I think this is where we disagree.No, I wouldn't argue with that. However it simply isn't what you initially said. We have no idea what the experience of the OP might be. I agree (and have stated elsewhere) that the RX1 is a camera for an experienced phototgrapher. My point was and remains, that the camera is entirably useable if you understand it and shoot accordingly. If the photographer wants to use it as a point and shoot that will nail focus every time without too much thought on their part, it isn't the appropriate bit of gear. In saying that I am not making snide comments about the skills of others, we all have different requirements when we shoot.
--
Mike Fewster
Adelaide Australia
Your argument: Experience of photographer can make up for "most" of the sluggishness of the RX1.
My argument: Experience of photographer can make up for "some" of the sluggishness of the RX1.
How would you prefocus in these scenarios?
Street Scenario #1: At night, an interesting looking motorbike is at a stoplight 5 meters away. Subject requires f2 at 1/60 to shoot at under iso 800. Only 2 seconds to compose, focus, and take the shot.
Street Scenario #2: Right after the motorbike shot, you find a beautiful girl walking towards you 3.5 meters away, but will be 1.5 meters by the time you are ready to compose and take the shot.
See, those are impossible shots with the RX1, because no human can react that quickly and accurately focus at f2. Maybe with a rangefinder, but no chance with the RX1. Unless zone-focusing means foreseeing a scene before it even happens! With the A7x series or Leica Q, those shots are captured. This is where our definition of "usable" differs, I think.
And I must add that subjects in focus (via zone-focusing) and subjects in critical focus are two different beasts.
Last edited:


