View Single Post
  #5  
Old May 16th 13, 02:04 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
James Silverton[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 123
Default Stupidest, most overpriced, most poorly executed camera in thelast two years

On 5/16/2013 5:08 AM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Wed, 15 May 2013 17:48:19 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:

On May 14, 10:03 pm, Savageduck
wrote:
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


Whatever anyone says, an LCD in anything brighter than cloudy
conditions is just plain HORRIBLE to use. And since LCD's can't be
diopter corrected like EVF's and DSLR optical viewfinders, 50% of the
population have to wear glasses if they intend to do any manual
focusing.


And no LCD lets you focus with the accuracy of the old ground-glass
view finders in the SLR of 15 or more years ago. Neither can a DSLR
offer the same certainty.


I'm glad to see I am not alone in having difficulties with an LCD
display out of doors. Judging by the lack of optical viewfinders in less
expensive cameras, I thought I might be handicapped :-)

--
Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)

Extraneous "not." in Reply To.