Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/02/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]So this the same thing as my Contax G2 that I sold years ago. It was my most loved and hated camera: fantastic lenses, I mean the best lenses I have ever owned in any format or film size. Totally unreliable AF, where the AF point was hard to locate. Guesss I'm out there, too. -----Original Message----- From: FRANK DERNIE Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 12:55 AM To: Leica Users Group Subject: Re: [Leica] any Sony RX 1 users No viewfinder, autofocus impossible to judge when using an add-on optical viewfinder (I would be)? Completely useless to me, however good the results in a review taking test charts. Shan't be getting one. Frank D. >________________________________ > From: Jayanand Govindaraj <jayanand at gmail.com> >To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org> >Sent: Wednesday, 13 February 2013, 4:40 >Subject: Re: [Leica] any Sony RX 1 users > >Mark, >I agree. We will have to keep looking for revues! That should clear the >problem up without a doubt! I presume a rave revue is a revue with drugs >and a Sony RX-1? (-: >Cheers >Jayanand > >Sent from my iPad > >On 13-Feb-2013, at 8:53 AM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote: > >> Pauls opinion is of course to be taken seriously. >> It is of course. One opinion >> One can easily check out other revues which are out. >> None of them are bad. I read or two or three long others. >> the luminous landscape one is very intensive. And super good. >> In a month there will be a dozen. We'll see if any of them are bad. >> But if one opinion decides the issue for you; you'll not be interested in >> any of them. >> I think we'll be seeing people out using this camera. And we'll be seeing >> their work. So it won't be an issue of complied rave revues. >> >> >> On 2/12/13 8:24 PM, "Richard Man" <richard at imagecraft.com> wrote: >> >>> Yes, and if we can trust anyone, it would be Paul's. >>> On Feb 12, 2013 5:06 PM, "Marty Deveney" <benedenia at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> But the lens isn't very good, which is particularly problematic in a >>>> fixed lens camera. >>>> >>>> Marty >>>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Mark Rabiner <mark at >>>> rabinergroup.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> All this talk about flash this and flash that. >>>>> This is a full frame camera which can be used easily at iso 64,000 and >>>>> beyond just like a 3 pound full frame DSLR flagship camera can be. But >>>> can >>>>> go in your pocket. >>>>> And just like a Rollei 35. Which few used with flash. >>>>> >>>>> Its the beginning of full frame compact options for those who want the >>>>> quality that full frame brings you and are willing to pay a bit extra >>>>> for >>>>> it. >>>>> They 're not going to have to pay THAT much for it as this is also >>>> obviously >>>>> a premium placed camera. The ostentatious lens and ultra solid build >>>> makes >>>>> it so. Plenty of full frame compact options will be had soon made of >>>>> more >>>>> traditional plastic and with a safe mindless zoom designed to appeal >>>>> to >>>> the >>>>> masses. It won't really cost this much to have full frame fit in your >>>>> pocket. >>>>> It will be under two grand not under three. USD. >>>>> >>>>> Sony is a company I trust more than any other electronics company. >>>>> They seldom blow it. If that's the case now its a darned shame but I >>>> don't >>>>> think its going to slow up the reality of a full frame compact >>>>> market. >>>>> >>>>> To me it makes the full frame compact solution really serious. Instead >>>>> of >>>>> just pretending to me. A full frame compact camera would really be a >>>> serious >>>>> picture taking solution to be embraced by top pros and very serious >>>>> amateurs. The 1.5 crop and 2x crop would like to be but they are not. >>>>> We are all just too familiar with what a full frame digital sensor can >>>> bring >>>>> to our work. And many of us are willing to drag one around to get >>>>> that. >>>> But >>>>> when its compact that's a dream come true. When its compact we're >>>>> talking >>>>> Barnack. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 2/12/13 3:58 PM, "John Owlett" <owl at postmaster.co.uk> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Monday 11 February 2013, at 18:06 PST, Paul Roark wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I had the opportunity to test a Sony RX1 briefly. I sent it back >>>>>>> due >>>>>>> to defects, but it is an interesting camera and has a few attributes >>>>>>> that are an exciting glimpse of the future. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ... snip ... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So, interesting, but not ready for prime time for me. >>>>>> >>>>>> When the Sony DSC-RX1 was first mentioned on the LUG, several people >>>>>> expressed doubts as to whether it would actually be bought to take >>>>>> pictures. My reaction was, "It might be", so I went across to >>>>>> Bournemouth to take a close look at one. >>>>>> >>>>>> The RX1 is basically a solidly built camera body with a 24.3 >>>>>> megapixel >>>>>> sensor and a good 35mm f/2 lens. What Sony seems to be trying to do >>>>>> is to offer picture quality as good as an M-240 + Summicron, with >>>>>> build quality as good as an M-240 + Summicron ... without the >>>>>> flexibility of a system camera ... but at less than half the weight >>>>>> and less than half the price. >>>>>> >>>>>> And if Sony can achieve that, why not? After all, Rolleiflex sold >>>>>> about two million miniature Rollei 35 film cameras, and still makes >>>>>> an occasional batch. >>>>>> >>>>>> As a build-quality neurotic, but not a camera engineer, I felt that >>>>>> the RX1 was as solidly built as the Nikon F3/T I had with me; >>>>>> >>>>>> ... but ... >>>>>> >>>>>> the RX1 has no integral viewfinder. There is an EVF you can put in >>>>>> the hot shoe, but then you cannot fit a separate flash unit there. >>>>>> There is a compact-camera-style pop-up flash, but of course that >>>>>> won't bounce. >>>>>> >>>>>> There apppears to be no way to use an EVF and a separate flash unit >>>>>> at the same time, without setting up a slave flash to be triggered >>>>>> by the pop-up unit. Which is complication too far for my ideal of >>>>>> a walkabout camera. >>>>>> >>>>>> So, while I would agree with Paul that it is "an exciting glimpse >>>>>> of the future", I would also agree that it is "not ready for prime >>>>>> time for me." >>>>>> >>>>>> Later, >>>>>> >>>>>> Dr Owl >>>>>> >>>>>> ---------------------------- >>>>>> John Owlett, Southampton, UK >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Mark William Rabiner >>>>> Photography >>>>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Leica Users Group. >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Mark William Rabiner >> Photography >> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > >_______________________________________________ >Leica Users Group. >See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > _______________________________________________ Leica Users Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information