Martin.au: Panasonic is doing some pretty awesome work with the m4/3 lenses.
If this was a Leica "design" Panasonic would be promoting it up the wazoo and charge twice the price. Similar to the price for the 25mm f1.4 lens compared to the FF equivalents when it 1st came out ($600).
Dang, I wish Sigma would come out with two similarly bright excellent lenses for about half the price.
SHood: They say it will be slower then EOS-M. nough said.
EOS M with the adapter and the 40mm pancake is a little faster than the 22mm. Both are slower than m43 newer bodies with the 20mm (G3 & EM-5)...I do not have the 18-55 kit to test on the EOS M.
Dodi73: HmmmI think they should come out not only with primes but - given the compact size - also with a fast zoom (think of a 9-36 f/2.8 VR or a 9-50 f/4 VR): those would sell a lot. I think the camera might also have a very good potential but please, don't couple it again with those f/3.5-5.6 zooms again !!! Here lenses are compact enough not to bother about lens size! (not if Nikon expects people to mount on V2 also huge FF prime lenses and zooms, I mean)
A functional measurement for the maximum amount light expressed as an 'f' value for a lens is the same and not dependent on sensor size. The effects on depth of field is different depending on sensor size.
Hmm...let's see..aperture measurements only effect depth of field in yabokkie's on crack world.
rhlpetrus: Interesting, thanks. Looks like what the V1 should have been ... Well, let's see if Aptina improved on the sensor, they have been developing some nice new tech that provides for better DR and less noise in high ISO. The V1 is already very nice, quite close to my old D80 in IQ terms, let's hope this is better, even if by a small margin. The new primes and the UWA zoom also make for a more complete enthusiast's system, excellent for travel and light family shooting. The 10 f/2.8 is very good, I wished it were a bit faster though.
If they're truly going for function over form, an articulating screen is needed.
This is clearly a tour de force in design and aethstetics. Many many camera manufacturers aim to reach the same level of simple elegance of the Nikon V2 but none come close. Well, maybe the Hasselblad Lunar can be considered as lovely.
I love how the dood talks about Sony's great optical prowess...lol.
Raw Images Raw Talk: LX7 is a nifty little camera that would have caused quite a stir before m43, the 1 inch sensor and G1X cameras. Let's not forget the iPhone and smartphones.A great price would keep this kind of advanced camera around. $359 would work.After all, there will always be the aforementioned camera models being sold off as new models come in, like the GX1 at $469 right now.
I use a 42mm Circular Polarizer with my RX100 and it works just fine.
Stephen_C: Before the RX100 this would have been a great camera.
Well, I've used the LX5 & 7, own a G3 & RX100...the LX7 does not have a flawless interface. I also have a Pentax Q (almost same size sensor) and the RX100's IQ is better than the LX5/7 and Pentax Q, not even close.
The DXO sensor tri-area scores do make some sense, but the lens "reviews" from them have been pretty much garbage.
IT HAS GPS. lolx.
HGFGKM: It is a fantastic looking camera with enhanced performance.....I only wish I had the money to buy it...for all those with negative comments and derisive remarks, I am only asking the question: Would you buy it if it cost $1,000?
I'd buy one for $1000, assuming real Nex-7 image quality. Just to get the "you just took a picture of me with that ugly POS?!?" stares.
Demon Cleaner: Anyone who outlays $1100 for the "special edition" 12mm f/2 instead of paying the same amount for the 12-35mm f/2.8 X lens needs their head read. Oly can't honestly be expecting to sell even a single unit at that price point.
@peevee1 LR makes CA's a one click fix.
hellowin: The 60mm macro will have a hood supplied?
The lens is made by Olympus.
How much will these bodies be worth 75 years from now on Antiques Cyber-Road Show?
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.
Please don't use common sense financial analysis and Leica in the same post (everything you said makes perfect sense except with anyone wanting the red-dot). I'm not going to buy an RX1 straight-off, but Sony will sell plenty of them.
Biowizard: Yes, this sounds snobbish, but at nearly $3K, so what?! ...
1) Would that the marque read "Olympus", "Canon", "Nikon" (or even "Leica"), rather than that of the company that makes cheap music players and consumer goods.
2) A high end product should not be festooned with engraved-in proclamations, such as "35mm FULL FRAME CMOS IMAGE SENSOR", complete with its own orange/metallic ring round the lens throat. That would be like writing, "6.395 litre v12 24-valve twin turbo" on a great stripe down the side of a Rolls-Royce or Bentley. Pur-lease!
3) "Cyber-shot" makes me think back to my Mavica, that revolutionary early digicam with 3.5" floppies as its media. Brilliant before USB, still have two of them - but oh, the image quality. A good dose of Gaussian Blur and halving of size of images was necessary before you could even look at them without wincing.
In short, I LOVE the idea of a fixed-lens full-frame compact. But not one that includes the dumbed-down slogans of cheap gear.
If it's leica superglue, you're looking at $2,500 an ounce. Though I'm with you, how great would it be to have a mechanical, hard-stop focus ring with markings from minimal focus distance to infinity. Having the mechanical iris ring is a nice start.
km25: I said this before, the Carl Zeiss Sonnar is not the top of the line lens formula for wide angle/normal lens. It is for tele. Planar, Biogon and Distgon are the top lens. By a 35mm f2.0 for their range finder camera, it will be a 35mm f2.0 Biogon. If want a tele, yes it will be a Sonnar. Simpler lens formula. With the simplist in the Zeiss line up being the Tessar, a three element lens.
Look man, it's obvious you love Fuji stuff...which is fine-those primes for the X-Pro system are awesome. Pretending to be objective while saying Sony has screwed you over several times, well that's just pathetic. Pretending that you've stated positives about the RX1, well that's just pathetic also. I don't care if someone agrees with me or not (how boring that would be if we all agreed). I'm just calling you out for your arrogance and general BS....You're a Sony troll-pure and simple.
@mcm49So in your inifinitely open-minded, genius-level, common sense approach to evaluating this cameras, I have seen one positive comment from you about the RX1. Troll is as troll does.