• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Sony RX1R II

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Brilliant camera from the outset! With the increased pixel count, the 42.4 MP sensor acts as a digital zoom. So one could take portraits from the distance one would use for a 50 mm or 80mm lend and crop accordingly and end up with a file good enough for a 20"x24" print!

Still is does not have a supplementary lens to get wide angle as with the Ricoh GR but one can fit a Ricoh wide angle supplemental lens via a step up filter adapter.

This would make a darling street camera. However if one is scraping together enough for this camera, one could get instead an A7RII which can take almost any lens of any focal length with the correct adapter!

Asher
 

Jerome Marot

Well-known member
This would make a darling street camera.
I am not convinced it is better than the original RX1 for that use. The foldable viewfinder was a good idea for the RX100 which is pocketable, but is less practical than the optional electronic viewfinder for a camera like the RX1. The added resolution will be lost most of the time because the camera is not stabilised. The adjustable low-pass filter is a strange gimmick and appear to have be invented to avoid manufacturing two different cameras.

Basically, when I see this camera (or the Leica Q), I wonder if the manufacturers actually try to use the devices they build for us. A camera with a fast lens and a 24mmx36mm sensor has only one advantage over a smaller camera like your Ricoh: one has better control of depth of field, so one can use it to the kind of pictures which benefit from depth of field control as was practiced on the original 35mm film cameras. For this, the RX1 has the perfect lens: its 35mm f/2.0 is one of the very best there is.

It has the perfect lens, but it has one of the worst ergonomics on this planet. It is almost unusable without an additional viewfinder. So what does Sony add? A foldable viewfinder. This is not practical at all: one cannot put the camera back in the bag without folding the viewfinder, which is a flimsy contraption. You can actually see the problem on the Sony presentation: they put an extra eyepiece on the viewfinder all the time. You cannot fold the viewfinder with this thing on.

Oh: and Sony removes the flash, which was essential for fill-ins and forgets about stabilisation. I am not impressed.

As to the Leica Q, the camera ergonomics are perfect: focus, aperture, shutter speed adjustments are just as one would like them to be. But what was Leica thinking when they designed a lens with 13% distortion?

Give me the Leica Q with the Sony/Zeiss lens, sensor-based stab and make it a bit smaller and I would be interested, even at the price they want for these gadgets.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Thanks for your very fine critique of both this new RX1 camera and the Leica Q!

It seems that for me, after reading your comments, the Sony A7RII with image stabilization is a far better housing for the 42MP Sony sense for street photography as one has both a choice of lenses and 5 axis image stabilization. One can have on it a compact Summilux 50 mm 1.4 for less bulk or any other lens and is is at least jacket pocketable.

Asher
 

Jerome Marot

Well-known member
It seems that for me, after reading your comments, the Sony A7RII with image stabilization is a far better housing for the 42MP Sony sense for street photography as one has both a choice of lenses and 5 axis image stabilization.
That is what it would seem from the available data, but I reserve my opinion for when I have tried one. Often the devil hides in small details.
 

James Lemon

Active member
The best camera to have is the one that you enjoy shooting and are happy with the results that you get from it. Many new cameras have been introduced in the last 6 months but I don't by into the hype. I am happy with what I currently have!
 
Top