A lot of comments for the video on Youtube also say it was an unsuitable location and that they have to have it redone somewhere else. And I agree for the whole video we saw three photos of what was essentially one and the same set up
Hilarious that they took it to the bowling to check low light, yet most of the video is overexposed. Kinda says ‘you are not ready to use an expensive camera just yet’…
It’s called a modular design. A DSLR works better once you add a lens too…. At least this one works without viewfinder with the option of being more compact.
Canon should take notice, their M system doesn’t even offer the option of a matching viewfinder.
Too limited in use? You do realize that it’s a prime lens on a compact? Hence: Plugging Zeiss OVF or Sony EVF will give you exactly the same capabilities as if you’d use a camera with build-in TTL viewfinder (minus the parallax in OVF). Yes, you can remove it to make camera easier to fit in a pocket, but… that’s an advantage I’d say.
ahahahah, go Canon? with what? EOS-M? G12? nobody has something even close to a RX1, yes its expensive, but its the price of exclusivity, if someone makes something like an RX1 maybe the price will come down, but i dont see someone with big balls likeSony to do so!
mm big balls or nothing to lose? ahah with the a99 a77 and minolta what can lose sony? 2000 dollars for a compact are you serious? sony is smoking his head only for a bunch of tech fans… try a real camera and do some real photos
Why too expensive?
Only because it is a “Compact Camera”?
It has FF sensor, wide feature set and outstanding IQ, not to mention a superb 35/2 Zeiss lens that alone is worth 1200 Euros (compared to the Sony,Canon and Nikon equivalents).
If you can’t afford it than just admit you can’t afford it and don’t blame it being too expensive.
$2,800.00 for an RX1, or, for example, $2,900.00 for a 5DMkIII with lens. How many people, do you figure, will be swayed either by the $100.0 savings on a roughly $3,000.00 purchase, or disregard the relative costs altogether and reach for the RX1 simply because they absolutely must have a camera that’s smaller?
Pay premium price for a camera that can’t use EVF and external flash/slave at the same time, or XLR. No tilting LCD, and a lens that needs software to make it behave to Zeiss standards.
Not going to fit any of my pockets… so why not provide some more comfortable ergonomics? It’s an overpriced trophy camera that will slow down serious photography. It’s a bragging rights camera for high brow to be seen with.
The price is right for ego-tographers. But photographers need a shooter that performs relative to the price.
Some good points, but lots of anger mostly. I have to agree with Dirk.
I also thought the grip will be bad until I tried it, now I think it is actually very decent. The camera fits in any of my jacket pockets, even in my cargo pants. The lens is actually great and yes it has some weaknesses like any other lens out there. But, yes, a tilting LCD would have been nice.
I’m only watching this if his hot girlfriend is in the vid. Please someone verify before I waste my time with another DigRev amateur comedy night routine.
Oh… I see his girlfriend in the thumbnail! Clicking to watch now!
Well, to be a review made by Kai for a Sony camera, this is indeed EXTREMELY high praise…
And the constant whining about the price – with origin in the constant crooked comparison with other full frame cameras WITHOUT lens! Put in a lens of equal image quality in the price equation, and you’ll find that you aren’t going to find anything cheaper elsewhere. And you wount find any other lens with comparable IQ unless you’ll chose a Leica M camera with Summicron 35/2,0. Which will cost you 3-4 times as much. And ALL other available alternatives will come in as heavy weighters of about 2 kg, while the RX1 weight is less then 0,5 kg. The same goes for volumes ratios too.
The fact that most of us personally would LIKE it to be cheaper has nothing whatsoever to do with this!
I can not afford the RX1 either, but I certainly do NOT think it is priced too high. To succed in making such a high quality tool as this several times smaller and lighter than anything else out there, will bring several times higher research and developing costs to the company that dares to embark on such an endeavour. And of course higher production costs too. Miniaturisztion will always be more expensive than keeping to standard sizes, and extrem miniaturization even more so.
The whining from Kai and a lot of others, claiming that the RX1 (and A99 too) is too expensive has no other foundation than pure ignorance! You get something of very good quality completely unique here, and this is CERTAINLY NOT something that is cheap to achieve.
.
The edit function here is still absent, so I couldn’t go in and correct spelling mistakes. Should have spelled “essentially” above, and “volume ratios” in my long-winded post above.
since when a potential buyer, and even more an actual buyer, is not entitled anymore to question the features of a product, including the price? Actually: the price is what should be scrutinized and questioned in any product we buy. Otherwise there will always be geniuses like the former director of Sigma overpricing products “just because”.
Sony RX1 is a unique product, but nevertheless overpriced. A99 is overpriced.
Well, the RX1 can actually be priced like this because there is no direct competition: Sony will then analyze the market response to this move, and will make future choices based on that. My take is that pricing the camera so high was a move to launch, in perspective, the Nex FF system as a premium system with no compromises in quality. In few words, in my opinion the price is justified from this point of view, not from the point of view of the RX1 only (although, sure, a luxurious camera can always sell as a status symbol; but this is not my point here).
A99 OTOH was a marketing fiasco. Excellent camera, with distinguished features, and well advertised (at least in Japan), which for some reasons did not sell even close to the expectations. “Some reasons” means price, of course. The A99 is priced like the D800, currently. And since the D800, with all its minuses, is the camera of the moment for many pros and high amateurs, this meant going against the camera that was perceived as the best of the bunch, with an uncompetitive price, and a sensor that on paper was less interesting. Besides, that very sensor was used also in a camera priced 1000 dollars less, which is not to say that the two cameras are the same, but the perception of the value of the most important single feature of the camera, the sensor, was being lowered by Nikon’s move. I am not even starting the discussion about all the features the A99 has and the D600 does not: better be, considering the price difference. Besides: features that many photographers upgrading from apsc cameras may not consider essential, while the margins saved for the D600 could be invested in good lenses (which is considered essential by any single buyer of FF cameras). Fact is that the A99 appeals to people who are already invested in the alpha system, not to people buying from scratch or, even worse, having “sparse” legacy lenses from Nikon or Canon. By “sparse” I mean: not enough to build a system, such as a macro or a non-pro tele zoom, but enough to consider the same mount system with more attention than the others.
With the alpha system (unlike the Nex) Sony did nothing to steal customers from other brands. Being Sony the underdog in the FF system, this is indeed what they should have done. They didn’t do it, they failed, and now they are bailing out of the market.
Let’s wait for the Nex FF system then, and let’s hope Sony will manage to succeed not only in its technical achievements, but also in marketing and pricing the cameras well. Otherwise in 2014-2015 we will be here wondering what went wrong and why (as many are doing with the alpha system. I am always surprised by some poster’s surprise about what happened).
To Lorenzino
5 months ago |
A long analysis, and your point is?
A99, D800, 5dmk3 are in the same class and A99 is the cheapest, except the erratic UK pricing.
In fact, I just bought A99 from scratch with a CZ 24-70 + 85f2.8, planning to upgrade/buy more lenses when budget ready.
Didn’t like D600, the OVF is crap tried at local Costco, I would pick A850.
32mp in D800 will look horrible when shoot indoor with gentle lighting with no flash allowed for my baby, also i dont have budget buying an extreme good lens to resolve the 32mp, i believe many pol out there who bought D800 are using their old lenses that cant resolve the 32mp, so why buy a 32mp? So out.
In fact, only the dust and oil issue for both cameras are enough to stop me buying it.
Not Mk3 because worst DR among them, most expensive, and my personal dislike about the brand.
PS. I can see Nikon is scared and worried when they maniplate their pricing. See their low priced d600.
lorenzino
4 months ago |
To “To Lorenzino”
I thought that my point was more than obvious. In few words: RX1 is overpriced, but not having other direct competitors it can be priced this way. A99 was and is overpriced, and having direct competitors is a fiasco, from the point of view of sales. Mind that I am talking about sales only. And it was obvious it would be so since the beginning: in many European countries the price of the D800 and A99 is the same, and also in Japan.
About numbers: mp count is still an important feature, and 32 is not 36. Identical in real life, probably, but not from a marketing point of view.
Sure, we all make our choices, and your choice was a very good one. But since the overall market is based on the choices of many different people, it is sometimes easy to predict that at a given price a product will be a commercial fiasco even if it is an excellent product. This was the case of the A99, and for this reason Sony bailed out from that kind of camera. I think it is sad that the A99 is the last of its kind, and I think the responsability lies not on the Sony technicians, but on the Sony marketing and sales department. Shame on them.
This guy just hates Sony. Every video that I have seen of him doing a review of Sony, he just doesn’t want to do it right. This RX1 is a winner in anyway you see it. He has no choice but to accept that fact but just look at the pics that he takes with the camera! The pics are just aweful. He wants to show this camera in the bad light while trying to do his best to praise it by mere words.
Remember him doing a review on A99 when the whole world had done and dusted their reviews on it? He had nothing to complain about the camera so he had to pick on it’s amazing looks. This guy is a shocker when it comes to Sony reviews.
What the heck are you talking about? Him hating Sony? It’s a very positive review. None of the negative bits he mentions (mostly the price) haven’t been pointed out by dozens of other reviewers before. You are naysayers, not him.
He always preferred Canon or Nikon over Sony almost on all occasions. Since A77, he has changed his view slightly but still can’t accept the fact that Sony is playing it big in the Camera arena.
I love his reviews and that is why I watch his videos. If you are Canon or a Nikon Camera user, his reviews on Sony may well make you stick with Canon or Nikon. I hope this clears the air.
Singling out the looks of the A99 for criticism, was Kai’s way of communicating that nothing else was at fault!. It’s part of his style to pick on something and then exagerate. Like this one, it was a positive review.
whos says leica fanboys arent cheap? Havent you read the constant leica fanboy whinings about how other camera makers should make cameras for their m lenses, and how they should be catored to because theyre too damn cheap to buy a leica camera? In fact, i think the biggest whinos and cheapsaktes are the leica people, the ones who talk big online about how they want this leica and that lecia, but all they have is a couple of old leica lenses and they whine and whine about how other manufactureres should make peaking focus this and that, as if the entire camera world is here to help Leica make money. theyre too cheaop to buy new equipment and in numbers they go online in drves complaining why no company cares about a market no one wants, the 7-10 thousand dollar manul focaus rangefinder market. Hello, newsflash, the profitable rangefinfers died in the 60′s.
This is a great camera that takes awesome pics. It just needs a built in view finder. I love that Sony had the the guts to make this. If I did most of my shooting with a 35mm I would truly consider this camera. By the way I love the orange ring on the RX1 and the 99. Its about image and prefer the orange ring to the red thumb of Nikon (looks dated).
Regarding RX1 No OVF and a fixad lens! Are you kidding? This is just a very good, expensive point-and-shoot. Don’t compare with system cameras – NEX7, Canon, Nikon. RX1won’t sell to help Sony survive!! Wating for a NEX FF.
Lennart, you are saying that “RX1 won’t sell to help Sony survive!!” Which means that you are claiming that the RX1 will be sold with loss for Sony. How do you know that?
.
Kai already praised Sony for it’s bold move with the RX1 since the camera in production .
Have a look on Canadian’s camera show review , it’s same conclusion .
The RX1 is too expensive , with that kind of $$$$ , I could get something even better .
Yun, I’ll agree with you that this is a very positive review coming from Kai. Usually he is more interesting in playing clown when reviewing Sony cameras. For that matter, I have never seen a serious review performed by him for any camera, regardless of brand.
“Then you too complain about this: “The RX1 is too expensive , with that kind of $$$$ , I could get something even better.”
I’ll assume that you with “better” don’t allude to something outside the photographic segment which RX1 is aimed for, such as under-water, action photo etc.? Then I would be very interested to know what equipment you can get that would accomplish better dynamic range, colour richness, impression of live, small weight and pocketability than the RX1 for LESS DOLLARS?
.
EVERY person in the world having too much money will buy this cam. I bet there are more of those than skilled photographers or photo-afficionados. Now, did Sony prove to have a brilliant market concept, or what? For pro’s and prosumers there will be a new FF Nex line, you’ll see. If my rich auntie shoots FF on her RX-1, I will have to have a FF too. So the RX-1 is a market-opener, besides a volume seller. Brilliant concept, absolutely brilliant.
From my eyes, the RX1 is a very specialized “Model Car” which Sony developed as a stepping stone towards a mirrorless FF camera. It seems to me it was a testing bed for a few different concepts and ideas, and worked well enough they decided to put it into production to recoup some R&D costs.
It’s a very unique camera, and comparing it with other ILC FF cameras isn’t really the point.
Correct. Not everyone drives a Toyota Camry. Some drive a Corvette or Bentley or Aston Martin. There are some out there who make good money doing photography, design, or whatever who will buy multiple cameras. They will buy a Hasselblad, Canon, NEX, AND an RX-1 and RX-100 for different types of work. Some people are smart enough to know that you will never find one camera that will do everything well.
We continue to see a lot of whining on this site about Sony and how they apparently can’t do anything right. Pricing aside, from all that I have read, Sony has hit home runs (or for the rest of the world, scored goals) with the RX-1, the RX-100, the NEX system of cameras, and many of their video cameras. Maybe not perfect but way better than average are the a99, a77, a65 and other SLT cameras. This has all been achieved in the short amount of time since Sony bought Minolta. In addition Sony R&D at Sony has created sensors that are appearing in everything from cell phones to the top cameras out there, and even licensing the manufacture of its sensors to other camera makers.
But we continue to hear gloom and doom. Sony continues to be at the forefront of innovation even after earthquakes and floods created many problems for them.
What have Canon and Nikon done recently that is a innovative as Sony, other than copy Sony. Pentax, Olympus, and Fuji have also been much more innovative than the Big Two. Canon/Nikon have had that huge user base to depend on, but they cannot depend on that forever. People in the past looked down cars from Japan (yes there are some of us old enough to remember that) and then Korea. In the US, Ford, Chevrolet, and Chrysler almost lost a lead in sales that people in the past thought would be impossible to lose.
So let’s give Sony some time. There will be some stumbles, but I think that based on recent innovation, they are not to be overlooked.
Part of this is driven by the nature of the market. Canon and Nikon, being legacy companies in the industry, can make consistent, incremental improvements to their products and retain their market share. The younger and smaller companies are the ones that have to do things to “get attention” and need to be more revolutionary in order to increase market share. This is why Sony comes out with an SLT design and Canon has had the 7D in production for approaching 3 years.
I think it over priced. Entry price should of $1,999. No matter what other think, this is where the price should of been set at no matter what. Comparing it to high price car is wrong. It’s not hybrid, it a point and shoot. The Zeiss is just the name that can demand the high price.
Sony should focus on there g lenses, because I think there sharper than Zeiss. Zeiss have a nice coatings that allows you to look toward the sun or light. I don’t own a Zeiss lens, but I did have one on a bridge cam, sony h series dsc line and if that’s the way there high price lens are designed. I’d give the sony g lens a better over all award.
The A99 is just a little high based on the fact it cost less to make electronic view finders than a high precession optical finder and mirror system with a long shutter life, etc. Plus there low price point cam’s can shoot faster frames than the A99.
I’ve heard people say that small phase detect sensor in the A99 is to small.
I do not own a A99, but would say that is not true, given all the features of the A99, they put it in there because of the ability to use APS lenses.
The phase detectors on the sensor is design for full frame lenses.
Given what I just said, it is a viable expectation that they could price it at $2,800 us dollars, but I think it should started $300 below that amount given it’s lack of high shooting rate.
The A99 is Video and Photo cam. Focus is so much to the point in today’s cam’s, but not the focus of doing one thing or the other in today’s dig cam’s. They got to do both and this creates a conflict of interest.
If I had that amount of cash to blow, I’ll take this over a Leica. For the money, this gives me more value than an overpriced camera with a circular red logo. It’s not ‘expensive’ given the tech and the small size it’s housed in.
Just like crazily expensive 4k televisions at CES 2013, this is priced to match it’s early adopters stage.
We’ll benefit from this in a year’s time so thank you Sony for getting the ball rolling! Competition is great for us.
If Hasselblad had brought out the RX-1 with the Zeiss lens at sub $3,000 then the reviewers would be saying what an earth-shattering and ground-breaking camera it is. In fact, they would be saying exactly the same if it had been Canon or Nikon who released it.
This is an issue of brand snobbery and nothing less.
In answer to the RX-1 price complaints, how much do these people think the FF NEX is going to be? Less than 2k? I doubt it very much. And with a Zeiss 35/f2 lens? Less than 3k? I doubt it even more.
Sure, they could have used a non-Zeiss lens to lower the RX-1 price but for what gain? 200 or 300 bucks less? Are the target buyers more interested in price or quality? I would suggest the latter….
My sentiment as well. If we play with the idea of the exact same camera, badged with Hasselblad or Leica branding, and the price tag was $5.000 or even more, nobody, absolutely nobody would dare to nag about the price.
Ah well, if you remember the story correctly, the “Lunar” was acclaimed as the most ridiculous idea ever conceived by Hasselblad, and is actually being analyzed as a clear sign of Hasselblad’s decline.
Though nobody thinks the FF Nex will be a “cheapo” camera, nonetheless it should not even approach the Hasselblad’s idea of ripping money from pseudo-snobbish customers, as it would mark the end for Sony as well…
The Zeiss is $1,000 to 1,300 lens the rest is the body and being a full frame. Which I think is ridiculous. Why don’t they just make a cheap full frame. Full manual and manual lenses. Because they don’t want too!
You could buy a entry level 35mm film camera, but not in digital camera.
I don’t want a small cam and I don’t like them. I don’t care about the change in security after 911 and this move to small cams.
Even just a cam with auto focus and 12 million pix would be fine. I guess I could buy some used or some older cam that’s still trying to sold that cam out many years ago.
What nonsense! The cheapest FF camera in the world is $2,000 (Nikon D600). Do you think Sony is going to make loss just to please you and thousands of others who would never even buy it?
Even if the lens was a generic brand the cost of the RX-1 would be $2,500 (based on the D600 costs).
Your arguments just don’t make any sense – the size of the RX-1 is the whole point of it. You don’t want a small camera and that’s fair enough but it’s no basis for a reasoned discussion!
Very nice review by Kai! Love his way of reviewing. It not the boring standard review. I always thought Kai was a little against sony, but I think he’s just real honest about things in his way.
If I had the money I would buy it, but I’m saving for the FF NEX so I can’t
Disclaimer: SonyAlphaRumors has no affiliation with any of the equipment manufacturers mentioned on this site. Please visit their official websites by typing the specific brand name and adding .com after it in your browser. All trademarks and brands belong to their respective owners.
Here is the definition of the word “rumor” according to Merriam Webster dictionary:
Pronunciation: \ˈrü-mər\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English rumour, from Anglo-French, from Latin rumor clamor, gossip; akin to Old English rēon to lament, Sanskrit rauti he roars
Date: 14th century
1: talk or opinion widely disseminated with no discernible source
2: a statement or report current without known authority for its truth
3 archaic : talk or report of a notable person or event
----
Content Copyright If you want to use any image from this website you have to ask for permission. You cannot copy more than 20 words from any of our posts. And you have to define the source with "Source: SonyAlphaRumors.com" (working link).
Click on the Share button below to write the message!
Name and email are NOT required so you can stay anonymous. Also the IP-address will not be submitted to us. Use Imageshack to share pictures (anonymously).
Share rumors and news with sonyalpharumors Click here
NEXfive
5 months ago |…unavoidable :-/
Boomstick
5 months ago |At least they highlighted the distortion and optical correction.
Too bad they didn’t take it out on the street though.
Everlast66
5 months ago |A lot of comments for the video on Youtube also say it was an unsuitable location and that they have to have it redone somewhere else. And I agree for the whole video we saw three photos of what was essentially one and the same set up
shamb
4 months ago |Hilarious that they took it to the bowling to check low light, yet most of the video is overexposed. Kinda says ‘you are not ready to use an expensive camera just yet’…
ihur
5 months ago |Price..price..price…prick!!!
Kevin
5 months ago |They never left that tiny corner of the bowling alley for the entire video review. It was a pretty awful review.
derek
5 months ago |we will never be satisfied with anything we do, touch, think, feel, like, love. Let’s go back to film!
Ty
5 months ago |Love it. Hate the price! I’m saving my billions for a99.
Maxwell
5 months ago |I will buy a used RX1 for $1000 a few years in the future
If not there are some lenses for a maybe FF NEX to buy lenses for.
lol
5 months ago |no evf… no ovf… fail .. go canon
Spoon
5 months ago |It’s called a modular design. A DSLR works better once you add a lens too…. At least this one works without viewfinder with the option of being more compact.
Canon should take notice, their M system doesn’t even offer the option of a matching viewfinder.
www.martingamper.com
4 months ago |+1
I love your analogy to the Lens-less DSLR
John Maverick
5 months ago |They are optional. Because some like an EVF with live histogram, while others with a rangefinder background will prefer the optical approach.
MdB
5 months ago |too expensive, too limited in use, and sony wonders why they can sustain enough users to keep a system going for a long period of time.
John Maverick
5 months ago |Did even you watch the review? Kai was triumphant about said other makers should follow, and it’s a significant move in the right direction.
Sky_walker
5 months ago |Too limited in use? You do realize that it’s a prime lens on a compact? Hence: Plugging Zeiss OVF or Sony EVF will give you exactly the same capabilities as if you’d use a camera with build-in TTL viewfinder (minus the parallax in OVF). Yes, you can remove it to make camera easier to fit in a pocket, but… that’s an advantage I’d say.
Hellven
5 months ago |ahahahah, go Canon? with what? EOS-M? G12? nobody has something even close to a RX1, yes its expensive, but its the price of exclusivity, if someone makes something like an RX1 maybe the price will come down, but i dont see someone with big balls likeSony to do so!
taros gerdas
5 months ago |mm big balls or nothing to lose?
ahah with the a99 a77 and minolta what can lose sony? 2000 dollars for a compact are you serious? sony is smoking his head only for a bunch of tech fans… try a real camera and do some real photos
Frank
5 months ago |You don’t think it’s a real camera? I guess anything with Sony on it bothers you.
etr brony
5 months ago |“go canon” ????
where is canons FF compact? until they are ABLE to make a high-end FF compact its pointless mentioning them
cinq1
5 months ago |go Canon ? with their bar dos-m?
One More Thought
5 months ago |I think Kai summarizes it perfectly: great sensor, OK features, price not OK.
Now that said, this is still a great camera for some…but it’s just the start for Sony FF mirrorless.
Dirk
5 months ago |I’m not getting tired to repeat!
Why too expensive?
Only because it is a “Compact Camera”?
It has FF sensor, wide feature set and outstanding IQ, not to mention a superb 35/2 Zeiss lens that alone is worth 1200 Euros (compared to the Sony,Canon and Nikon equivalents).
If you can’t afford it than just admit you can’t afford it and don’t blame it being too expensive.
Van Hammersly
5 months ago |$2,800.00 for an RX1, or, for example, $2,900.00 for a 5DMkIII with lens. How many people, do you figure, will be swayed either by the $100.0 savings on a roughly $3,000.00 purchase, or disregard the relative costs altogether and reach for the RX1 simply because they absolutely must have a camera that’s smaller?
My guess is… not all that many.
CTPhotographX.com
5 months ago |Pay premium price for a camera that can’t use EVF and external flash/slave at the same time, or XLR. No tilting LCD, and a lens that needs software to make it behave to Zeiss standards.
Not going to fit any of my pockets… so why not provide some more comfortable ergonomics? It’s an overpriced trophy camera that will slow down serious photography. It’s a bragging rights camera for high brow to be seen with.
The price is right for ego-tographers. But photographers need a shooter that performs relative to the price.
Vlad
5 months ago |Some good points, but lots of anger mostly. I have to agree with Dirk.
I also thought the grip will be bad until I tried it, now I think it is actually very decent. The camera fits in any of my jacket pockets, even in my cargo pants. The lens is actually great and yes it has some weaknesses like any other lens out there. But, yes, a tilting LCD would have been nice.
CTPhotographX.com
5 months ago |Put a FF sensor in an a33 size body, or body like Maxxum 9000… then I’ll be impressed, and pay dearly for it.
pjpo
5 months ago |35mm f/2 is only $350 for Nikon. Don’t say just because it’s Zeiss. $1200 only for f/1.4 which this is not.
Jason
4 months ago |You comparing a cheap Nikon 35mm lens to that of a Zeiss and think you’ll get the same IQ. HA!! Laughable. By the way, here is a link for you to check out regarding the real price of a Zeiss 35/2 lens. http://www.popflash.com/zeiss-lenses/zeiss-biogon-35mm-f2.0-t-zm-silver-usa-new/
CTPhotographX.com
5 months ago |I’m only watching this if his hot girlfriend is in the vid. Please someone verify before I waste my time with another DigRev amateur comedy night routine.
Oh… I see his girlfriend in the thumbnail! Clicking to watch now!
Romeo
5 months ago |I love her too!
Wheelus
5 months ago |Yes, she is the unsung hero of Kai’s videos. We should start a fan club.
Zoltan
4 months ago |Aham, right guys…
lol you guys sound a bit pervy haha
While she is ok(or even cute) I don’t really find her attractive but you seem quite keen lol
GunnarK
5 months ago |Well, to be a review made by Kai for a Sony camera, this is indeed EXTREMELY high praise…
And the constant whining about the price – with origin in the constant crooked comparison with other full frame cameras WITHOUT lens! Put in a lens of equal image quality in the price equation, and you’ll find that you aren’t going to find anything cheaper elsewhere. And you wount find any other lens with comparable IQ unless you’ll chose a Leica M camera with Summicron 35/2,0. Which will cost you 3-4 times as much. And ALL other available alternatives will come in as heavy weighters of about 2 kg, while the RX1 weight is less then 0,5 kg. The same goes for volumes ratios too.
The fact that most of us personally would LIKE it to be cheaper has nothing whatsoever to do with this!
I can not afford the RX1 either, but I certainly do NOT think it is priced too high. To succed in making such a high quality tool as this several times smaller and lighter than anything else out there, will bring several times higher research and developing costs to the company that dares to embark on such an endeavour. And of course higher production costs too. Miniaturisztion will always be more expensive than keeping to standard sizes, and extrem miniaturization even more so.
The whining from Kai and a lot of others, claiming that the RX1 (and A99 too) is too expensive has no other foundation than pure ignorance! You get something of very good quality completely unique here, and this is CERTAINLY NOT something that is cheap to achieve.
.
GunnarK
5 months ago |While I was writing, Dirk wrote esseentially the same thing but much less long-winded…
.
GunnarK
5 months ago |The edit function here is still absent, so I couldn’t go in and correct spelling mistakes. Should have spelled “essentially” above, and “volume ratios” in my long-winded post above.
Admin, could we get the edit function back?
.
lorenzino
5 months ago |Sorry Gunnark, BUT…
since when a potential buyer, and even more an actual buyer, is not entitled anymore to question the features of a product, including the price? Actually: the price is what should be scrutinized and questioned in any product we buy. Otherwise there will always be geniuses like the former director of Sigma overpricing products “just because”.
Sony RX1 is a unique product, but nevertheless overpriced. A99 is overpriced.
Well, the RX1 can actually be priced like this because there is no direct competition: Sony will then analyze the market response to this move, and will make future choices based on that. My take is that pricing the camera so high was a move to launch, in perspective, the Nex FF system as a premium system with no compromises in quality. In few words, in my opinion the price is justified from this point of view, not from the point of view of the RX1 only (although, sure, a luxurious camera can always sell as a status symbol; but this is not my point here).
A99 OTOH was a marketing fiasco. Excellent camera, with distinguished features, and well advertised (at least in Japan), which for some reasons did not sell even close to the expectations. “Some reasons” means price, of course. The A99 is priced like the D800, currently. And since the D800, with all its minuses, is the camera of the moment for many pros and high amateurs, this meant going against the camera that was perceived as the best of the bunch, with an uncompetitive price, and a sensor that on paper was less interesting. Besides, that very sensor was used also in a camera priced 1000 dollars less, which is not to say that the two cameras are the same, but the perception of the value of the most important single feature of the camera, the sensor, was being lowered by Nikon’s move. I am not even starting the discussion about all the features the A99 has and the D600 does not: better be, considering the price difference. Besides: features that many photographers upgrading from apsc cameras may not consider essential, while the margins saved for the D600 could be invested in good lenses (which is considered essential by any single buyer of FF cameras). Fact is that the A99 appeals to people who are already invested in the alpha system, not to people buying from scratch or, even worse, having “sparse” legacy lenses from Nikon or Canon. By “sparse” I mean: not enough to build a system, such as a macro or a non-pro tele zoom, but enough to consider the same mount system with more attention than the others.
With the alpha system (unlike the Nex) Sony did nothing to steal customers from other brands. Being Sony the underdog in the FF system, this is indeed what they should have done. They didn’t do it, they failed, and now they are bailing out of the market.
Let’s wait for the Nex FF system then, and let’s hope Sony will manage to succeed not only in its technical achievements, but also in marketing and pricing the cameras well. Otherwise in 2014-2015 we will be here wondering what went wrong and why (as many are doing with the alpha system. I am always surprised by some poster’s surprise about what happened).
To Lorenzino
5 months ago |A long analysis, and your point is?
A99, D800, 5dmk3 are in the same class and A99 is the cheapest, except the erratic UK pricing.
In fact, I just bought A99 from scratch with a CZ 24-70 + 85f2.8, planning to upgrade/buy more lenses when budget ready.
Didn’t like D600, the OVF is crap tried at local Costco, I would pick A850.
32mp in D800 will look horrible when shoot indoor with gentle lighting with no flash allowed for my baby, also i dont have budget buying an extreme good lens to resolve the 32mp, i believe many pol out there who bought D800 are using their old lenses that cant resolve the 32mp, so why buy a 32mp? So out.
In fact, only the dust and oil issue for both cameras are enough to stop me buying it.
Not Mk3 because worst DR among them, most expensive, and my personal dislike about the brand.
PS. I can see Nikon is scared and worried when they maniplate their pricing. See their low priced d600.
lorenzino
4 months ago |To “To Lorenzino”
I thought that my point was more than obvious. In few words: RX1 is overpriced, but not having other direct competitors it can be priced this way. A99 was and is overpriced, and having direct competitors is a fiasco, from the point of view of sales. Mind that I am talking about sales only. And it was obvious it would be so since the beginning: in many European countries the price of the D800 and A99 is the same, and also in Japan.
About numbers: mp count is still an important feature, and 32 is not 36. Identical in real life, probably, but not from a marketing point of view.
Sure, we all make our choices, and your choice was a very good one. But since the overall market is based on the choices of many different people, it is sometimes easy to predict that at a given price a product will be a commercial fiasco even if it is an excellent product. This was the case of the A99, and for this reason Sony bailed out from that kind of camera. I think it is sad that the A99 is the last of its kind, and I think the responsability lies not on the Sony technicians, but on the Sony marketing and sales department. Shame on them.
Suresh
5 months ago |This guy just hates Sony. Every video that I have seen of him doing a review of Sony, he just doesn’t want to do it right. This RX1 is a winner in anyway you see it. He has no choice but to accept that fact but just look at the pics that he takes with the camera! The pics are just aweful. He wants to show this camera in the bad light while trying to do his best to praise it by mere words.
Remember him doing a review on A99 when the whole world had done and dusted their reviews on it? He had nothing to complain about the camera so he had to pick on it’s amazing looks. This guy is a shocker when it comes to Sony reviews.
Mark
5 months ago |Give it a break.. he’s said good things about NEXs and other Sony cameras. Stop spreading lies.
yosemite
5 months ago |What the heck are you talking about? Him hating Sony? It’s a very positive review. None of the negative bits he mentions (mostly the price) haven’t been pointed out by dozens of other reviewers before. You are naysayers, not him.
Suresh
5 months ago |I have seen his reviews on a few Sony Cameras.
He always preferred Canon or Nikon over Sony almost on all occasions. Since A77, he has changed his view slightly but still can’t accept the fact that Sony is playing it big in the Camera arena.
I love his reviews and that is why I watch his videos. If you are Canon or a Nikon Camera user, his reviews on Sony may well make you stick with Canon or Nikon. I hope this clears the air.
John Maverick
5 months ago |Singling out the looks of the A99 for criticism, was Kai’s way of communicating that nothing else was at fault!. It’s part of his style to pick on something and then exagerate. Like this one, it was a positive review.
max
5 months ago |Given that Kai is a Leica fan it’s a bit rich , him whining about the price of the RX1.
MdB
5 months ago |whos says leica fanboys arent cheap? Havent you read the constant leica fanboy whinings about how other camera makers should make cameras for their m lenses, and how they should be catored to because theyre too damn cheap to buy a leica camera? In fact, i think the biggest whinos and cheapsaktes are the leica people, the ones who talk big online about how they want this leica and that lecia, but all they have is a couple of old leica lenses and they whine and whine about how other manufactureres should make peaking focus this and that, as if the entire camera world is here to help Leica make money. theyre too cheaop to buy new equipment and in numbers they go online in drves complaining why no company cares about a market no one wants, the 7-10 thousand dollar manul focaus rangefinder market. Hello, newsflash, the profitable rangefinfers died in the 60′s.
John Maverick
5 months ago |As a cheap Lecia fanboy who can only afford a few great old lenses, this hurts deeply
kalpurush :)
5 months ago |Kai loves the camera IMHO, but can’t afford it, unfortunately!
He has to blame about something, you know!
Poke
5 months ago |This is a great camera that takes awesome pics. It just needs a built in view finder. I love that Sony had the the guts to make this. If I did most of my shooting with a 35mm I would truly consider this camera. By the way I love the orange ring on the RX1 and the 99. Its about image and prefer the orange ring to the red thumb of Nikon (looks dated).
Lennart
5 months ago |Regarding RX1 No OVF and a fixad lens! Are you kidding? This is just a very good, expensive point-and-shoot. Don’t compare with system cameras – NEX7, Canon, Nikon. RX1won’t sell to help Sony survive!! Wating for a NEX FF.
GunnarK
5 months ago |Lennart, you are saying that “RX1 won’t sell to help Sony survive!!” Which means that you are claiming that the RX1 will be sold with loss for Sony. How do you know that?
.
knekker
5 months ago |Does any know if the USA version of the RX1, has the option of shooting in PAL 25p, 50p as well?
puellas
5 months ago |remember is a sony.. is not a leica! so much money for a box with electronic inside instead of a real camera.. mmmm….
Yun
5 months ago |Kai already praised Sony for it’s bold move with the RX1 since the camera in production .
Have a look on Canadian’s camera show review , it’s same conclusion .
The RX1 is too expensive , with that kind of $$$$ , I could get something even better .
GunnarK
5 months ago |Yun, I’ll agree with you that this is a very positive review coming from Kai. Usually he is more interesting in playing clown when reviewing Sony cameras. For that matter, I have never seen a serious review performed by him for any camera, regardless of brand.
“Then you too complain about this: “The RX1 is too expensive , with that kind of $$$$ , I could get something even better.”
I’ll assume that you with “better” don’t allude to something outside the photographic segment which RX1 is aimed for, such as under-water, action photo etc.? Then I would be very interested to know what equipment you can get that would accomplish better dynamic range, colour richness, impression of live, small weight and pocketability than the RX1 for LESS DOLLARS?
.
Zoltan
4 months ago |Define better…
For some people the best image quality in a compact form IS better than a big bulky camera.
You see it’s all subjective, depends greatly on each individual what properties they look at.
Size, IQ, MPixel count, lens choice, features etc…
And even then if you look at just one property like size some might prefer a big camera while others will prefer a small one.
So anyone who says this and this is better than that think about the above…
harvey
5 months ago |EVERY person in the world having too much money will buy this cam. I bet there are more of those than skilled photographers or photo-afficionados. Now, did Sony prove to have a brilliant market concept, or what? For pro’s and prosumers there will be a new FF Nex line, you’ll see. If my rich auntie shoots FF on her RX-1, I will have to have a FF too. So the RX-1 is a market-opener, besides a volume seller. Brilliant concept, absolutely brilliant.
John Maverick
5 months ago |Agreed. In one move they demonstrated to the world that they can out-innovate every other camera manufacturer. Enormous marketing prestige.
etr brony
5 months ago |THANK YOU SONY!
amazing camera, so refreshing to see a well built, useable, high quality compact camera. AND its FF!
the price is justified
Vivek
5 months ago |Kai is not into Gariz’ fine accessories?
Rob
5 months ago |Jeez people, simmer down.
From my eyes, the RX1 is a very specialized “Model Car” which Sony developed as a stepping stone towards a mirrorless FF camera. It seems to me it was a testing bed for a few different concepts and ideas, and worked well enough they decided to put it into production to recoup some R&D costs.
It’s a very unique camera, and comparing it with other ILC FF cameras isn’t really the point.
Wheelus
4 months ago |Correct. Not everyone drives a Toyota Camry. Some drive a Corvette or Bentley or Aston Martin. There are some out there who make good money doing photography, design, or whatever who will buy multiple cameras. They will buy a Hasselblad, Canon, NEX, AND an RX-1 and RX-100 for different types of work. Some people are smart enough to know that you will never find one camera that will do everything well.
Wheelus
4 months ago |We continue to see a lot of whining on this site about Sony and how they apparently can’t do anything right. Pricing aside, from all that I have read, Sony has hit home runs (or for the rest of the world, scored goals) with the RX-1, the RX-100, the NEX system of cameras, and many of their video cameras. Maybe not perfect but way better than average are the a99, a77, a65 and other SLT cameras. This has all been achieved in the short amount of time since Sony bought Minolta. In addition Sony R&D at Sony has created sensors that are appearing in everything from cell phones to the top cameras out there, and even licensing the manufacture of its sensors to other camera makers.
But we continue to hear gloom and doom. Sony continues to be at the forefront of innovation even after earthquakes and floods created many problems for them.
What have Canon and Nikon done recently that is a innovative as Sony, other than copy Sony. Pentax, Olympus, and Fuji have also been much more innovative than the Big Two. Canon/Nikon have had that huge user base to depend on, but they cannot depend on that forever. People in the past looked down cars from Japan (yes there are some of us old enough to remember that) and then Korea. In the US, Ford, Chevrolet, and Chrysler almost lost a lead in sales that people in the past thought would be impossible to lose.
So let’s give Sony some time. There will be some stumbles, but I think that based on recent innovation, they are not to be overlooked.
Rob
4 months ago |Part of this is driven by the nature of the market. Canon and Nikon, being legacy companies in the industry, can make consistent, incremental improvements to their products and retain their market share. The younger and smaller companies are the ones that have to do things to “get attention” and need to be more revolutionary in order to increase market share. This is why Sony comes out with an SLT design and Canon has had the 7D in production for approaching 3 years.
kevin
4 months ago |I think it over priced. Entry price should of $1,999. No matter what other think, this is where the price should of been set at no matter what. Comparing it to high price car is wrong. It’s not hybrid, it a point and shoot. The Zeiss is just the name that can demand the high price.
Sony should focus on there g lenses, because I think there sharper than Zeiss. Zeiss have a nice coatings that allows you to look toward the sun or light. I don’t own a Zeiss lens, but I did have one on a bridge cam, sony h series dsc line and if that’s the way there high price lens are designed. I’d give the sony g lens a better over all award.
The A99 is just a little high based on the fact it cost less to make electronic view finders than a high precession optical finder and mirror system with a long shutter life, etc. Plus there low price point cam’s can shoot faster frames than the A99.
I’ve heard people say that small phase detect sensor in the A99 is to small.
I do not own a A99, but would say that is not true, given all the features of the A99, they put it in there because of the ability to use APS lenses.
The phase detectors on the sensor is design for full frame lenses.
Given what I just said, it is a viable expectation that they could price it at $2,800 us dollars, but I think it should started $300 below that amount given it’s lack of high shooting rate.
The A99 is Video and Photo cam. Focus is so much to the point in today’s cam’s, but not the focus of doing one thing or the other in today’s dig cam’s. They got to do both and this creates a conflict of interest.
Jacob
4 months ago |If I had that amount of cash to blow, I’ll take this over a Leica. For the money, this gives me more value than an overpriced camera with a circular red logo. It’s not ‘expensive’ given the tech and the small size it’s housed in.
Just like crazily expensive 4k televisions at CES 2013, this is priced to match it’s early adopters stage.
We’ll benefit from this in a year’s time so thank you Sony for getting the ball rolling! Competition is great for us.
Dave Cox
4 months ago |If Hasselblad had brought out the RX-1 with the Zeiss lens at sub $3,000 then the reviewers would be saying what an earth-shattering and ground-breaking camera it is. In fact, they would be saying exactly the same if it had been Canon or Nikon who released it.
This is an issue of brand snobbery and nothing less.
GunnarK
4 months ago |So right! You hit the head exactly on the nail.
.
Dave Cox
4 months ago |In answer to the RX-1 price complaints, how much do these people think the FF NEX is going to be? Less than 2k? I doubt it very much. And with a Zeiss 35/f2 lens? Less than 3k? I doubt it even more.
Sure, they could have used a non-Zeiss lens to lower the RX-1 price but for what gain? 200 or 300 bucks less? Are the target buyers more interested in price or quality? I would suggest the latter….
Freddo
4 months ago |My sentiment as well. If we play with the idea of the exact same camera, badged with Hasselblad or Leica branding, and the price tag was $5.000 or even more, nobody, absolutely nobody would dare to nag about the price.
lorenzino
4 months ago |Ah well, if you remember the story correctly, the “Lunar” was acclaimed as the most ridiculous idea ever conceived by Hasselblad, and is actually being analyzed as a clear sign of Hasselblad’s decline.
Though nobody thinks the FF Nex will be a “cheapo” camera, nonetheless it should not even approach the Hasselblad’s idea of ripping money from pseudo-snobbish customers, as it would mark the end for Sony as well…
kevin
4 months ago |Your paying for the zeiss, not the full frame. That’s why they put it one there.
kevin
4 months ago |The Zeiss is $1,000 to 1,300 lens the rest is the body and being a full frame. Which I think is ridiculous. Why don’t they just make a cheap full frame. Full manual and manual lenses. Because they don’t want too!
You could buy a entry level 35mm film camera, but not in digital camera.
I don’t want a small cam and I don’t like them. I don’t care about the change in security after 911 and this move to small cams.
Even just a cam with auto focus and 12 million pix would be fine. I guess I could buy some used or some older cam that’s still trying to sold that cam out many years ago.
Dave Cox
4 months ago |What nonsense! The cheapest FF camera in the world is $2,000 (Nikon D600). Do you think Sony is going to make loss just to please you and thousands of others who would never even buy it?
Even if the lens was a generic brand the cost of the RX-1 would be $2,500 (based on the D600 costs).
Your arguments just don’t make any sense – the size of the RX-1 is the whole point of it. You don’t want a small camera and that’s fair enough but it’s no basis for a reasoned discussion!
Emacs
4 months ago |Sony doesn’t have prism, mirror, phase detection sensor array. So the its body is cheaper to build than D600.
Milt
4 months ago |Kai is a goofball.
Jason
4 months ago |I cant afford it, so it must suck!!
alphabart
4 months ago |Very nice review by Kai! Love his way of reviewing. It not the boring standard review. I always thought Kai was a little against sony, but I think he’s just real honest about things in his way.
If I had the money I would buy it, but I’m saving for the FF NEX so I can’t