On 2013-05-14 18:27:30 -0700, RichA said:

On May 14, 2:52*am, Savageduck wrote:
On 2013-05-13 22:54:50 -0700, RichA said:

No, not the Pentax K-01, but this Sony. *The more I thought about it,
the more I realized the fixed lens was the silliest idea they could
have had and there was NO reason for it. *There are no design
constraints with mirrorless, you can design lenses that almost touch
the sensor, if you need to. *However, Sony blew it big time by being
the first out of the blocks with a FF mirrorless (Yes, I know Leica
has one, but they are MF lenses) and they made the monumentally crazy
decision to have a fixed lens. *They could have creamed off lots of
(for a mirrorless FF) Nikon and Canon customers, even at $2800. *Now,
they are stuck with another curiosity.

http://www.dpreview.com/products/son...ts/sony_dscrx1

OK! I'm not going to be buying one of those.
Now what?


If you are a died-in-the-wool DSLR'er, you wouldn't buy a mirrorless
except (perhaps) as a portable body. However, people who LIKE
mirrorless cameras won't buy it because of the fixed lens. At least
Canon's "M" which looks superficially similar can change lenses.

I come from a 35mm rangefinder/SLR school and for now I am content with
a DSLR. However, as much as I would like a Leica M of some sort, I
realistically can't afford the body, to provide it with the glass it
deserves. There have been several tempting offerings in recent years,
but nothing which gets me to take the bait just yet.

That Canon M is interesting. I see Amazon has it available with the
f/2.0 22mm for $499.
....but I do like to have a VF I can put my old eye-ball up to.

--
Regards,

Savageduck