Reading mode: Light Dark

Do you think Sony will enter the fray with a MF RX?

Go to last post
travelinbri_74

travelinbri_74

Veteran Member
Messages
5,541
Solutions
1
Reaction score
2,776
I could see Sony putting out a MF RX1 type around 5000 USD.

Why wouldn't they?

-TBri
 
is going to make some money. I am shocked no one has, yet. Please, please, Pentax.

But thankfully (because of the sensor size) it will be a bit larger than the too-small RX series. Something like the old Fuji 645 series with a fixed zoom would be a dream camera. Coat-pocketable, or easily fitting in a computer-messenger bag/briefcase.
 
With what Sony has achieved in FF sensor development, where the A7RII is just about already medium format film quality in terms of resolution, Im not sure how much sense this makes. For product photography we have Olympus and Pentax taking us well into 50-80MP range at a fraction of the price of MF, and Sony offering a tiny body with modern features for half the price of MF. I just dont see the appeal of MF right now, unless you're doing very high end portraits or fashion work that require higher resolution and absolute top tier equipment which may help justify your rates.
 
We disagree on that. I think the transitions and color depth on MF appear - to my eye - significantly better than FF. Take a look at some of the recent MF pics being taken and compare them to Sony FF. Not saying Sony FF isn't more than enough to do some jobs, but if you want top quality and small, I think this would be it.

-TBri
 
travelinbri_74 said:
I could see Sony putting out a MF RX1 type around 5000 USD.

Why wouldn't they?

-TBri
Click to expand...
The RX1 has a fixed, single focal length lens design. Right off the bat, this would not appeal to me. If this camera were selling for $999 (what I think something like this is worth to me but not to say it wouldn't be worth more to others), I might be swayed if a slightly more expensive MF version were released.

I think most MF users are ILC users at heart (like myself) . For this reason, I believe Sony's market research would reject the idea at least at the $5000 price point.

--
Once you've done fifty, everything else is iffy.
 
Last edited:
People already pay nearly 5,000 USD for a Leica Q. You don't think a Sony MF camera rivaling it would be well received? I don't think it is for everyone, but I think - if done well - it would get a loyal following.

-TBri
 
I agree although I think the focal length may need more thought. Medium format is typically associated with landscape (wide) and portrait (telephoto). I'm not sure that a "general purpose" 35mm equivalent lens would be the right choice.
 
In a perfect world I would want a 28/2. If they could make the AF reasonably fast, and the lens was excellent, that could cover 80% of my needs.

-TBri
 
Fair point. No, I mean a MF 35/2.8 (approx) which would be 28/2 equivalent.
 
travelinbri_74 said:
People already pay nearly 5,000 USD for a Leica Q. You don't think a Sony MF camera rivaling it would be well received? I don't think it is for everyone, but I think - if done well - it would get a loyal following.

-TBri
Click to expand...
I had to look up the Leica Q. Of course, some of its price is the Leica premium. Leica could probably get away with an fixed lens MF compact. :)
 
Oh, I would be all over this camera if Sony would decide to release it. I don't think they are going to do it, though. That would be seriously ballsy move.

Preferably it should have the Sony 54x42mm sensor as apparently it's the only digital MF sensor capable of delivering True 16-bit files, 44x3 apparently delivers only 14-bit files. Now the real question is what would be the focal length for this beast?

My wish: about 21-24mm (35mm equivalent) Zeiss lens, and say f/3.5-f/4 f/stop to keep it relatively small. If it would cost between 4500-6000 €/$, I would be all over this camera! I would bet it would sell very well!
 
tex said:
is going to make some money. I am shocked no one has, yet. Please, please, Pentax.

But thankfully (because of the sensor size) it will be a bit larger than the too-small RX series. Something like the old Fuji 645 series with a fixed zoom would be a dream camera. Coat-pocketable, or easily fitting in a computer-messenger bag/briefcase.
Click to expand...
PDR isn't everything, but, because of the conversion-gain changing trick, the a7RII/RX1RII is every bit the equal of the larger sensor at ISO 640 and up, and I think that's where a small, fixed-lens camera is most likely to be used. Putting a zoom on such a camera would threaten the wonderful rendering of the RX1's 35, and make the camera larger.

Still, it would be an interesting alternative. I was a big Plaubel Makina fan, but I have to admit that the RX1II beats it for IQ.

Jim
 
If Ricoh put out a GR with the 645Z's sensor, the equivalent FOV (40mm but faster), and the responsiveness and well-considered controls as the current GR, I'd gladly pay Leica Q prices for such a thing.

Heck, if Nikon put out Coolpix cameras with their FF sensors and a nice, fast 28mm fixed lens, and retained as much as possible identical physical and user interfaces as their DSLR big brothers, I'd pay Sony RX money for them. Imagine a Coolpix D4S or a Coolpix D810 that from a tactile and UI point-of-view would feel almost identical to their DSLR brothers, but in a smaller package.

They could probably sell a boatload of them just as companion cameras to pros buying their DSLR equivalents. Nikon would get to amortize their sensor and ASIC development costs as well as whatever else they can reuse from their parts bins in these cameras.
 
Tmuussoni said:
Oh, I would be all over this camera if Sony would decide to release it. I don't think they are going to do it, though. That would be seriously ballsy move.

Preferably it should have the Sony 54x42mm sensor as apparently it's the only digital MF sensor capable of delivering True 16-bit files, 44x3 apparently delivers only 14-bit files.
Click to expand...
What's the point of a sensor like the Sony 54x42mm one quantizing the pixels with precision far finer than than the read noise?

Jim
 
Every bit its equal in what ways? I very much hesitate to argue technical points with you, but I am seeing differences with my own eyes, especially in tonal gradations.

In terms of resolution, the difference between 42 and 50/51 is probably negligible enough not to make a difference. Improvements to iso and noise probably do favor the newer sensors, so then DR. It makes them equal, then, perhaps in that regard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top