Sony RX1 test and news roundup…
I have to catch up with some recent RX1 tests. On top you see the latest X-E1 vs RX1 comparison by Steve Huff. Sony RX1 autofocus test at SonyAlphaLab. An RX1 long term review at DC.watch (translation here). More RX1 tests at http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/blog. Sony RX1 first impression review at Calebluke.
—-
RX1 at Amazon, B&H, Adorama, J&R, eBay.
RX1 Gariz accessories:
1) They made a new half leather case in Black and Brown (Click here to see them on eBay).
2) The new lens cap (Click here to see them on eBay).
3) The new entry is the anti loose button(!) (Click here to see them on eBay). 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! (Click here to see them on eBay).
ZPk!Qg~~60_35.JPG)
John Maverick
6 months ago |That was a good comparison. The Rx1 clearly wins!
Edgar
6 months ago |For 2.5x the price, I would hope so!
doug
6 months ago |I don’t get the point of comparing the RX1, which is FF, with the X-E1, which is APS-C. They’re not even close in price. The Sony costs twice as much. Of course it’s going to beat the pants off the Fuji.
ihur
6 months ago |Apple and orange taste comparison
AquilaN
5 months ago |I would expect to compare RX-1 with Fujifilm X100S. Both has fixed focal length with the almost the same angle of view. Of course, Fuji has optical viewfinder and APS-C sized sensor, which differs it from RX-1. But I believe that both cameras are designed for the same functional target of users, maybe Sony is addressed for higher income group of people but is the price worth the advantages of RX-1?
Dimitri
5 months ago |“Sony is addressed for higher income group of people but is the price worth the advantages of RX-1″? The answer is ΝΟ, ΝΟ, ΝΟ !!! The target group of RX-1 is the rich, ignorant client, who spends 3000 $ for a camera with no control buttons.
The style (small size) and the photografy art are incompatible. Pure exhibitionism is the answer! Expensive jewels for morons! These people don’t care about photos. Their equipment is the only joy of their life.
Emacs
5 months ago |LOL dude. Your comment is one of the most idiotic I have read here. Showus your highly artistic images taken with heavy and large camera, otherwise you cannot be taken seriously after that crap you have written.
Dimitri
5 months ago |To Emacs: You ‘ll never have the opportunity to see my images. The arrogance of your writing style shows that you belong to the target group i have mentioned before. So is not possible communicate with you in the art field. Any way, I never pretended to be a great photographer. My point is (if you have the mental capacity to understand it) that half of RX-1′s price is only style and nothing more. Ι would prefer a couple of decent lenses instead of wasting 1500 $ for nothing (or, for 2800 $, a Nikon D600 with a good lens!!!)
Fabian
5 months ago |I find it ironic that you jump to conclusions about some demographic, then proceed to call other folks arrogant for disagreeing. It’s true that this camera is very expensive. But think for a moment what it is — full frame compact, w/a high quality lens (probably $1200 on its own). You’re correct in that most of us would get better value elsewhere. However, if I had the means, I would buy this camera in an instant. For me, personally, portability is as high on the list as IQ which is why I own an NEX-3 and not a “full size” SLR/SLT. I shoot 90% w/i this 35mm equiv. range so this camera is almost ideal for someone like me. If money is not an issue, then am I still a “moron” w/”expensive jewels?”
Dimitri
5 months ago |To Fabian: Dear Fabian, I apologize for some of my coments, but offending who dreams the RX-1 was not my purpose. If I had the means and if money is not an issue I would buy RX-1 to!!! But that’s the point: Almost no one has the money for such a luxury dream. Look at the RX-1 sales: there is in stock everywhere! I think that for the majority of this site’s readers the question is the balance between I.Q. and price. I like dreaming to, but for the moment I’m waiting for a new decent SONY camera for my A mount gear!
Dimitri
5 months ago |To AquilaN: “Sony is addressed for higher income group of people but is the price worth the advantages of RX-1″? The answer is ΝΟ, ΝΟ, ΝΟ !!! The target group of RX-1 is the rich, ignorant client, who spends 3000 $ for a camera with no control buttons.
The style (small size) and the photografy art are incompatible. Pure exhibitionism is the answer! Expensive jewels for morons! These people don’t care about photos. Their equipment is the only joy of their life.
jlabate
6 months ago |Steve, thanks for the excellent comparison and nice to see the autofocus issues one reads about for both are not really an issue. But take that case off the RX1 and the size difference is apparent. The RX1 is 1/2″ less in both width and height and the body is significantly thinner too. (I love camera size.com).
Wheelus
6 months ago |With a little rounding the Sony is 4.45 X 2.5 X 2.7 while the Fuji is 5 X 3 X 1.5 after the case is taken off of the Sony. The Fuji has interchangeable lenses. It seem as though a better comparison would be the NEX-6 VS. the Fuji.
jlabate
5 months ago |But with that thickness you mention of 2.7″ RX1 and 1.5″ X-E1, that includes the lens on the Sony but not on the Fuji. The thickness of the body only of the Sony is actually thinner than the Fuji. The size differences may or may not be important to users but it does highlight what an amazing technical feat the Sony is to get full frame that size.
lorenzino
6 months ago |However Rx1 is not a small camera. As owner of the RX100, though I expected the RX1 to be bigger, I have to say that it is definitively in a superior size category. Not pocketable at all, nor fitting into a handbag.
I guess then the major difference between the two cameras is that they belong to two distinct categories: mirrorless with interchangeable lenses, and fixed “compact”. Even for transportation that make a difference, because as big as the Fuji may appear, if you take out the lens and cover it with body cap the Fuji can fit into just whatever much better than the RX1 (which has quite a significant lens protruding).
JMi
6 months ago |Let’s redo this test when we will have the coming 32mm Zeiss lens on the XE-1. We will see then if it really worth to pay so much for a single fixed lens camera, even FF.
Hendrick
5 months ago |Rather, Fuji’s own 23mm 1.4 because the depth of field will be same at widest aperture and see how Fuji’s 35mm equivalent compares to zeiss 35mm. Zeiss 32mm is a 50mm equivalent so not a real comparison.
kevin
6 months ago |I don’t see the reason period.
Zony
6 months ago |I had the eye tracking on my Canon Elan IIe. Eventually turned it off, it was not very useful. Think face recognition is more promising for portraiture if Sony can fine-tune for the eyes.
What the Elan IIe’s external flash could do was put flashlight into only one area of a picture, leaving the other areas bereft of flash. Now THAT was a great feature that allowed for balanced light throughout the image. Perhaps Canon still has that feature, for all I know.
knekker
6 months ago |I have been trying to google this in order to learn more, but without any luck. So I will ask here.
It seems like the NTSC(American) version of the RX1, does not allow you to shoot in 25/50p, but on the other hand the PAL(European) version, both has 24,25,50 and 60p in it.
So my question is, is it in any way possible to get the NTSC version to offer the same options as the PAL version? The reason i ask is because I am thinking of buying the NTSC version, but given i live in Europe, I want both options.
Michele
5 months ago |I live in Norway and I just bought the A99, I didn’t buy it for shooting videos so I never bothered looking into the menu until I saw your post.
This is what happens with the A99:
-when the system is set to NTSC you can record movies with the following specs:
-AVCHD at 60i 24M (FX); 60i 17M (FH); 60p 28M (PS); 24p 24M (FX) and 24p 17M (FH)
-when the system is set to PAL it outputs the following:
-AVCHD at 50i 24M (FX); 50i 17M (FH); 50p 28M (PS); 25p 24M (FX) and 25p 17M (FH)
Both NTSC and PAL can do MP4, of course….
I don’t think it’s gonna matter where you buy your camera, since it sounds like looking at the specs that both RX1 and A99 are capable of the same movie quality; I don’t think you’ll ever find a company that creates a camera with some specs for the NTSC market and other for the PAL: there’s just a set up menu and that’s it.
Take care
knekker
5 months ago |I live in Denmark, so we’re not that fare apart =P
So the A99 has the option to switch between NTSC and PAL? I hope it is the same with the American version. It does sound merely like a software issue, if that is the case.
Thanks for looking into it anyway Michele
Michele
5 months ago |Yep, it looks like we’re neighbors!
Sorry for this super late reply, I was around for work; A99 can switch between PAL and NTSC in the set up menu.
What might happen if you buy a camera in US (they work on NTSC by default i think) is that if you set the system for PAL it might come up with a “reminder” every time you switch the camera on: my A99 says something like “running on NTSC” when set up in NTSC mode and switched on.
Ha det!
Green.Lens
6 months ago |Obviously, RX-1 focuses faster and this is with plain CDAF. Good Job!
Vladimir
5 months ago |http://iamandregoosen.com/2013/01/sony-rx1-and-the-x-e1-adelaide-wedding-photographer/
Jimmy
5 months ago |Rx1 is $3000. Only for elitist wankers? What if I was deciding between that and a Leica M with 35 cron for close to $10000. Not so expensive now. Yes I can change lenses on the Leica, but a lot of Leica users permanently keep their 35mm lens on.