to justify an upgrade.
If Sony are gouging I hope you put a similar comment in the review thread for the Leica X2, a $2,000 compact with an APS-C sensor, an inferior fixed optic, no video, no WiFi, a vastly inferior rear LCD screen, no integrated finder (Leica's add-on finder is $525 street).
The Sony can focus closer (20cm min.), can shoot stills or HD video, has manual aperture and focus controls, and a full frame sensor that will deliver better dynamic range and detail and/or provide the compact camera shooter with more cropping options for "digital zoom".
There's only an $800 difference between the Leica X2 street price and the RX2 - the sensor difference alone accounts for this yet there is much more on offer from Sony in this camera.
Both are expensive cameras but the RX2 is, in context, a much better value.
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.