backtop

Print 26 comment(s) - last by nocturne_81.. on Sep 12 at 2:51 AM
$3,000 for a fixed lens camera

A new digital camera has leaked from Sony called the RX1. The fixed-lens camera appears to be very compact yet has very impressive specifications for a “pocketable” camera.
 
The rumors claim that the camera will have a full-frame sensor and will sport a Carl Zeiss 35mm F/2.0 compact lens. Speculation points to price tag of around $3,000, which seems like a lot for camera that doesn't support interchangeable lenses.
 
The only details we know are from the photographs. The camera has a hot shoe for flash or other accessories, a pop-up flash, and a control wheel on the top for aperture and other settings.
 
This digital camera is expected to compete against the Fuji X100 and the Leica X2. The official announcement of the camera is expected to happen on Wednesday, September 12.
 
Would you buy a $3,000 digital camera without support for interchangeable lenses?

Sources: Sony Alpha Rumors, Engadget


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
RE: Would not with or without
By anactoraaron on 9/10/2012 12:23:09 PM , Rating: 2
Better for still studio photos, maybe, yes. I personally have never used a camera from Hasselblad (and likely never will) so I can't give an informed opinion on their quality (high price doesn't always mean quality). I do see that they have an official Ferrari endorsed camera though (I wonder how much they had to pay to do that).

I don't see anything they sell that has a faster shutter than 1/800th so they may be better for studio work (again I have never used one), but for action there are faster shutter cameras that fill that use better.

'Better' varies on usage, so to say "there are better cameras than Nikon and Canon" isn't something I completely agree with.


RE: Would not with or without
By bug77 on 9/10/2012 12:29:15 PM , Rating: 2
For pro cameras, a larger sensor IS better. That's not to say anyone would go around taking vacation snapshots using one.


RE: Would not with or without
By Jeffk464 on 9/10/2012 12:53:38 PM , Rating: 2
Not just for pros, if you really want professional looking nature scenes like the pros you need the big lens and sensor. Our point and shoots or phones work pretty well for good family pics and what not, but they just really hold out for those spectacular shots.


RE: Would not with or without
By anactoraaron on 9/10/2012 1:04:11 PM , Rating: 2
For pro's that want to freeze action to say, be able to count the stitches on a baseball, 1/800th isn't going to cut it. (looking at Hasselblad here)

Like I said, usage determines which camera is better.


RE: Would not with or without
By bug77 on 9/11/2012 3:44:53 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, it could. With a larger sensor, you can go with ISO 400 or ISO 800 and get no noise at all. But that's just theory, in practice sports events are packed with Nikons and Canons. Not sure if because of shutter speed, the need for zoom (larger sensors have a wider FOV, quite the opposite of what you need for sports) or just plain cost.


RE: Would not with or without
By aliasfox on 9/11/2012 10:02:24 AM , Rating: 2
big frame, slower shutter is good for stills and low light - the hasselblad would be great for capturing outdoor evening scenes or really minute detail, for example.

a faster shutter like that available on SLRs (especially nice ones) is good for stopping motion, especially in good light (F2.0 lens on 1/6400 shutter at ISO 800 at an effective focal length of 400mm, for example).


"What would I do? I'd shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders." -- Michael Dell, after being asked what to do with Apple Computer in 1997









botimage
Copyright 2013 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki