lacikuss: Sony version?
^^ That's only with the A7rII. The other A7 bodies don't work too well with Canon lenses.
Though its probably on the radar - a Pentax and Sony mount version after a year so so when sales flatten out.
AlliHjelm: Read somewhere that the RX1 II can only manage 1/2000 if shooting at the full wide f/2 aperture. If true I would think that that would kind of suck in broad daylight meaning that you'd need a ND filter for that kind of situations.
Yes you would need an ND filter. Its a limitation of a leaf shutter.
The advantage however is a more quiet shutter with far less vibration so you can generally shoot at low shutter speeds easier and the camera operation would be quiet and allow you to shoot more discretely.
The last advantage is that your flash sync speed will be 1/2000 !!! Very useful to get full flash power at the max shutter speed.
IMO all these advantages far outweigh the lower max shutter speed.
jhinkey: Sony giveth and likely Sony taketh away in some way . . . hopefully the camera doesn't now behave poorly in some other way as a result of using the uncompressed RAW files.
@exapixel - Ok you have a Sony camera. Show me your photos which are ruined. Ill wait. :)
@Mike - Fair enough you do have a point. I am happy Sony is addressing the issue. My point is that the issue has been greatly exaggerated that's all.
King Penguin: It's obviously a superb camera but using your head not your heart, why would you buy this over a Leica Q.
It's like buying a Nissan instead of a BMW!
......and before the fan boys comment, it's not snobbery, it's about driving experience, pride of ownership, down the road resale price and most importantly pre and post customer service.......the list goes on........
@ZoranHR - Why do you think I am trying to push this camera onto you ? :P
I am not buying this camera not because of any bias but i simply can't afford it !
If Leica works for you then thats good why would I wish you anything bad if you are happy with another camera ? :P
rhurani: Sony san! for me please the same camera without EVF, without tilting of the LCD, without the filter, but with a built-in flash, a 24MP-only FF for 700$. Deal?
The Ricoh is good but slow lens and only APS-C sensor.
RichyjV: Good good, lossless would be much more preferable but maybe the processor cant handle it, and it will have to wait for a later camera.
The pro vs anti sony tribalism in these comments is pretty pathetic. People getting big mark ups for saying that other people will have nothing to complain about? Its a camera, thats all. If it works for you, great, if it doesn't then its likely that this fix alone won't make much difference, as I doubt that many people want to use uncompressed raws unless they really have to. Credit to Sony for making a mark and forcing Canon/Nikon (hopefully) to up their feature list past just slight improvements of MP/DR/ISO performance.
@jl_smith - I heavily push my files. I shoot landscapes so that means clipped highlights, clipped shadows etc which put a heavy strain on the RAW files to try and maximize the dynamic range.
Plus I shoot a lot of long exposures which causes even more compression of the dynamic range and hence I need to really push such files.
So yes I do use my cameras to the limits. There are a lot of things I don't like about my A7 II and A7 like poor battery life, not as fast & responsive as a DSLR, weaker high ISO performance, tilting rather than swivel screen, poor dials on the A7 II etc.
BUT these RAW artifacts aren't on the list. If Sony does come up with uncompressed raw I will still stick with compressed lossy raw only because my camera isn't terribly fast anyway and using the smaller files will help not slow down the camera further.
And I had a look at your gallery and at reasonably close inspection on my 27" monitor I can't find any photo ruined by artifacts.
@exapixel - If you can go on flickr and any other website which showcases Sony photos see if you can find ANY photo ruined by these compression artifacts.
To people who actually shoot this is a complete non issue. To people who shoot a lot of test charts and brick walls or use other systems have an issue though.
^^ That is true but its not down to the lossy RAW compression. Nikon does have a a way of getting the best out of the sensors.
Nikon has done a better job on the sensor but honestly I have worked with the 6D and 5d mk 3 for wedding photography and the differences are not that great at normal viewing sizes.
For high ISO the A7s is the only camera to consistently give you useable results above ISO 12800 upto maybe ISO 64000.
bluevellet: 30% improvement in AF speed compared to the RX1R AF speed is not saying much.
@bluevellet - Those are all figures on paper. Use the camera in a store and if the AF isn't up to snuff for your needs don't buy the camera !
You can't make a decision based on some figures. For all we know the 30% increase is very conservative.
Giuseppe Fallica: Some doubts. This camera is the state of the art and there is no discussion. But I fear it's a very fleeting temporary item (if exist not-fleeting consumer items!). I mean that RX1rII was born simply assembling the new (amazing) A7rII sensor inside an almost old RX1 body. Honestly, I was waiting for a fullframe curved sensor, 4k video hight frame rate, new lens f1.4. And something more, as focus stack mode, HDR built in, ecc. In conclusion I'm a bit disappointed, but I think also that it's an superb camera, well above even top class SLR costing twice.
@Dythedog - IS is always nice to have. Always. That said for a 35mm lens you can take some pretty sharp photos at even 1/10 seconds easily.
With IS you can go down to maybe 1/4 . That is less than 2 stops. Not a huge difference.
There is no mirror in this camera and the lens uses a quiet leaf shutter so getting sharp shots at low shutter speeds isn't terribly difficult.
Performance will definitely suffer. You will get the same fps but your write times will increase.
And your photos will look no different anyways. :P
Upto 6400 the results are not terribly impressive. I doubt an older A7 or A7 II will do much worse in that regard.
But the ones at 51200 and 64000 are serious WOW ! I don't think any current camera can capture anything at those ISOs without looking like a serious mess ! :P
LeitzKameraAktion: I wonder if Sony might introduce a 12mp version using the same sensor as the A7s/II? I already have an RX1, and would find a 12mp version with exceptional low-light capability very tempting...
^^ Makes sense. This IS a niche camera. Spending $3200 for a niche camera is not for many so something similar in a more palatable $1700 may make a lot of sense.
@Harold66 Exactly ! I frankly can't afford either this camera or the Leica Q. But I don't rush into the Leica forums to try and disparage Leica owners ! :P
^^ Who knows ? Next time Canon & Sony users should start bitching about Nikon menu systems and how everything is opposite land in Nikon (from the direction the zoom and focus rings operate, to the mounting of lenses etc).
Its not about what you said its about what you meant and that was loud and clear. I can read between the lines.
" lossless because otherwise what's the point of having a high end kit and 14 bit raws if I'm going to then volunteer quality loss"
M Jesper: Interesting that you guys call the EVF excellent, when most RX100 III/IV reviews seems to dislike it being so awkward to use and difficult to see. I'm sure it 'looks' fine in a controlled environment, but outside in practical use i'm not so sure. It's probably a little better compared to none at all, but people will compare it to the A7 series because that's the choice isn't it. Now you can say both have a EVF, but it still seems like a huge sacrifice.
The available (included?) eye cup might help. Though i'd still prefer a centered and fixed EVF with large magnification for sure.
^^ By all accounts the viewfinder on the Leica Q should be better than the RX1R II anyday.
That said its a much larger camera.
UnitedNations: You would need VERY stable hands to shoot 42mp.No more coffee...& always carry around a tripod...
^^ Wait two years and the all new RX1r III will be announced with IBIS for JUST $500 more !!! :D
@ZoranHR - My problem ? :P
If I have said anything wrong do point that out. If not then I am not going to going answer some loaded question.
If the Leica Q floats your boat do go ahead and buy it. I even wished you luck and requested you to post some photos. Why should you take offense to that ? :P
Becksvart: Re: "Should it not be just 'Zeiss' at this point..?'
I don't think there's a Zony without the "Carl" yet?
Its pretty obvious your query was badly worded or misunderstood by many including me. That is why nobody else replied or cared to upvote you !