Sony RX1 - extensive review ""Holy Mackerel, they finally did it!"

[fractal]

Extensive review on the SONY RX-1. Mostly great and some not so good. Bottom line is that it is a groundbreaking camera that can more than compete with the best.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-rx1/sony-rx1A.HTM

snipit...
Performance, optics and image quality -- oh my!

Beyond its ground-breaking size, what really thrills me about the Sony RX1 is its image quality -- and its phenomenal lens. Ultimately, it all comes down to the pictures a camera can deliver, and the RX1 delivers in spades across the full spectrum of lighting conditions and subjects. Image quality isn't just good, it's exceptional. Having a sensor derived from that in the Sony A99, this comes as no surprise: That camera takes great photos as well, and the RX1 more than matches it. Whether it's due to its extraordinary lens, or to a weaker (or no) low-pass filter, images from the Sony RX1 are noticeably sharper than those of its translucent-mirror big brother at low ISOs, and significantly so at higher sensitivities where better noise-reduction processing could be playing a role.

What's remarkable to me is just how well the Sony RX1 stacks up against the best the field has to offer. (See the image crops below for specific examples, or help yourself to our Comparometer to compare all our test images, to your heart's content.) And when I say "the best the field has to offer," that's without limitation. Images from the RX1 can be put up against those from literally any 35mm-sensor camera currently on the market and they hold their own, if not better the competition. It's no surprise that the 36-megapixel Nikon D800 out-resolves the RX1 at low ISO, but the D800's smaller pixels exact a price at higher ISOs, where the balance tips in favor of the RX1 again.

 

[ddbowdoin]

Extensive review on the SONY RX-1. Mostly great and some not so good. Bottom line is that it is a groundbreaking camera that can more than compete with the best.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-rx1/sony-rx1A.HTM

snipit...
Performance, optics and image quality -- oh my!

Beyond its ground-breaking size, what really thrills me about the Sony RX1 is its image quality -- and its phenomenal lens. Ultimately, it all comes down to the pictures a camera can deliver, and the RX1 delivers in spades across the full spectrum of lighting conditions and subjects. Image quality isn't just good, it's exceptional. Having a sensor derived from that in the Sony A99, this comes as no surprise: That camera takes great photos as well, and the RX1 more than matches it. Whether it's due to its extraordinary lens, or to a weaker (or no) low-pass filter, images from the Sony RX1 are noticeably sharper than those of its translucent-mirror big brother at low ISOs, and significantly so at higher sensitivities where better noise-reduction processing could be playing a role.

What's remarkable to me is just how well the Sony RX1 stacks up against the best the field has to offer. (See the image crops below for specific examples, or help yourself to our Comparometer to compare all our test images, to your heart's content.) And when I say "the best the field has to offer," that's without limitation. Images from the RX1 can be put up against those from literally any 35mm-sensor camera currently on the market and they hold their own, if not better the competition. It's no surprise that the 36-megapixel Nikon D800 out-resolves the RX1 at low ISO, but the D800's smaller pixels exact a price at higher ISOs, where the balance tips in favor of the RX1 again.

what I like about this... this camera is a progressive camera, not a reactive camera. Sony went out and said we're going to change the marketplace and innovate. Look at the D600 and 800, all those bodies do is appeal to certain financial demographics. There is nothing better about those cameras that an older D3s couldn't do. Instead of innovating, pushing the technology, and closing the gap between digital and film... they just start packing useless features and HDDSLR video because that's what everyone is doing now.

Just take a peek at the past... look at all of the camera designs that were out there. They range from classic and minimal to WOW what is that!

I have to take my hat off to Sony, finally someone who broke away from the pack rather than putting out another DSLR with slightly different features.

 

[CP_alum08]

what I like about this... this camera is a progressive camera, not a reactive camera. Sony went out and said we're going to change the marketplace and innovate. Look at the D600 and 800, all those bodies do is appeal to certain financial demographics. There is nothing better about those cameras that an older D3s couldn't do. Instead of innovating, pushing the technology, and closing the gap between digital and film... they just start packing useless features and HDDSLR video because that's what everyone is doing now.

Just take a peek at the past... look at all of the camera designs that were out there. They range from classic and minimal to WOW what is that!

I have to take my hat off to Sony, finally someone who broke away from the pack rather than putting out another DSLR with slightly different features.

No doubt this camera is innovative, but you can't put all the blame on the camera industry. Sadly, slight modifications are the norm now with anything technology related. Cars, cell phones, etc. they all do it. Someone comes out with a new, fresh idea and for the next X-years that design is tweaked and modified until the next big thing happens. I'm not arguing with you, I'm just saying don't be surprised to see an RX2 next year
That said, I think this is probably the way of the future. These new "advanced" p&s cameras (not really sure what else to call them) and the mirrorless systems seem to be expanding pretty quickly. I don't think DLSRs will totally go away but if I can get the same results with a camera a fraction of the size and weight, why wouldn't I?