Image via DSLRmagazine
Short break from the news coverage on the new cameras to share you the link to the latest Sony RX1 review at Dpreview (Click here). The camera earns the Gold Award and an overalls core of 79%. The main negative is the poor video quality but this camera isn’t made for filmmakers anyway 🙂
Dpreview writes: “There are plenty of photographers who are likely to appreciate a camera with a fixed prime lens, precisely because it offers something that interchangeable lens cameras don’t – in terms of size and dedication of purpose. So, if what you want or need is a fixed 35mm full frame camera, then the RX1 not only offers you that – it also offers a camera you can really love. And its combination of image quality and size make it one that will allow you to get photos you wouldn’t get with any other camera.”
Photographer and SAR reader Wataru used the RX1 to shot some of his latest portraits and the first nude pics ever taken with the RX1. You can see them at 500px.com (please click only if you are an adult!).
P.S.: I will soon post a new roundup with new RX1 and RX100 reviews and test. Just give me some time to sort out all links and rumors I got in these days! Thanks!
—-
RX1 links roundup:
RX1 at [shopcountry 15824].
RX1 Gariz accessories:
1) They made a new half leather case in Black and Brown ([shoplink 16437 ebay]Click here to see them on eBay[/shoplink]).
2) The new lens cap ([shoplink 16439 ebay]Click here to see them on eBay[/shoplink]).
3) The new entry is the anti loose button(!) ([shoplink 16438 ebay]Click here to see them on eBay[/shoplink]). Don’t know if that will be really useful for you RX1 owners. Someone has it and call it how it works? Thanks!
4) And this is the really first time I see that. A special Leather skin hood! ([shoplink 16441 ebay]Click here to see them on eBay[/shoplink]).
RX100 links roundup:
RX100 price search links: [shopcountry 13014].
Cases: [shoplink 13347 ebay]Official Sony LCJ-RXA case[/shoplink], [shoplink 13344 ebay]Gariz case[/shoplink], [shoplink 13345 ebay]more leather case[/shoplink].
Batteries: [shoplink 13346 ebay]NP-BX1 Battery[/shoplink].
Special stuff: [shoplink 13343 ebay]Multi-Coated LENS ARMOR UV[/shoplink]. Magfilter at Amazon (Click here). RX100 filter adapter on [shoplink 13486 ebay]eBay (Click here)[/shoplink]
74 Responses
A99 has the same video quality, so it’s poor.
A99 has extremely good video quality, no idea what you are talking about. The video quality of the RX1 is even better because a) no light loss of a fixed translucent mirror and b) perfect lens.
AM I? does DPR have an idea of what they are talking? “Extremely” good video quality, please define that? Have you seen the moire and aliasing? Have you seen comparisons side to side with other cameras? A GH3 or even a hacked GH2 will run circles arround A99 (yes I know they are x2 cropped, but we;re talking quality and details).
The footage from a99 is highly compressed due to AVCHD codec, and even the uncompressed HDMI doesn’t save the situation.
People assault and call me a noob, but have no idea of what “good” video quality actually looks. Take a dedicated video recorder like Blackmagic, which costs roughly the same amount of money – a99 has no chance competing.
Wow, a dedicated camcorder costing the same will be better. Who would’ve expected that?
Since when GH2 and GH2 are “dedicated camcorders”, and costing a fraction of a99.
Was talking about the Blackmagic you mentioned. Your GH2 and GH3 comparison is also flawed. Yes, they are cheaper, but they don’t have full frame sensors, do they? How about the A99 running circles around them in terms of still output?
He is right. AVCHD is a bad codec that is limited to a bit rate of 24mbps in 24/25p and 28mbps in 50/60p modes. Blackmagic is a camera that although affordable, it is a x2.5 crop actually (smaller than m43) but it has its flaws although video is exceptional.
GH3, however, is a camera that has a markedly better video quality than any Canon FF, Sony FF (even FS700 is crippled by the AVCHD codec) can compare to a GH3 or a hacked GH2. This is a fact that a camera that costs around £1k outperforms video capabilities of cameras many times its price. If Sony wishes to compete for video enthusiasts, a better codec is needed. Essentially, most of you may think that Sony couldnt change this in the current line up, but they can because its a software limitation (proven by the GH2 hacks) so why wouldnt they offer it to begin with? especially in the FS700 which has worse image quality than the FS100 which is not crippled by any codec.
RTI, The GH3 isn’t really a fraction of the cost of an A99, considering the body only is around $1600 and a decent cinema lens to fit it is upwards of $500-1400, it can actually be more expensive than an RX1 and price comparable with the A99 combo.
VG900 is a dedicated video camera, and the quality is just as bad as on the A99.
Worth noting is that DPReview shows they know nothing about video when they call the video quality of any AVCHD codec camera ‘extremely good’. It just isnt.
For those interested in video, you should rather head to EOSHD where you will see what AVCHD looks like to its other counterparts and how price and ‘dedicated video’ cameras are not what is needed to get better video quality.
Does nobody remember why did the VG20 not sell as well because it had the same video quality as a NEX 5n?
Actually AVCHD is not that bad. Read this -> http://www.eoshd.com/content/8332/sony-fs700-the-image-quality-verdict-incredible-14-stops-of-dynamic-range-in-avchd
“AVCHD – an underrated codec”
then im asking u back, did u use a99 urself and compare to other cameras in real? which camera do not have moire and aliasing at all? and did u really compare urself with it with all the camerasssss!?? good quality in terms of what u talking about. if u did not really try it out then just “shhhhhhhhh”
Several samples of any camera you want, downloadable at full 1080p too from vimeo. Go ahead, check it out. If you are happy with what you have, you sshh, let the grown ups speak.
You are silly. When I need quality i take Epic. When I dont have less budget I will use A99+BM Shuttle.
Guys this FF camera is a good performer.
Shoot something dont troll.
RTI already showing how nub he is!
You are not serious, go to http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx1/20 and search video comparaison vs A99.
And in the future, make some seriou research before giving your opinion!
You may as well mention that the MK3 and D800 also has poor quality in that regard. Those, plus the A99 will crush the Panasonics and blackmagic in low lighting, but yes, they are not perfectly suited for video (they are allround cameras).
That said, the blackmagic also uses a CMOS sensor and is prone to rolling shutter-effect. The only camera I know of that will not, is the upcoming DigitalBolex if it ever gets off the ground.
show us your fine videos shot with anything.
What is that thing on the top of the RX1 hotshoe ?
@ hei:
It’s an old rather lousy russian optical viewfinder with revolving lenses for five different focal lengths. Looks cool but is kinda pointless on a camera with a fixed prime lens. If you want to get a fantastic 35mm viewfinder for your RX1, the Topcor viewfinders are among the brightest and finest ever produced. The problem is to find them and to be able to pay for them. 🙂
http://www.cameraguild.jp/nekosan/image/camimage/leotopcor.jpg
Thanks man
“18teen”? 😉
Poor videoquality for intern (AVCHD) og extern (Uncompressed HDMI 4:2:2/10 bit)?
Video quality, it’s all relative. My Nex 5n easily outperforms ALL videocams people around me possess. And yes, there might be some ongoing and furthergoing wishes in that respect, but for a photographer and occasional video amateur the video quality of my NEX is absolutely stunning.
I assume the video quality of this RX1 is better, at least, so who don’t get what they want, video professionals? They wouldn’t buy an RX1 to shoot video, would they?
Like a video shooter I agree. But 5N gets HOT even modded
For photographic requirements the Fujifilm’s X100S is the better choice. The autofocus performance is not good as it should. And Sony has a poor firmware support to improve their products. And no viewfinder … sorry… it’s a shame. And the overpriced lenses of Zeiss have all the same problem … to slow autofocus for the lens construction & a little bit to much vignetting. For me it seems to be a camera from engineers for marketeers – the needs of photographers are on key points neglected. Pity!
Fuji is not known for having good autofocus…
This RX1 is fabulous. I had it 3 weeks ago and it’s pleasure to use it.
See http://www.flickr.com/photos/hedes. I also own the A900 and upgrades to the A99 at the end of this year and both are really complementary.
Indeed really nice images… because it is a fullframe camera and it costs much less than a Leica. What I do not understand is, why Sony built a high end device, well designed camera as ‘all-day-in-my-pocket’ camera and forget the interaction pattern of using a camera as photographer. I want a viewfinder, I want a fast autofocus, preferably weather sealed, a good wide angle adapter, a power-grip …. finally we are talking about an outstanding camera… a Leica alternative.
Maybe it’s a poc just to see how the market reacts. The RX2 will have a viewfinder.
Meanwhile, some magic instants are lost 🙂
Yes viewfider is important. Without it RX-1 is only the world’s best compact camera. With it a professional grade photografic tool for several ( but not all) purpose. The additional viewfinder is perfect for me, because when the size is important I can take it off, and it is tiltable and that is much better than nex-7 nex-6 option. And in addition the “in finder picture quality” is clearly the best comparing to nex cameras and anything others.
I am afraid it is far to niche a product it obviously has no use under 35mm and no use over 35mm it has very poor AF of any kind not even a built in viewfinder restricting it to essentially near static semi-wide angle subjects .It is just an expensive one trick pony
Much less? I would not be so sure. In europe it costs $4000 (€3000). About the same as used M-9.
Yes, much less.
… pointles comparing to used Leica without lens
And it definitely shouldn’t cost so much: it must be about perfect for this price (europe). At least it should have swivel touch screen. So typical Sony crap product. I wonder how uselessly Sony wastes resources: phones (crap Xperia Z), NEX-es, whole SLT idea, etc. No wonder it suffers from these losses in recent times, they played too much about market segmentation and ⅙ baked products. I hope they’ll die sooner than later and better company will take control over their photography and sensor development divisions.
No one is forcing you to buy any of their products, are they? Is Sony somehow taking value away from your own gear? Is Sony somehow demeaning to Photography? What is your point, either buy what you like or focus on shooting.
knowing sony its probably just a beta tester am pretty sure a new RX something will be out soon. I hate that companies do that but I always wait to see whats next after anything new comes out anyway.
So now we’re turning to porn? Anything to get a few thousand more clicks. Sony Alpha Rumors, I hope you’re happy counting your filthy money.
PORN? I’ve seen the pictures and they’re just nudes. Tasteful nudes. No porn at all.
Well, go enjoy your “ART”! Nothing wrong with selling a little “flesh for fantasy” is there? Especially when there is a little filthy lucre to be made. Sounds like you’re the one with the PROBLEM. I hope you’re proud!
Get a grip, dude…
So quick to define me. But go on. Keep up your opprobrious taunts. So nice to see an online community avoid falling into GROUPTHINK.
If you equate eroticism or sex with filth, then you have a real problem, my friend.
If you equate eroticism or sex with filth, then you have a real problem, my friend.
you degenerates need serious help..all of you.
Chill out. I just said that those pictures were not PORNOGRAPHY. Which, by definition, involves SEX. And there’s NO SEX going on there.
They are adult, nude pics, yes. You may not like them. You may not agree with SAR posting a link to those pictures. You are very much entitled to think and/or feel that way. And everyone should respect that.
HOWEVER, those are not porn. That’s all I’d tried to say.
Art is in the eye of the beholder, but apparently the sight of a nude woman is too much for you to handle without flying off in a rage. You need help.
Oh yes, going to buy a Porsche today!
Damn, some people has serious problems 🙂
Nude photography has a long history. And if it happens to link to it once per year you really shouldn’t go upset!
There are several photographers who shoot nudes that use m4/3 gear and are featured on other sites all the time. Finally we have a talent doing the same with Sony gear. BRAVO!
Porn industry was the major driving forces in film and photography world. Show some respect for it, hehehe.
get a life!
Well, for some reason I don’t manage to post my answer. I guess all my messages are being filtered? And why?
However: we had enough of the pseudo-religious dogmas. Art is art, and nude is a legitimate mean of expression.
Nobody forces anyone to see it, after all…
They just link to it. Hey what’s wrong with selling a little sex. All in the name of “ART”? Everyone does it. And that makes it perfectly fine, right? Right?…Right!
Well, it IS perfectly fine. No problem with nudes, no. Only people who have problems with nude pictures are, usually, people with problems…
And, I must add: Admin LINKED the site, and did not directly published the pics. So it was your choice to clic on the link and see the contents. Which needed to be further double clicked to be opened. It is indeed very complicated to explain how possibly pics of naked women could damage people who accepted to see them with no less than four clics (which count as a “yes” for any possible question like: “is it ok even if it’s a nude?”).
Freedom sucks, doesn’t it?
No, no. My problem is with him trumping it up. It states right on the post (NUDE PICS!) And again, you want to make up things about me-FINE. I see anyone who has an opinion different from the MAJORITY is run over here and slandered. Talk about GROUPTHINK.
Calling those pictures PORN is inflammatory. It is important to acknowledge that some religious perspectives take offense to public presentation of nude bodies, but the history of nude art & nude photography is not intended to offend.
In any event, calling it PORN is attempting to anger artistic photogs, no doubt. Don’t take that bait…
My comment was meant for “Mick” who is a little ‘meek’
Ah, the old bully tactic. You don’t even know me, but keep fighting for your dross. Enjoy!
@mick you wouldn’t be one of those nutty Yank fundamentalists ?
Didn’t know that religiotic sickoes crawling around here, too, having wet dreams about their imaginary friend up there.
The RX1 is a great toy and I would love to have it, could I afford it as such.
As for video for videographers, quite correctly it is not the right tool; for the serious photographer and for taking an occasional vid on the side it looks like perfect to me.
Not all is perfect – but what device is, after all.
FYI it’s spelt “sickos.” So nice that you’ve come to that conclusion from a sample of my posts. Admin has every right to promote that link. And I have every right to be critical of that. If you want to resort to name calling, that’s your right as well. And that’s all I have to say for now.
Thank you Andrea for 500px link. The RX1 shots are some of the sharpest I’ve seen from the camera. Also love that guy uses a nex6. I’m damn jealous!
Because he uses RX-1 or he shoots nude women? hahaha…
An interesting review. It reminded me of the other major reason why I haven’t bought one (other than price). I use manual focus most of time and I love the focus peaking feature on my NEX-7. It makes manual focusing fast and easy. Unfortunately, the RX-1 only gives you focus peaking in magnified view, which sucks big time. It’s distracting, unnecessary and really slows you down. For me this is an even bigger dealbreaker than its high cost.
Wow wonderful photography! Glad to see someone using Sony cameras for art instead of shooting brick walls and worrying about specs. There are lots of non-nude pictures too.
You could qualify your statement by also acknowledging that the the MK2 and to an even larger extend, the D800 suffer these same issues. The panasonics can’t keep up in low light due to their smaller sensor, and DOF will be better on the FF cameras.
The blackmagic is dedicated for video, and is better in some of these areas, but has no chance against them in low lighting situations. Also, the blackmagic uses CMOS which is prone to rolling shutter effect (if you pan too fast for instance). The only camera (somewhat affordable) I know of that does not use CMOS is the upcoming DigitalBolex, if it every hits ground.
No camera shoots nice pics, thats done by the photographer…and even then, he doesnt do much since the camera is a light photocopier. you folks need to stop proping yourselves up so much.
I didn’t write this. I guess the system is now stitching my name to new posts?
Nothing against this post per se, just stating that I didn’t write it…
lorenzino (the real one)
Juat kidding, I wrote it. I like reaading what I wrote and writing it again.
lorenzino ( the real one)
what the fuck….
what the fuck….
Why would they disgrace the beautiful RX-1 by putting a pencil-sharpener on top of it??
If I could afford an RX1 I’d probably shoot nudes with it…
In the meantime I’ll have to stick to A77 sleaze…