Yep, I am fully aware we are comparing apple with oranges. The Leica M and Sony RX1 are similar but at the same time very different cameras. But it’s interesting to see how they compare when it comes to analyze the pure image quality. You would expect a $12,000 Leica M + Summilux 35mm ($4,999 here at Amazon) combo to match and probably beat the performance of the $2800 Sony RX1. Just watch the video made by TheCameraStore TV (specifically the part from minute 10 towards). The Sony RX1 can shot way sharper pictures! That’s one of the advantages having a fixed lens that has been specifically developed for the Sony 24MP sensor. Suddenly the camera sounds like a bargain compared with the Leica 🙂
Also Steve Huff compared the Leica M with the Sony RX1 and writes: “The RX1 is a resolution monster as well and seems to beat the Leica M here for sharpness/detail”
I guess that if the Sony RX1 sells well than Sony may come out with a new RX2 soon (maybe in 2014).
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]).
119 Responses
“$12,000 for Leica M + Summilux can’t match the $2800 RX1 image quality!”
The RX-1 should have been flying off the shelves by now, no? 7* rating and multiple sources confirming the superiority of the Rx1 should make Sony rethink its interchangeable lens camera lineup and make more Rx’ cams.
Expensive niche products won’t save Sony’s finances.
Yet, this seem to work very well for many other companies.
many people are still holding onto their money waiting for a full frame NEX
There is already a full frame Nex. NEX VG-900.
It could have been NEX-6 but they put APS-C in it by mistake.
I’m holding out fot mine in 56 megapixels .
you’re a funny guy, 56mpixel in a casual oriented nex.. yeah.. ok.
Well, according to Sony the RX1 sells well 🙂 So I don’t see any reason to complain.
But yes, I completely agree: Sony should really rethink their strategy and push for more RX models, especially: develop RX10 with APS-C sensor and some small bright lens instead of playing with countless NEXes all the time. Noone remembers these anyway.
And plus one more for more RX cameras.
Not sure if the lens used was Summilux 35 ASPH FLE.
Well, it is FLE
I’d rather have a full frame A mount mirror less than a full frame NEX. I don’t get the great need for a NEX full frame, especially when there is already a wide variety of full frame A mount lenses. Still, if they can have one camera that takes both mounts (and be reasonably priced), that would be quite a coup.
+1 and exactly!
Whether its mirrorless amount ir nex hybrid it should be 56megapixels.
By enlarging the same sensor design as the nex7n to full frame size sony could achieve this witb absolutely no downside. By the time Sony releases its next full frame camera I they might even expand the technology and make it even better.
Another option would be to enlarge the same c size sensor to 36x36mm54mp and 84the megapixels (many square
You don’t get it? I have a mirrorless camera in my bag at all times, everywhere I go. My SLR always stayed at home. Is it really so hard to understand?
A FF E-mount can make use for about any rangefinder and SLR lens ever produced. That’s one thing you A-mount whiners obviously never will get in your heads.
YES!
Yep. Cause you see – on A mount there’s huge pile of AF lenses, including excellent Zeiss, so there’s hardly any need to play with adapted lenses. While on E-mount you’re down to… 13 lenses (including duplicated focal lengths) so you’re bound to think that adopted lenses is a best and only way to go…
yawn… same story over and over again.
Except that the potential market for A mount cameras is too small because it only appeals to current or future A mount users. That’s not how you get users from or those interested in other mounts on board. Yet that’s exactly what Sony should and aims to doo. A mirrorless A mount system is dead in the water, just like the Pentax mirrorless K. The latter just sped things up with fugly looks and the lack of an add on EVF.
@Freddo , the ability to use manual focus non stabilized lenses is a somewhat debatable advanatge, and certainly not one that will help out Sony’s finances.There are a very wide selection of lenses for the A mount all of which have full AF and access to the IBIS { which I really wish they had found a way to put in NEX } Unfortunately the selection of native mount lenses for Nex is both small and honestly most are at best mediocre
Canon IS lenses still have IS when using the right adapter. The large majority of A mount glass (exception being a handful of older Sigma lenses)does not.
Did you ever hold a VC Heliar 15mm in your hand? Obviously not. Just try and look it up and compare to those oversized unadaptable A mount lenses of yours.
exactly, it’s tiny (just got mine on Monday)
+1 mirrorless A mount
Remove the mirror from the A99, done.
And put a 56 megapixel sensor in a hmp version of it
and there you have it, a camera that no one will buy!
” A few people are not yet ready for 56 megapixels and they probably don’t want anyone else to have it.
That’s a shame especially if it prevents us from getting one. “
You fight so hard yo limit sony toto making just another 24 megapixel camera with higher and higher iso just like the new a99 that isn’t selling.
Many many people will buy a 56 megapixel camera that they can actually carry around and use.
The only thing stopping then is the fact that closed minded people fight so hard to stop it from being made. People like you with voices loud enough to halt progress.
At some point you too will want this camera.
You should be joining those of us that are trying to encourage sony to make such a camera.
I don’t have discourage sony from making your kind of camera whatever that is.
But help us encourage sony to make our type of camera, just one, whether its a mount or emount.
I know you may be getting tired of hearing the same thing over and over but sony seems to be a little hard of hearing these days and we need tbem to hear us.
What will you do with 56mp sensor and no lenses that actually resolve that high?
Most Nikon lenses do not resolve enough for the 36MP D800, but you cry for 56mp….
For what purpose? To have artificially large files that are a pain to actually work with but not give you any extra detail?
What lens can you buy that resolves 56mp? Even then, what would you honestly do with it? Take photos of your cats and post them on facebook at 1000px wide?
I have no idea why you think thete are no lenses.
The pixel density of a ff 56mp sensor is identical to the a77 or nex7.
Most high quality primes resolve that and more are on the drawing board.
Lens resolution is in line PAIRS per mm therefore you may be interpreting the specs wrong.
Any wildlife photographer needs all the resolution possible to see hair feathers etc.
Most of us sometimes take less than perfect shots that need cropping.
I understand you may not be ready for this or any camera but please answer my question.
Why is it so important to you that we not get this camera?
Shooting 56MP and downsampling to 24MP – the resulting image WILL be sharper (w/o artifacts) than a 24MP capture. The Bayer pattern interpolation produces actual resolution which is limited to about 1.4x pixel pitch. Just sayin’.
The reason is size. I never thought I would prefer a nex over A-mount but Its just as easy to carry two nex-6 or nex-7 than it is to carry a big dslr. I can then use two different primes instead of changing lenses, not to mention all the awesome manual lenses. I can carry more stuff with a smaller camera. The only problem now is the lens selection that seams to be on its way.
To rx1 sell well it has to reduce the price a lot. not 100 or 50 bucks.
Leica is dead! This latest iteration is nothing short of a sad and desperate attempt by a once great camera company to play ‘catch-up’ .. and it has failed.
I cringe when I read/hear the silly claims made by Leica enthusiasts – all that garbage about how ‘special’ Leica’s are.
All these idiotic posts by folk complaining about the RX1 price! Wake up people. Here is a camera (the RX1) that is a real game-changer. $2800 seems like a reasonable price when you weigh it against the preposterous prices that Leica demands.
Go Sony! Your cameras are far from perfect … but you are the ONLY company making anything that looks interesting.
Buy one, heck buy 2 (Rx1) for a good measure and show your support with your wallet. Empty words will not cut it. 🙂
For a company that is “dead”, they seem to be selling quite well. Almost all of their newest bodies and lenses have been back-ordered for months.
game changer in P&S category 😉 – just trolling
In Europe RX1 is so f@&king expensive that I almost find 2800$ a bargain. Anyway, to come back to the topic, I don’t see any reason to claim a winner: one is a rangefinder and the Sony is a P&S. Yes, both have a “full frame” sensor, but apart from that the other common thing they share is that they let you take photos.
A point and shoot? It may be a cybershot and it may be used as a point and shoot, but with the exception of the fixed lens, it is a better featured camera than the Leica.
RX1is a cybershot and will never be a rangefinder, period. I’m not questioning about quality: photos speak for themselves. And I love the idea of a fixed lens camera BUT at that price (in EUROPE) I want it with an integrated viewfinder, not being milked with a super expensive exterior one.
I hate Leica, Leica is dead in the water! Am I cool, mummy am I cool now? I hate Leica just like the other kids…
Man, RX1 is still building up it’s reputation. In a year time people start to think it’s cheap
MAN what a FANBOY SITE -_- rx1 is so crap that you cant even change lenses!!!! rx1 is too much expensive for what offer!
not possible to change lenses in a fixed lens camera? what an epic fail!
[/irony]
so if is a compact camera why compare it to a leica? [/funny boy]
They’re both compact mirrorless quality cameras, whether you like it or not. Just because they have obvious differences too, doesn’t mean you can’t compare them for the market coverered by the afore mentioned overlap.
Was that so hard to grasp to begin with?
Did anyone call it a compact? But yes, it’s by far the most “compact” full frame camera. And thats also the whole point of the camera 😉 Bye bye hater
“not possible to change lenses in a fixed lens camera?” is this not a compact camera? Leica CAN switch lenses, sony CANT = overpriced… argument closed 😉
@Ampas:
MUHA! Almost half the price of the lens for the Leica. And for that money you get a faster operating body with a better sensor included. Overpriced only if you can’t afford it. In which case these Leica’s are way out of reach and the discussion is silly to begin with.
It’s sad you don’t understand the value of the RX1. Go tote around the 5DIII then, and see if you take it everyday to work with you just in case an interesting shot presents itself. No? Then go for the new Leica and see how fast your wallet burns up.
you don’t know what your talking about. The lens alone compare’s to lenses that cost as much or more than the RX1. Its not for everyone but its far from what you describe it to be.
meh even the canon M is better than sonuy rx 0,1 or hem, rxpstatyon
Indeed, since the rumors of the FF NEX is out, then people are waiting for it. When it comes out, however, and the price will most definitively not please the amateurs and enthusiasts (because they think NEX should be under $1k), people will begin to whine and what not.
I am happy that the RX1 is out there and I really wish Sony the utmost success with it. I, for one, will buy one when I can afford one and will wait for an RX2 with a 50mm lens and I can have a nice two cam combo kit. Thats all the lenses I need, really.
For those who want more lenses, stick with SLR or get any of the already nice NEX’s around and stop complaining about prices.
If the NEX FF is way over-budget (I won’t pay more than $3k for it, if it’s indeed awesome as anticipated), and there’s an RX2 with 50mm lens, I think I’ll go with the RX2.
Thats my man right there. Wise choise
Hehehe,
not even Steve Huff’s overpositive and overenthusiastic review won’t fix dat :>
RX2 with viewfinder and without builtin flash. Also I’d prefer 50mm to current 35mm
How does the RX1 compare to the D800 + Sigma 35mm F1.4 which costs around the same UK , or even to the d600 +sigma 35mm F1.4 which costs £500 less . The RX1 is an expensive one trick pony , Leica pricing has zero to do with a normal persons reality. I have to imagine that designing a camera solely to use one lens and one lens to be built into one camera has to be a lot easier than designing a lens that will be used on multiple different sensors Nikon have 12mp APS,16MP APS,24MP APS along with 12MP,16MP,24MP and 36MP FF. I would be shocked if a lens optimized for one camera did not deliver excellent results
some peaople will never understand that a truck isn’t comparable to a car, even if you can drive from A to B in both
the truck is louder, heavier and far more difficult to park, just like a Full Frame DSLR.
All valid points, but doesn’t change anything.
It compares great. The only real difference being the interchangeable lenses. In the end, the D800 is simply a refined old technology and nothing more.
What a ridiculous headline. Sony has to resist against the Fuji 100S. By the way … the new Leica is a good camera for Leica users. The quality of leica lenses are unattained. Pointless fanboy article!
Here a comparison of Leica M, RX1 and X100s:
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2013/03/21/crazy-comparison-leica-m-sony-rx1-and-fuji-x100s/
I personally think the Leica is still way overpriced for what you get. RX1 and X100s pricing seems okay to me however.
And who says Leica lenses are better than Zeiss? By definition? They are both on the highest but very much comparable level, sometimes on or the other is a tiny bit better.
“Leica is a good camera for Leica users” Wow!
The RX1 market is quite limited to 35mm plus perhaps 50 and 85mm. These would be an offer for those going for very expensive lenses, so it doesn’t matter to buy it with a camera. Sony did much better taking this market instead of trying to compete against the established Canon or Nikon DSLR domination – Sony completely succeeded on the high end market here.
On the other end they’re starting with E-Mount offering the option to attach Leica, Canon, Nikon or whatever lenses anyway. Therefore the Full Frame NEX becomes a key product for Sony on the market. For pulling users from other companies to attach their glass to a Sony camera the Full Frame NEX should be as affordable as possible, because Canon and Nikon have missed to serve this need and it’s easy to take, while the mass market already gets nearly similar results with Speed Boosters. Quite curious about this development, while I’m hoping for Sony improving the video use of their NEX photography camera line to point out the dual use of E-Mount as a main advantage…
The most important thing is glass then sensor in this day and age in most cases. Sony has killer sensors. The potential for a full frame NEX is outstanding. Imagine slim AF adapters like the lea2 but smaller that will work for nikon,canon etc. It would be cool if Sony made these adapters but I am almost sure they want but someone probably will. One universal camera for all. I hate all the fighting about camera brands. we should have a camera that can use any lens we want and that may or may not be the FF NEX.
I believe in this day and age each and every brand has great optics and great sensors. It is all about usability and price now.
Soooo, how well does the rangefinder on the RX1 work? How does it perform paired with a 90mm lens, a 50mm, or a 21mm lens? Oh wait, it doesn’t have any of these. Can we at least try to ignore these silly apples and oranges comparisons?
Oh yeah, the new Leica M is $7000, not $12000.
or any of the R lenses for that matter. I agree, pointless comparison
Did you read the headline?
The combo of M + Summilux FLE lens (best Leica lens btw.) is 12.000$ and picture quality of the sensor+lens of the RX1 seems to be better than than sensor+lens of the Leica. Nothing more, nothing less. No comparison of the other functions of the cameras at all.
Nope, misunderstanding here. I don’t dispute findings of this review, I’m just saying that it’s comparison of two completely different systems. RX1 should perform better since its lens is tailored for that sensor/camera and it is Zeiss lens. So my comment was more of a ‘yes, it’s better but you can’t do lot of things with it you can with M 240’ – sorry, should’ve worded my comment more like this one
And thus the image quality performance of the RX1 beats the image quality of the M. And since rangefinders have always had the reputation of being the more compact of systems, the RX1 is rightly pitted against it because it is a non SLR alternative with a FF sensor. So, A kit of RX1 and RX2(if 50mm coming soon)will still be cheaper than an M and a 35mm lens. Even if you chose the cheapest 35mm lens, the CV 35mm 1.4, at around $500, you would still have change for the RX’s
BOOM!
I would just have a bag full of rx bodies at different focal lengths rather than Leica.
they are comparing image quality on a print, made by 3 different full frame cameras with a 35mm lens, you can do that, right? and you can see what was the best result of those prints, right? it was sony’s camera, right?
Ethan, plus one.
Colin you’re right… sonuy is a good idea but too much expensive, is a camera for fool people with money and tecnologymania
Full quote:
“The RX1 is a resolution monster as well and seems to beat the Leica M here for sharpness/detail but again, on a nice display it appears flatter than the Leica and lacking in any kind of character. It is colder and more sterile. Still, it appears the Zeiss lens beats the cron for sharpness, which may come as a surprise to some.”
Thats no resolution monster.
Make a 56 megapixel full frame camera.
That would be a resolution monster.
That’s the the camera I would buy!
Have a look at this review of a bunch of expensive 35mm lenses on the NEX 7.
http://3d-kraft.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=138:adorable-35s-35mm-speed-lens-comparison-leica-slr-magic-mitakon-canon-speedbooster-samyang&catid=40:camerasandlenses&Itemid=2
Check the sharpness in the crops. None of them can out-resolve the 24Mp sensor of the NEX-7. 54Mp fullframe is just silly. Also, can you tell me how long it would take to process 54Mp RAWs in lightroom?
I don’t know what is getting more tiring, all of the repeated post for a 54MP sensor or this old straw horse about how long it would take to process photos from a high MP camera.
animalsbybarry………give it a rest!
John, you like me are a long time poster and I respect your work, but just get a new computer.
It’s like “don’t Increase the speed limit on the highway from 55 MPH to 70 MPH because my car won’t go that fast!”
I’ll ignore both the insult and the compliment and instead respond to the issue (I have actually never seen it addressed here before).
I own a current quad-core i5 with 8Gb, and it takes up to 10 seconds to check corner sharpness with 16Mp NEX Raws. I am genuinely curious how this process could be scaled up to Medium Format resolution without it posing a significant problem to workflow. Supposedly some MF .psd files are in the order of 1 Gb in size.
I recognize the need for 54Mp cameras, but it’s hardly appropriate in the context of the consumer orientated NEX line.
Any lens currently sharp enough for a a77 or nex7 would be sharp enough for a 56 megapixel full frame camera because the pixel density is identical.
Even sharper lenses can and will be made when the cameras get sharper.
There is great need for portable high res affordable equiment.
Animal photographers need to see every detail of an animal.
Scenic photographers need to capture tons of detail.
Every one of us often needs to crop a less than perfect shot into something better.
That’s the reason people like the animal guy keep asking for high res over and over again.
Thats why you should be joining us.
If Sony hears it often and loud enough mayby there’s some small chance they might actually listen.
We need high mp that can be used by anyone that wants it.
Not just in the studio.
Not just by the professional.
Not just by the super rich.
Join us.
John.
If Sony would include tiff as a file format option it would save processing time, especially for large files.
I recently updated my computer and it makes a huge difference in processing time.
We don’t need a RX2…we need a R2,interchangeable lens, mirror-less camera.
Yes Leslie … AND an EVF built right in.
Why are people crying over the headline? Am I the only one seeing “image quality” at the end of it? Nobody’s saying the RX1 is the better camera. But try to refute the fact that it offers better IQ at that specific focal length. Do it, Leica fanboys.
+1000
Yes, build an RX# for each focal length and compare the complete system… ohh crap, now I’m thinking I’d invest in that… Hey Fuji, Sony I wanna talk about a system…
Now you’re just being childish.
This is the same as saying the Nokia Pureview 808 has a better IQ than the iPhone 5. That’s 100% fact. Does that mean the Nokia 808 is a better phone? Nope.
Learn to take the comparison at face value and you’ll be fine. Or you can just… deal with it.
Plus one.
I own the Rx1 and love it but I do think with the accolades this camera is getting they should release a “Pro” version with a built-in VF, articulating screen, and perhaps without a flash and charge $3500 if need be. It can be as big as it needs to be to accommodate these updates. Personally, I’m happy with my purchase but others seem to want more of an all in one.
I could definitely see them releasing a 50m version of the Rx1 as well. I think it would be pretty cool. Those 2 ranges cover what likely buyers of this camera would want for the most part.
– and the sooner the better, Marlon, so the subsequent mdls that follow at fractions of that price will finally fulfill the “digital- Rollei 35/Oly XA/ Contax T”/etc pocket cam w/full quality wish, without breaking the bank.
Should be a fairly rapid process of succession, much quicker than for example with Sony’s audio recorders- Those began w/a bang at the high-end w/the ground-breaking PCM-D1 at around $3000, followed by the nearly as good D50 for $750, to the current M10 at under $300.
Since Gariz cases and the eBay link was mentioned on this post:
EVERYBODY BE AWARE OF THE EBAY GARIZ CASE SELLER: “originstore”
They never refunded my money when I returned my nex6 case. They never wrote to me after I sent them 6 eBay messages and direct emails.
Good looking but not so cheap cases. So be careful selecting your eBay seller.
About the rx1:
1) How come full frame camera can be that small?
= fantastic
2) As a full frame camera (whatever it is), offers a better image quality than Leica?= fantastic
3)Cheaper than many of the other major brand full frame cameras? = fantastic
4) not Leica, not Nikon, not canon, but not sont camerabrand SONY did this? = fantastic.
5) the lens on it is famously trustable CARL ZEISS? = fantastic.
That’s 5 clear fantastic points here. Nobody should say anything against.
But, yes of course go head and write your comments below here about: BUT, BUT, BUT…
…and don’t forget it has a leaf shutter and can flash sync at 1/2000 of a second. That is really fantastic!
But… you are right.
oh it’s still Leica 😉
Huh, I was moderated out!!! Why???
I love that this guy is comparing resolution by hand holding the cameras vertically away from his face. This test tells me nothing about resolution differences.
The Steve huff quote was taken out of context, and gives a somewhat distorted impression of his opinion of the RX-1 vs. the Summilux. Here’s the entire sentence:
“The RX1 is a resolution monster as well and seems to beat the Leica M here for sharpness/detail but again, on a nice display it appears flatter than the Leica and lacking in any kind of character. It is colder and more sterile.”
So in Huff’s view, sharper does not necessarily mean better. I would agree.
He lost me where he claimed that the RX1 beat the Leica M but the Leica M beat the D600. This makes no sense whatsoever since the D600 has the same sensor as the RX1 and was tested better.
It’s not just the sensor but the lens-sensor combo. What lens was used on the D600?
A) the D600 wasn’t tested better. All the separate measurements were well within the margin of measuring error (going both ways…), except colour response where the RX1 beat the D600 by quite a margin.
B) the measurements don’t account for all the properties defining IQ. Different AA filters can lead to different visual results too for example, while not really impacting these scores. If all was equal but it isn’t since the RX1 comes with its own unique lens.
But he seems to claim it is independent of lens that the Leica is better than the D600. That just does not make any sense given that tests show the D600 sensor better than the Leica by a HUGE margin.
You said “HUGE margin” ?
xD take it easy dude you sound a bit extrem on your words.
Bro
Why do you personally attack someone just for wanting a camera that you dont.
Where do you come up with this total crap about no lenses available.
But what I most want to know is what is the honest reason people like you don’t want us to get the kind of camera we want.
So what use for a 56MP camera do you have, and which lenses available for it will resolve anything close to that? Are you printing billboard-sized ads? Chances are you already have an 80MP MF back + appropriate lenses if you are.
Again only a few lenses resolve the 36MP that the Nikon D800 has, so what makes you think your A mount lenses will magically be capable of pulling out that sort of resolution?
Most new macro primes including 90-100mm Sony sigma and tamrin
Most of the new shorter focal lengs coming out and lots more.
Your concept if resolutions are wrong for 2 reasons.
You are not considering pixel density which is the same as the nex7 anda77
And you apparently do not know what you are reading when you read about lens resolution.
Lens resolution is typically expresed in line PAIRS. Therefore id is actuallyy double what you apparently think it is.
2 rows of pixels is the theoretical minimum to describe a line pair in reality it require s even more.
Your statement therefore is total nonsense.
If you actually read the comments made earlier in this posting by Mega Pix Man you would have had your answers before asking.
As for my personal information i firs need you to answer 2my questions for me.
Why would i give personal info to someone who sole purpose is to personally insult people ( see your rude and insulting cat comment )
And we are still waiting for the answer to the question of why you do not want other people to not have a 56mp camera just because you won’t buy it.
I have heard from others like yourself and would really like to understand what your motivation is.
That is of course if you have the guts to give us an honest reason.
Bro
Looking back at earlier comments not only have all your questions been answered but you have been asked the same question befor which you still are not answeriing.
I will ask again simply so there is no confusion.
What is the honest reason you want to prevent sony from building an affordable 56 megapixel camera for those of us that want it to buy.
It seems bro has the guts to trash other people.
But totally lacks the courage to honestly answer the questions asked of him.
Don’t worry Sony peaple like that probable won’t buy buy any new cameanuonera camera.
Bro we are still waiting for your answer.
In what way does my explaining common sense, real world use of a camera with such resolution mean I’m preventing Sony from doing anything? Nothing any of us do, in regards to posting speculation on the comments section of a rumor websites prevents or enables Sony to make or not make a product, this is some truly absurd reasoning.
So, you can name a half dozen, or maybe a dozen lenses that could match up with a 56MP camera. Yay?
Unless you’re regularly printing photos over 5 feet wide, you’re not going to reap the benefits of a 56MP camera. I personally do not care if Sony makes one or not, I’m sure they will eventually, or something similar, but it isn’t a huge need that they need to produce this sort of camera. There is a small segment of people who care more about numbers than anything as that they would please if they do, I would personally prefer they spend their effort improving DR, ISO performance, etc over meaningless MP numbers. A 56MP camera with the same pixel density as the A77(and similar noise performance, see: quite poor for a current generation camera) would be good for an ISO 100/200 landscape camera, but not much else.
24-36MP is good enough for 99.9% of use, so again, what do you NEED 56mp for?
Thank you for finallystanding up and answering our question.
Print size at 300 ppi the accepted quality standard would allow 20″x30″ print to be made from 54megapixels. Slightly more from 56 megapixels.
Yes everything I do is bigger than that.
Every picture I take reguires me to carry something portable into the field. So no camera currently made is good enough for me. That doesn’t even consider the fact that I often need to crop as I can seldom pose animals into perfect compositions.
If you read every post I have ever made the word cat never appears nor have I ever in my life posted anything on facebook.
Your personal attacks are wrong and unwarranted.
I do hope we can have future conversations that are more civil. I am definitely willing.
As for good enough that term doesn’t exist in my vocabulary but if a better 24 megapixel camera is good enough for you sony recently made the a99 for that very purpose and will probably make future similar prouducts. I support that.
Now it’s our turn.
perhaps you are not yet ready for 56 megapixels and perhaps someday you will be.
There are many other people with many other uses for higher resolutions.
I hope I have given you reason to be more supportive of our position, but at the very least less opposed to it.
HEY….WAIT.
Was that sharpness comparison made on a Jpeg basis ORRRRRRRRRRRRRRR a Raw basis ?
Come ON.
You are such an ignorant. Do not you feel shame with your comments?
If you cannot take a better image with an M you should change profession.