Previous news story    Next news story

Just posted: Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R Preview with studio and real-world samples

By dpreview staff on Jun 27, 2013 at 04:19 GMT
Buy on GearShop$2,798.00

Just posted: Sony Cyber-shot DSCRX1R hands-on preview. We've had a few days to try out Sony's new Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R, the sister camera to the RX1. The only difference between these two full-frame enthusiast cameras is that the RX1R lacks the anti-aliasing feature of the original RX1. We've created a hands-on preview of the RX1R, including a gallery of real-world samples and some preliminary studio tests, to give you an idea of how the new camera performs. 

Click to read our hands-on preview of the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R

65
I own it
163
I want it
5
I had it
Discuss in the forums
Our favorite products. Free 2 day shipping.
Support this site, buy from dpreview GearShop.
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1R

Comments

Total comments: 93
Timmbits
By Timmbits (9 months ago)

I don't find that there is such a big difference between the two in contrast and sharpness - just a bit if you pixel-peep - but I'm not sure it's worthy of a second model, at the expense of occasional moiré.

and I do agree with others, that a tilting screen isn't too much to ask for at this price point. (actually, they should throw in the viewfinder, and a bicycle, and a tablet too!) lol

2 upvotes
jeffharris
By jeffharris (9 months ago)

When will Sony release a version with interchangeable lenses?

2 upvotes
Timmbits
By Timmbits (9 months ago)

I agree... but are you kidding? that would have a devastating effect on some of their other camera sales.

2 upvotes
Clyde Thomas
By Clyde Thomas (9 months ago)

I'm sorry. But I'm just not seeing it. Viewed through the samples and I don't see anything that my a900 with Mino 35/2 can't do just as well if not better.

Sony won't impress me until they start using their own 36mp sensor inside their own cameras. On the comparison page, this new RX can't even keep up with the D600. Kind of sad really, considering they could bring so much more to the table.

And really, it's starting to bother me that they charge so much for a lens shade. Approaching arrogance with such extortion. Wish they'd put more effort into partnering with 3rd parties for flash and smart radio slaves. Kind of a joke to have such a dismal flash system in 2013.

2 upvotes
Fellowpedestrian
By Fellowpedestrian (9 months ago)

They've been at it since the first "Walkman", don't you remember?

0 upvotes
BBnose
By BBnose (9 months ago)

The layout of RX1 is even better than Nex series. I hope Sony would make the lense interchangeable for the next RX series model.

0 upvotes
FreedomLover
By FreedomLover (10 months ago)

Do you know of measurements showing the normal focus equivalent of the eye?

35mm distorts all images, everything seems farther away. It's a camera for narcissists :-)

0 upvotes
remeife
By remeife (10 months ago)

Has it got intervallometer??

0 upvotes
franzel
By franzel (10 months ago)

Looks good; add a fully articulating screen, I'll get it asap .

1 upvote
Turnedge
By Turnedge (10 months ago)

Disappointing to see another short development cycle on luxury electronics. (Not that you can really call dropping a filter 'development').

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
jennyrae
By jennyrae (10 months ago)

laugh at people acting like little children and attack people who don't like repeat product and say truth about it. funny how brand make people stupid. Sony not only existing camera and not better camera. RX1R and RX100 II are repeat product and not new innovation from last camera. no filter is innovation? bsi by 1/3 improvement is innovation? maybe for people with Sony psychosis.

3 upvotes
ET2
By ET2 (10 months ago)

Not every generation of model needs entirely new camera body with new features. RX100 II adds new sensor, wifi, NFC, hotshoe, and tilt LCD, while maintaining the same pocket size.

As for RX1R, Sony isn't even claiming it's a new model that replaces the old model It's the same camera with missing AA filter for landscape photographers.

2 upvotes
JeffAnderssen
By JeffAnderssen (9 months ago)

I'm with ET2. Don't like it? Don't buy it. I've bought it, and am pretty excited about it - some of us just love technology, and elegant and intelligent use of it :)

0 upvotes
ChrisKramer1
By ChrisKramer1 (10 months ago)

I sooooo cannot afford this camera that it's hearbreaking.

1 upvote
bluevellet
By bluevellet (10 months ago)

Still a great feat of engineering with some nice IQ, just like the first model.

But at that price point, I'd have trouble living with the various performance issues (AF in particular). It would have been nice if Sony had fixed those with the new model. Maybe next time?

3 upvotes
Michaels7
By Michaels7 (10 months ago)

And high price point is always what hurts Sony.

1 upvote
Clyde Thomas
By Clyde Thomas (9 months ago)

I don't mind high prices as long as it's balanced to final output and usability. Here, they are not. Arrogantly pitiful.

0 upvotes
Tape5
By Tape5 (10 months ago)

This is certainly a pocketable camera in that after buying it you will have plenty of room for it inside your pocket.

What is the point of being pocketable when Sony wants to charge as much as one pays for some studio heavyweights?

Sure photographers want their pocket cameras to take top shots, but I suspect those who are prepared to pay 3000 for a camera, don't care much if their camera fits into their pocket.

It is a piece of Sony jewelry.

0 upvotes
Mapel
By Mapel (10 months ago)

I wish I could afford at least the first model... :(

0 upvotes
Seagull67
By Seagull67 (10 months ago)

Just buy a Fujifilm XE1 - good lenses now and more to come, and a great inbuilt EVF. Light & very easy to take anywhere - I do all day every day. Why pay so much more for this still limited Sony? Fujifilm have it nailed already with so much more usability for less outlay.

3 upvotes
NomadMark
By NomadMark (10 months ago)

Perhaos people want a camera with better high iso performance, and more control of DOF, than the XE1 can offer? And perhaps 35mm is a focal length some people find very useful.

I like the XE1 a lot. I shot with it a fair bit. But when I wanted a second small camera in my kit, the RX! could not be beat.

1 upvote
JackM
By JackM (10 months ago)

More control of DOF - not much. Even on FF you have to be pretty close to your subject to get thin DOF with a 35mm lens.

I would say "just buy a Fuji X100S" and enjoy the beautiful OVF and a camera you can carry in a loose pocket.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
NomadMark
By NomadMark (10 months ago)

It's noticable enough when shooting close up mug shots, I can tell you that for sure. I've own a NEX 7 with a gaffle of lenses and RX1, and I can tell the difference.

To each their own. I like the x100s, too. It IS a beautiful camera.

I enjoy the ISO performance of the RX1 more than any other feature.

0 upvotes
slncezgsi
By slncezgsi (10 months ago)

There will soon be 35/1.4 (equivalent) lens for the X system from Fuji - so the DOF will be very similar to Sony 35/2.0

1 upvote
xoio
By xoio (10 months ago)

Another Viewfinder-less wave it about in-front of your face like a phone wannabe!.
No thanks.

10 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (10 months ago)

Except for the fact that it takes both an OVF and a 2.4m dot OLED EVF via the multi connector. So you don't have to wave it about if you don't want to.

1 upvote
glacierpete
By glacierpete (10 months ago)

At this price level the optional external EVF should come for free. I would rather go with a Fuji X100S.

2 upvotes
Paul Storm
By Paul Storm (10 months ago)

look sony, what REALLY is on everyone's mind is when are we gonna have this camera with interchangeable lenses???

guys/gals: if agreed 'like' this and let's send sony this message

i so wish the photo world would have it's own steve jobs!! everything is soooo incremental, sony please make something truly, insanely great! just make it happen already!!!

5 upvotes
Nishi Drew
By Nishi Drew (10 months ago)

Steve Jobs gave the photo world the iPhone...

0 upvotes
mtsporty
By mtsporty (4 months ago)

Steve Jobs CHANGED the world :)

0 upvotes
ArcaSwiss
By ArcaSwiss (10 months ago)

Preordered one from B&H today.

2 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (10 months ago)

So?

2 upvotes
ArcaSwiss
By ArcaSwiss (10 months ago)

So you are an a-hole

2 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (10 months ago)

There is very little point in confining yourself to an expensive fixed lens camera and limited functionality just to gain the marginal advantage FF provides over a 1.5x crop sensor.

4 upvotes
NomadMark
By NomadMark (10 months ago)

Marginal?
There is a pretty large gap with respect to DOF control and OOF background blur between the two. High ISO in the RX1 is significantly better than most 1.5x crops as well. The Fuji cameras might some close until aruond 1600. My RX1 can make some pretty clean files at 6400 that no 1.5x crop can touch.

2 upvotes
calking
By calking (10 months ago)

Too much hype about 6400+ ISOs....the vast majority of shots taken by most people don't require it...it's just another spec for forum heads to clash over. My ONLY Point here is that using the self-timer or a tripod would yield better night shots at FAR less $$$. To each his own, though. I live these Sony rx cams...I have the rx100, but shooting handheld in the dark isn't worth the cost of FF for most.

0 upvotes
Kiichiro
By Kiichiro (9 months ago)

I rather not carry a tripod. I just needed a good point and shoot that I can throw in my wife's purse :)

0 upvotes
mcshan
By mcshan (10 months ago)

Some over the top posts here. You don't have to be rich or pay "$1000 for a dinner" to buy this camera. The price isn't for every budget but that is how it is with many things. Come on.

8 upvotes
Create Dont Imitate
By Create Dont Imitate (10 months ago)

Finally... the end of the AA filter.

The AA filter was always an amateurish fix for a real problem.

The AA filter era will go down as a black spot in the history of cameras... an embarrassment for the engineers who thought of it and used it.

Medium format cameras never had this absurd filter... rightfully so.

3 upvotes
thx1138
By thx1138 (10 months ago)

Really, you should do some more research before making wild claims. Many MF cameras had AA filters, but some had the option of being able to remove it when required.

The need for AA filters diminishes as resolution increases since it becomes less and less likely that you can get interference between the much smaller sensor pixels and repetitive naturally occurring patterns on the subject. Current high end MF cameras have huge resolution 60-80MP and there is no need for AA filters, but even the D800E can show moire and for cameras with relatively low pixel count, you can easily get interference from many patterns in nature.

3 upvotes
Create Dont Imitate
By Create Dont Imitate (10 months ago)

As I said above... alaising is a real problem.

"Fixing" the problem by bluring the image was never a good solution.

Removing the filter increases image quality.

2 upvotes
philbond87
By philbond87 (10 months ago)

What would have been your solution?

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (10 months ago)

Going but not gone. I can recall lengthy posts from engineers giving mathematical explanations of the terrible things that would happen without a blurring filter. Still, I think the only reason this happened is because, like Adobe, the camera manufacturers ran out of new features to add. Prediction: Infrared capability (with a disclaimer about unpredictable results) will be the next feature.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (10 months ago)

> "Fixing" the problem by bluring the image was never a good solution.

AA filter is a bad thing to solve a worse problem.

1 upvote
hiro_pro
By hiro_pro (10 months ago)

great idea but for the price i wonder if i could find a used Leica...

1 upvote
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (10 months ago)

Good luck finding one cheap with that lens ;)

5 upvotes
NomadMark
By NomadMark (10 months ago)

What, an m9?
m9 sensor is junk compared to this one.
Lower noise in iso 3200 with the RX1, vs iso 800 with the m9.

6 upvotes
LJohnK2
By LJohnK2 (10 months ago)

I just can't understand the price, especially when you add in an EVF.......what is the target market ?

Nice camera ......but where I come from 3 k will get you two Oly Em-5 & 12-50mm kits .

2 upvotes
Benarm
By Benarm (10 months ago)

target market: premium *pocketable* camera

5 upvotes
jkoch2
By jkoch2 (10 months ago)

Target market?

1) Adroit connoisseurs,
2) The well-to-do, or
3) The spendthrift camera junkie who somehow hasn't already exhausted his cash, credit limits, or pawnable assets. "Must have. Must have," he mutters, trembling, in a cold sweat.

RX is the perfect Rx for each group.

7 upvotes
NomadMark
By NomadMark (10 months ago)

Oly Em-5 IQ does not even compete wrt iq, where I come from.

11 upvotes
forpetessake
By forpetessake (10 months ago)

It's a great camera, everybody would want to have it, so the market is only limited by price. It's targeted to folks who don't hesitate paying $1000 for a dinner. There are actually plenty of those.

3 upvotes
DotCom Editor
By DotCom Editor (10 months ago)

They forgot the viewfinder.

18 upvotes
jennyrae
By jennyrae (10 months ago)

disappointing news. Sony nothing new to offer. same camera like last time.

7 upvotes
CFynn
By CFynn (10 months ago)

Wonderful little camera though. I wouldn't be dissaponted to have one.

Comment edited 51 seconds after posting
12 upvotes
jennyrae
By jennyrae (10 months ago)

wonderful if don't have old RX100. I think buy RX100 better for less because of no much different.

2 upvotes
CFynn
By CFynn (10 months ago)

Sure you have the right thread?
The RX1 / RX1R is very different to the RX100.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (10 months ago)

The RX100 is nothing like the RX1

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (10 months ago)

So hot-shoe, tiltable LCD, optional EVF port, no AA-filter, and a new BSI CMOS sensor are "nothing new"?

Wow. Sony addressed virtually all of the user requested upgrades (i.e., hot-shoe, EVF port, articulated LCD) and Sony users are not happy. Scratches head.

7 upvotes
ET2
By ET2 (10 months ago)

jennyrae isn't a "Sony user". He/she owns is a Samsung user

2 upvotes
stupidisanart
By stupidisanart (10 months ago)

People should just enjoy the fact these cameras exist. Yes they are priced beyond any reasonable person wallet and not the most practical solution for almost every photographer but enjoy that sony made this.

11 upvotes
sportyaccordy
By sportyaccordy (10 months ago)

How/why? How can one enjoy a camera they can't afford to own?

I give Sony credit for making the phone but I don't take delight in knowing it exists. My hope is that they make something similar with an APS-C sensor that actually closes flat... runs on Android 4.0 and has a phone. Even at $1000 that makes sense.

4 upvotes
M Lammerse
By M Lammerse (10 months ago)

I enjoy the fact that I do not need this camera for my work, and that there is so much choice out there, that you can reach that quality the Sony RX1 delivers (lower priced) with more options and most importantly can be used with the same joy.

And yes I know...it is not an RX1R which is mentioned on the cameras' I have to use, but I enjoy as well that 'I' do not care about that.

It's a wonderful camera, do not understand me wrong.

3 upvotes
Houseqatz
By Houseqatz (10 months ago)

because it shows that there is a market for this type of camera, and if the trend is consistent, the FF pocketable camera will become less cost prohibitive, over time. though, i doubt it will ever fall into the 'easily affordable' category.

9 upvotes
Tape5
By Tape5 (10 months ago)

Most of the things I enjoy in life I don't own. I will consider adding this to the list.

2 upvotes
jacketpotato
By jacketpotato (10 months ago)

Anyone recall prices of digicams 10years ago.
In three years FF digital mirrorless will be around £1500.

5 upvotes
LJ - Eljot
By LJ - Eljot (10 months ago)

1999: 12.000 DM (6000€) for a 2.7MP-camera. (Nikon D1)

2012: 6000€ for the D4

One could say nothing had changed, but the D4 is very much better than the D1, obviously.

1 upvote
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (10 months ago)

Produce a really tiny FF camera...

Sans all the features...

Create modular add-ons worth a fortune, to increase the specs and features...

...and voila!

A big chunky DSLR-like bulky steroid dripping fully featured add-on junky!

Cha-Ching!

.

3 upvotes
birdbrain
By birdbrain (10 months ago)

Forgetting the size aspect for the moment, the sort of money this camera is going for I would get a Canon 5D3. Having used the 5D3 for a while now and seen what the real world results that one can get, then I can live with its size and with carrying it around.

This really needs to be a whole lot cheaper, or are Sony the new Leica? :)

1 upvote
rjx
By rjx (10 months ago)

"This really needs to be a whole lot cheaper, or are Sony the new Leica? "

I beg to differ. If this was by Leica, it would be nearly double the price. And at $2800, Sony obviously knows by the success of the RX1 that $2800 is not too steep of an asking price. Keep in mind that this camera comes with a nice Zeiss lens too, which is also not cheap.

11 upvotes
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (10 months ago)

People always forget the lens, or use a turd of a lens.

Canon 5D3: $2800
Canon 35L: $1400

Total: $4200.

Keep in mind that the Sony is significantly more portable, and Zeiss lenses >>> Canon L.

20 upvotes
EssexAsh
By EssexAsh (10 months ago)

and then try sticking your 5d3 into your coat pocket. Well done for totally missing the point of this camera.

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
18 upvotes
T3
By T3 (10 months ago)

These days, I don't carry around a camera the size of a 5D3 unless I'm being paid to do it. Plus, carrying around a 5D3, you stick out like a sore thumb. Not so with the RX1. It's just a completely different experience, and I can easily see how some people would be willing to pay the money to have the RX1's shooting experience. It's just a different value proposition.

10 upvotes
sportyaccordy
By sportyaccordy (10 months ago)

Exactly. It sucks that it's so expensive but I respect and understand what Sony wanted to accomplish. They just need an APS-C bridge camera between the RX100 and RX1. I'm thinking, RX10?

6 upvotes
Olgierd
By Olgierd (10 months ago)

A pinch of salt for those who claim Zeiss > Canon L. There's Carl Zeiss glass maid in Jena Germany and there's Zeiss sticker glued to the glass made in Japan.

2 upvotes
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (10 months ago)

Olgierd
And your point is what? that made in Japan Zeiss is still better than that made in Japan Canon

2 upvotes
BJL
By BJL (10 months ago)

The Canon 35L is one stop faster at f/1.4; the RX1 lens is 35mm, f/2, so one could instead compare to
- Canon 6D ($1900) with Canon 35/2 ($289)
or
- Nikon D600 ($2000) with Nikon 35/2 ($360)

2 upvotes
Olgierd
By Olgierd (10 months ago)

Boerseuntjie: No. But my old Sony F505 (that I've bought more than decade ago) used CZ glass (which wasn't bad for 5mpix camera) not necessarily mean it was better than Canon's equivalent used on their cameras at that time.
So, making a statement that all CZ are better than Canon, Nikon, Olympus is simply foolish.

0 upvotes
NomadMark
By NomadMark (10 months ago)

Personally, I have a 5D2. To me, the 5D3 doesn't add a lot of value to my kit. I'll pass and wait for Canon to release something to rival the resolution of the D800.

Meanwhile, I bought the RX1 after owning a NEX7 for some time and enjoying the size. And, I love it. The RX1 raw files are smashing.

3 upvotes
maximuscr
By maximuscr (10 months ago)

The Zeiss lens from this camera performs noticebly better at f2 than the Canon L 35 f1.4.

3 upvotes
Sunworshiper
By Sunworshiper (10 months ago)

The RX1 is my 'always with me' camera and is truly remarkable with files as good as my D600 (and nearly as good as my D800E). But the RX1 without AA filter should have been there at launch and I very much hope that Sony offer existing owners an upgrade path (sensor swap) at reasonable cost.

2 upvotes
tommy leong
By tommy leong (10 months ago)

thought my eyes was playing tricks
or you double posted

hahahaha

0 upvotes
panoviews
By panoviews (10 months ago)

No viewfinder, next candidate please.

8 upvotes
AstroStan
By AstroStan (10 months ago)

You are mistaken. The RX1 has a fantastic viewfinder. Actually there are 2 different viewfinders (optical and OLED).

0 upvotes
Tower
By Tower (10 months ago)

How many people to spend that money to get this sort of cameras?

1 upvote
Donald Chin
By Donald Chin (10 months ago)

A lot more than you think. :-)

8 upvotes
Robgo2
By Robgo2 (10 months ago)

What exactly do you mean by "this sort of camera?" If you mean a compact jewel with a spectacular lens and amazing IQ, then the RX1 is worth what Sony charges for it, and they seem to have quite a few buyers, including many who shoot with top of the line Leicas, Nikons and Canons. Some of those same folks are dumping their other gear and using the RX1 almost exclusively. Whether removing the already weak AA filter is worthwhile is for each individual buyer to decide. Personally, I find my RX1 to be about as sharp as I would want it to be.

10 upvotes
Nigel Wilkins
By Nigel Wilkins (10 months ago)

I would buy it if it had a 20mm lens with similar IQ. I would then fund it by selling my 6D & 20mm lens.

0 upvotes
Mike99999
By Mike99999 (10 months ago)

People would spend this money just on the lens, if it were good enough.

3 upvotes
DFPanno
By DFPanno (10 months ago)

Shoot with this baby and the memory of price paid goes right out the window. RX1 is my favorite camera in >50 years of photography.

11 upvotes
mcshan
By mcshan (10 months ago)

Plenty.

1 upvote
mumintroll
By mumintroll (10 months ago)

Truly? I don't see any significant difference in Raw. I would say in some part of picture is RX1 even better on high ISO than RX1R. Is it worth upgrade? I don't think so.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
CFynn
By CFynn (10 months ago)

Yes - not worth it IF you already have the RX1.

But, if you don't, then now there is a choice - just like with the Nikon D800 / 800E

4 upvotes
Total comments: 93