Sony DSC-R1

I wonder which market this camera is aimed at. The price and number of megapixels is far more than the average p&s needs, the fixed lens, lack of hotshoe and electronic viewfinder pretty much disallows any sort of SLR type use. So who is spending $1000 on a digicam with far too many megapixels for it's need?

I like the Waist finder though....

This camera looks to be a farily promising prosumer model (and the price is certainly right). I don't like the fact it does not have an mirror, instead using the CMOS sensor for previewing. Wouldn't this increase noise levels more relative to a DSLR. But I guess that's the sacrifice for cutting down on size. I really like the fact that the LCD is on top though, making shooting at low angles a breeze.

This camera certainly looks like it will pose a threat to smaller sensor CCD prosumer models that don't cost much less. Ben, this camera does have a hotshoe, look at the grip carefuly in the photos.

This is getting closer to what I want in a camera. Larger sensor, waistlevel viewing, and they got rid of that stupid flapping mirror and the need to stick the camera in front of my face. Now if only it had interchangeable lenses , and less time between shots.

When they incorporate Konica/Minolta's anti-shake tech ( aren't they some sort of partners? ), I'll probably buy one even with a fixed lens.

What provision for manual focusing does it have? Something like that recent Leica/Panasonic would be good

It has a hot shoe and can be manually focused with a ring on the lens.

I'm not 100% sure who Sony are aiming at since the DSC-R1 is larger, heavier and more expensive than (or similar in cost to) most consumer DSLRs + wide to medium tele zoom.

The 3 frame image buffer is small too and I've yet to see an electronic viewfinder that I liked. On the other hand most consumers seem to shoot digital camers held at arms length looking at the LCD screen, so I guess they don't need an optical viewfinder.

It is probably a nice camera and the lens looks like it should give high quality images and has a good zoom range, but I still can't quite see what it has over a DSLR unless image quality is much better. It is 10.3MP, which does give it an edge over the 6MP DSLRs, though not so much over the EOS Digital Rebel XT (8MP).

At $600 it would be a killer in the consumer market. At $1000, I'm not so sure.

This model heralds a new era in prosumer compacts. Minolta A200, Nikon 8800/8400, Canon PS Pro S1 IS, Oly C8080 -- all now seem outdated. In 2006 we will probably see a horde of APS-C compact prosumer digicams.

Some folks made me laugh out loud when they commented (in a couple recent threads) on this cam -- that this model would not be of much interest to serious amateurs who can afford DSLRs. Evidently the opinion of some typical "experienced" amateur who talks a lot about equipment but has a portfolio as thin as a mouse's tail.

Have you ever used a camera with an electronic viewfinder? They suck, especially for moving targets.

The DSC-R1 will appeal to a small segment of consumers who never want to use really long lenses, never want a really fast lens, don't want to shoot bursts of more than 3 frames and don't mind carrying around a camera that's larger, heavier and at least as expensive as a DSLR.

The market will be sandwiched between those who want something small and light and those who want something with the versatility of a DSLR. There will be a market for EVF cameras with APS-C sensors, but I'm not sure it will blossom much until they can get the price down to below that of similar DSLRs.

The one thing the DSC-R1 does have going for it is a 10MP sensor. In the past it's been shown that the number of pixels is a powerful marketing tool. I expect Sony will use that to full advantage.

Joe Average: doh... it's only a 5x zoom :(
Me: Wow... a "24-120" range with big glass... what a strong commitment from Sony :)
(by the way: I care more about the diameter of the lens than the size of its sensor)

How does this compete with the Panasonic Lumix FZ30 (with the Leica lens)? It, too, can do waist-level shooting with its flippable LCD and its very versatile mechanically zoomable Leica lens.

I have used a camera with an electronic viewfinder - a Canon Pro 1. There are things to like and things to dislike about such a camera.

To dislike: On the Pro 1 at least, there is some lag between reality and what the viewfinder shows; the display freezes up when taking a shot which makes it very difficult to shoot moving subjects; the quality of the lcd image is certainly not as good as what I see through my DSLR viewfinder; decreased battery life.

To like: Much easier to take shots at low and odd angles using the electronic viewfinder; smaller size and lighter weight can be an advantage; the "post-view" of the captured image is just as good as that on the lcd of a DSLR; quieter than a DSLR; no need to lockup a mirror for longer exposures; while the lcd display is not as good as a pentaprism/mirror display, it can provide some pre-shot feedback that is not available on the DSLR.

Although I like and still use my Pro 1, I do more often use my DSLR. But the main problem for me with the Pro 1 was that the small sensor made noise and sharpness issues a problem. An all-in-one camera using a 10+ megapixel APS sensor could have advantages over a DSLR with a similar sensor in certain situations.

I'd keep an open mind about this Sony camera until it is out for awhile and people have a chance to use and test it.

Dan

Who will this appeal to?

Sony fanboys. There is a large market segment, in Japan but also in the USA, of people who positively wet themselves at the mere mention of a new Sony product.

Anyway, looks to be a decent upgrade of their 828, which also went after and failed to capture the DSLR buyer. I'm sure they crippled some feature so it only works with Memory Sticks and not CF in typical Sony fashion, though.

Who will this appeal to? Sony fanboys. There is a large market segment, in Japan but also in the USA, of people who positively wet themselves at the mere mention of a new Sony product.

It seems Sony fanboys are very marginal in number compared to Canon fanboys who wet themselves with full frame DSLR cameras which are both unreachably expensive and have severe edge problems with wide angle lenses.

Anyway, looks to be a decent upgrade of their 828, which also went after and failed to capture the DSLR buyer.

Are you sure? Do you have an idea how many new buyers (those without an existing lens system) will prefer this camera if it (very possibly) delivers image quality equaling Nikon D2x and Canon 1DS at at least 1/5th of the price? btw you have to buy lenses for Nikons and Canons on top of that.

I'm sure they crippled some feature so it only works with Memory Sticks and not CF in typical Sony fashion, though.

You seem sure of a lot of things, unfortunately if you check the specifications you'll see it works with CF cards.

The nice thing about this camera is what it's foreshadowing.

They're now starting to use sensor size as a selling point and they're doing it the right way by educating the public about why it's better.

Also, I believe that the era of really cheap and innovative cameras is coming to an end. There will still be innovation (I'm not that dumb) but manufacturers will be reluctant to put them into cheap cameras. Their profits are starting to weaken with the relentless slide of prices for digital cameras. So, they'll make sure to save the really cool stuff for their higher-end models - where their profits are.

Quote: "many new buyers (those without an existing lens system) will prefer this camera if it (very possibly) delivers image quality equaling Nikon D2x and Canon 1DS at at least 1/5th of the price?"

Give me a break. I have yet to see any of these EVF cameras that can produce images even close to a D2X or a 1DS. Maybe this one will be the first but I highly doubt it. EVF viewfinders are absolutely horrible to look thru, plus they usually have a delayed image stuck on the screen after every shot you take(as another poster pointed out too).

I'm sure this camera will produce nice looking images and it is targeted at the Porsche Cayenne crowd who can't be bothered to figure out how to use an SLR.

My first thought was, why would I want a 350XT with a 17-85 lens permanently stuck on it. I am now wondering. May be it is actually a 14-70mm lens and the camera is free.

Future of photography is in one lens system. Absolutely controlable in every aspect. In such observation Sony R1 is one of the many ways and paths, maybe and probably dead end because of begining of the 21st cent. technology, but it opened one small way to this future achievement. How EVF impacts the quality of pics?

Customer: So, this Canon Rebel XT is the best digital camera money can buy, right?

Best Buy Salesman: No, I haven't showed you this new Sony Camera. It's top of the line. You can't get anything better. It's a little more expensive, but it's well worth the money.

Customer: How many megapixels does it have?

Best Buy Salesman: 10. The Canon only has 8. That's 2 million more pixels. That will be the difference between printing 11x14 and 16x20.

Customer: Wow. I've been thinking of making 16x20 inch prints.

Best Buy Salesman: Besides that, the Sony has a 5x zoom, and the canon only has a 3x. It accepts two types of memory, and has a flip up viewfinder. It will give you so much more freedom and flexibility down the road. And, Sony just has so much more experience with electronics. Canon is more of a printer company.

Customer: Oh. I guess I should get the Sony.

That sounds like a paraphrase from Shakespeare's King Lear -- touching but not quite realistic. Nicely done.

"targeted at the Porsche Cayenne crowd who can't be bothered to figure out how to use an SLR" Pardon? What more is there to figure out? How to change a lens or clean a sensor?

Personally, I'm hoping this turns out to be as good as the specs and the Zeiss T* badge suggest. I've used SLRs for over 25yrs and I've tended to stick within 28-100mm, so 24-120 is quite generous to me. The lens range I like working in, has been available on fixed-lens digicams for some time now but the image quality has been lacking (noise, CA & poor lenses to name but three). The best I could find was the OlyC8080 (now discontinued) and I'm now glad I didn't go for it.

I don't mind the weight at all - compared to the 2 film bodies (810+520g), 2 or 3 lenses, extension tubes etc, that I've been used to this could be a real boon to an aging back particularly as I regularly carry a 3.7kg tripod.

Also, my film gear is Contax/Zeiss and I would hope for some of the magic lens tonality I'm used to, from the R1.

Actually, I think the camera could potentially be ideal for me. The range of the zoom suits nearly all the shooting I do. The "slow" lens is not as big a problem as people might think since there is no mirror. I am hoping the lens is close to the Canon L glass (Zeiss T*....there is reason to hope) If the noise is reasonable at high ISO settings and the shutter lag is any where near the DSLR competition, this might be a bargain assuming the lens is truely Zeiss quality. I'll be interested to see reviews of production cameras. I've held out against the digital revolution, but this might be the camera to change that....we'll see.

As there is no such thing as the perfect camera, three is also no ?average photographer?.

But there is also no bed cameras only bed----

I can only tall my story ? more than 40 years of shooting as amateur, but with some experience, shows, some publications and many darkroom hours.

I have waited till the digicams will get wide angle, good quality and reosanble price.

Than comes SONY DSC F828 and I decided to jump in. Less then one year latter, with almost 3000 shots (and some good ones) I have very few bed things to say about the 828.

From my experience with the 828, SONY are on the right way. I believe that the SLR system (80 years old?) will disappear and the EVF/DISPLAY will be the standard solution to the viewing problem, and soon comes the lens exchangeable DIGICAM with APS sensor size. ? Then I will buy my second camera.

Well, I use a Nikon D70 (heavily, but not pro), a Rolleicord Vb, a Nikon F3, in other words: "real" cameras, SLR and DSLR. But the Sony is a camera I have been waiting for: large sensor (don't mind the megapixels, 6 would have been fine with me), 24-120 lens (as one other comment says, if you don't need long lenses, so what?), high ISO values, no dust on the sensor, "waistlevel finder" (that's what I love about the Rolleicord), no mirror slap. I shoot landscapes, nature and people, for all of this the Sony looks like the perfect camera to me. I hope sensor and lens deliver, if yes, I will certainly get one. It may not be perfect for everything, but it is for some of us. As to EVF, I can do with that. The D70 finder may be better, but beeing so small (compared to F3 and F100), I rather prefer a waistlevel screen, easier to compose. Wait and see.

This seems to be a prosumer camera that isn't quite sure what it wants to be.

The larger sensor and 10mp image should be very nice - I am sure this camera can take wonderful photographs (but then again, so can a holga)... :-)

What kills me on this camera - aside from not having interchangable lenses - is the fact that there is no optical viewfinder, and I have yet to see a digital viewfinder that I like at all. I'm addicted to the optical viewfinder - even the lamentably cramped viewfinders on the D70 and the 300D are viewfinders that I can use reasonably well, but digital viewfinders are terrible at tracking moving objects (as has been brought up before).

If the viewfinder on this camera is different, and can allow me to track a moving subject better, then it might be worth a look - especially if the wide angle and telephoto converters are worthwhile. It won't get me off a dSLR, but it might make a nice walkabout camera for someone who otherwise does not need very long, fast glass or isn't after anything moving faster than a walk.

Why is it called a review? It's just a copy of the press release.

Who called it a review?

Why haven't they made it with interchangable lenses. IMHO that is the greatest advantage of a DSLR, namely that I have access to a large variety of lenses, both cheap and expensive, especially if one has a Nikon or Canon system (MK and Pentax with some restriction), where one can not only access the huge variety of generic lenses but also a whole load of thrid party stuff. After all, even in die digital age, the lens still makes the camera (and the photographer the photos, but that's another story). Sony could even offer it with C and N bajonett, making the camera attractive for C&N glass owners. It has some distinc advantages to SLR cameras, i.e. the mirror, or rather lack thereof. This means no mirror vibration, or awkward lockup procedures, all things which are especially important when photographing with Tele.

I'd like to see a review that mentions the speed of the EVF. When they finally get the EVFs to real-time speeds, the flopping mirror of the modern SLR will be doomed. Why use that extra space, make more noise and require bigger lenses once the EVF can keep up?

Khm,... because through a pentaprism U see a real image and on an EVF U see a group of dots maybe?

There's a new airliner design proposal which has the "feature" of no real windows, but instead and TV screen which shows you what's outside. You're actually sitting inside a windowless box, deep in the bowels of the plane.

Would you rather look out of the window, or at a TV screen?

Good point, Bob, but I could be outside right now & here I am glued to this computer screen. :)

DPReview has added resolution and noise tests to their preview of the new Sony. Basically, they state that it has slightly higher resolution, with noise similar until 800 ISO. After that the Sony starts looking like a digicam.

I wonder when Sony will make this sensor available to KM, Nikon & Pentax? Sould be good competition for Canon.

Oh, I should have said that this is compared to a Canon 20D.

I just looked at the sample images at dpreview ... gosh ... the noise is intolerable in the shadows for indoor shots ...

What's the deal with everybody's fixation on the optical image in a viewfinder? What I'm mostly interested in is what the photograph is going to look like, not what the viewfinder looks like. If it were the other way around I'd just buy a nice pair of binoculars.

I own and have used a Nikon F and F2, a Minolta Autocord, Hasselblad 500c a few speed graphics, a Graflex 4x5 SLR, a couple of Leicas, a 70mm combat Graphic, a Argus C3, a Graflex XL, one of those finderles Voigtlander things with a 15mm lens and a few home made cameras. Some of them don't even have viewfinders. All I ever wanted from a viewfinder whether it was a ground glass or just a piece of bent wire was an adequate preview of where the edge of the frame was, and in some cases an idea of what the depth of field was. Of the cameras that have viewfinders, I prefer the waist-level finders because they look less like reality and more like a photograph (Polaroid backs help too).

I want an uglier display please. Flashing highlights before the exposure, a real time color histogram maybe.

One camera I'd like to see would be a camera with a real time LCD display with some indication of when the highlights were blown, and a Leica M mount so that I could mount almost any lens ever made through some combination of adapters. A button to enlarge part of the image for focusing as in the Leica digicam would be nice but not necessary if the viewing screen were say a six inch diagonal. Focusing and "metering" with the lens stopped down would be ideal, so auto-diaphragming would be superfluous.

While they are at it, the camera makers could allow the Lens-Sensor-Shutter unit( Can't they put some more effort into getting rid of the shutter? It's so last century. ) to separate from the viewfinder-controls part.

If the camera makers were serious about shutter lag, they could eliminate it or even have negative shutter lag by constantly starting the exposure process then only following through when the photographer "released the shutter".

Also, why is the ISO Speed (Sensor Gain really) not one of the easiest to adjust parameters on a camera. On my Canon 1Ds it's only a little easier than changing film stocks, and from what I understand the 1Ds is one of the easier to adjust It should be as easy as adjusting the shutter speed, aperture, zoom or focusing. Or let it be determined automaticly. I'd much rather have automatic gain to go with my choice of shutter speed and aperture.

I really like the sensor of the 1Ds, the focusing both manual and automatic is better than anything else I have seen , and the ability to mount just about any manual focusing lens (except Canon's) is very nice. On the other hand, how a 21st century camera can be such a clumsy pain in the ass to use when it costs as much as I paid for a nice used Volvo ( and sometimes seems to weigh as much ) is a mystery to me. Actually it's pretty cheap, I made 60,000 exposures with my 10D , then traded it in for a used 1Ds and have made about 15,000 with it, and the cost of that much film and lab fees are a lot more, but still ...

If Electronic Viewfinders were the norm, and a manufacturer tried to sell a DSLR where you couldn't judge the quality of the exposure in real time serious photographers would ridicule it as a misguided cost saving measure.

By the way, flying an airplane looking out the window rather than watching the instruments is a good way to crash

The e-WLF and EVF would be useful for IR photography. Of course they probably screw it up by putting a very strong, impossible to remove IR blocking fitler on it :)

Almost being strictly a portrait shooter, I can see where this might work very well. However, the lack of a portrait grip/controls and the failure to use IS put's this out of my area of interest.

As far as the EVF...I use a Minolta A1 now & having a real-time histogram (anti-shake not withstanding), makes it far more useful to me than a DSLR viewfinder (having owned & used both). I would like to see KM/Sony come out with a full featured DSLR incorporating this chip & KM's anti-shake system. If they could develop a real-time histogram (super-imposed in the viewfinder, much like fighter planes use holograms on the windshield), I would be all over it like stink on a skunk!

Remember the Oly E10/E20? Take the reflex mechanism from that camera, take the body, lens (the Oly C8080 lens would be fine too) and sensor from the Sony R1 and you have a killer digital ZLR.

The APS-sized sensor (low noise, smooth) is the big news, not the MP.

Quote "What's the deal with everybody's fixation on the optical image in a viewfinder? What I'm mostly interested in is what the photograph is going to look like, not what the viewfinder looks like. If it were the other way around I'd just buy a nice pair of binoculars."

Mr. Hugh Crawford you obviously see things differently than I (maybe its your EVF viewfinder). Your whole article seems non-sensicle to me. 95% of us are fixated upon an optical viewfinder because EVF finders are horrible to look at. I want to be able to EASILY see EXACTLY what it is I am composing. Any EVF image I have seen for a viewfinder is hardly a clear/accurate thing to look at.

Also, what are you talking about regarding the changing of ISO values??? This is a two-button process on my 20D that takes all of 2 seconds...hardly the pain in the ass that you make it out to be. Granted, I cannot afford the EOS1DS that you apparently have, so I do not know how you change it on yours. However, the last thing I want is the ISO to be set automatically as you suggested. If I wanted a point and shoot I would have bought one..not an SLR.

While I agree I have never seen an EVF I liked, there are advantages:

* The absence of a mirror allows the lens design to have its rearmost element closer to the sensor.

* Also, not having a mirror removes a source of vibration and noise. The R1 has a _silent_ mode. Not quiet.

* In combination with silent operation, the extremely flexible screen also allows composition without being obvious about it, which combined makes for very unubtrusive picture taking.

* The image shown is from the image sensor itself, that is, there is _no_ misalignment of focussing and actual film/sensor plane. I have as yet never owned a reflex camera, (even my TLR!), where there wasn't some degree of misalignment evident when testing.

* The live preview capabilities allow the nifty live overexposure warnings, and live histograms (which I personally would probably never use. The overexposure warning seems quite handy though.)

That said, I think it would be wise to be wary of EVF lag on the R1. If the camera can't support a movie-mode, I suspect that it may be limited in terms of frame rate to the displays as well. But in short - win some, loose some. If I bought the R1, I would probably switch between MF style composing from above, and regular viewfinder use.

A lot of people mention a lack of mirror on EVF cameras as though it were some huge benefit. I understand that having the rear lens element closer to the sensor may add a certain degree to image quality, but the 'vibration' from mirror thing is trivial.

Unless you are shooting from a tripod, any mirror vibration from an DSLR is going to be irrelevant (in other words, your unsteady hands will pose more of a problem for image sharpness than mirror slap). So, if you have to spend the time to set up a tripod anyway, whats the big deal about using mirror lock-up on your camera...most of the better DSLR's have that feature..(Nikon's D70 would be the exception). This is more than a fair tradeoff for having an optical view finder IMHO.

Hmm. Seems I need to add a few bullets to drive the point home harder. :-)

* The presense of a mirror makes instant shutter response impossible. While you can shorten the block-out time by making the mirror swing faster, this also increases noise and vibration further. (Unless using a semi transparent mirror as in the old Canon RTs. The mechanical shutter was still there though and the system could never penetrate the market.)

* Worse, having the mirror swing out of the way ensures that you will not be able to see the subject at the time of exposure. A lot of photographers really dislike that and it was one of the reasons people kept shooting with TLRs and rangefinders, and it is still so to this day.

* Not only does the EVF allow the combination of the virtues of rangefinders and SLRs, but it adds some of its own. For instance, the live preview not only lets you see through the lens the subject as you record it, but you can (if you wish) choose to see it _as it is recorded by the sensor_. This is quite powerful, to say the least. It must be ironic for the real oldtimers among us to hear the mirror/prism SLR defended against the new kid on the block and compare to the rangefinder vs. SLR discussions of yesteryear.

The two main drawbacks of EVFs are insufficient resolution and insufficient frame-rate. But these two drawbacks, while real, are both solveable.

The BIG advantage of mirrored OVFs is that they allow the use of lenses made for the previous film cameras. This reduces cost for the owners of said lenses as they migrate from film to digital, and lessens the need to carry dual set-ups during the transition. It also allows the manufacturers to keep their locked-in customers, and alleviates their need to design new lenses and set up new, parallell manufacturing lines for these.

'The presense of a mirror makes instant shutter response impossible'.

Come on Jonas, that is ridiculous. How fast do you need?? I guess that is the reason 99.9% of all professional journalists and sports photographers shoot SLR and not Rangefinders huh???

I hardly pretend to be a professional, but I have never ever come across a situation where I lost a photo because of the delay from time of shutter release to mirror flip-up and film/sensor exposure.

Well, I'd say that I have lost moments due to shutter delay. That is not to say that I haven't been able to live without those shots. As I mentioned the annoyance of not knowing just what you captured while the viewfinder blacked out is probably more important than those times you actually miss something.

But despite having really likeable SLR gear, I've found myself gravitating towards my rangefinder 35mm and MF gear, just as I used to simply like shooting with a TLR, and I realize that the uninterupted vision is an important part of that.

My whole point is this really - while electronic viewfinders have Real Issues right now, they also have the potential of being better than the mirror/pentaprism combo in just about every respect and to additionally bring unique benefits. It is pretty straightforwardly clear what is needed, and if the market pressure is there, it will happen. Unfortunately, even those SLR manufacturers that didn't have much in the way of vested interest in an old line of lenses chose (and it was probably a wise choice at the time) to go with the oldfashioned solution. Therefore, much of the pressure to improve EVFs was disarmed, and the low-end trend of eliminating the viewfinder altogether doesn't help things along. These more ambitious digicams are where the evolution may continue. Minolta upped the resolution, Fuji allows setting the refresh rate to 60 Hz instead of 30, so the technology moves forward albeit at a snails pace comparatively. Mirrors and pentaprisms (or -mirrorboxes...) don't move at all though.

And if Bob Atkins is the same Bob Atkins who used to wrestle with view camera transparencies, contrast masks and Cibachromes, he would have to acknowledge that focussing on the capture medium itself, and being able to preview the image as it will be captured by the camera, are abilities he would have been prepared to kill (or at least commit grievous bodily harm ;-) for at the time.

Does anybody know the x-sync speed (being an electronic shutter and no focal plane curtains)?

targeted at the Porsche Cayenne crowd who can't be bothered to figure out how to use an SLR

You'd be amazed how many good photographers drive Porsche Cayennes (I know 2 here in LUX at least).. the bad thing about generalizations is they never work (get the irony?)

I used to carry a small Domke bag with a Contax G1, 28mm, 45mm and 90mm lenses. Fantastic travel kit and wonderfully sharp photos.

I now carry a big Domke bag or a LowePro backpack with 300d, 17-40mm, 50mm, 70-200mm, 2x converter, close-up filter, etc. It weighs a ton but I can photograph just about anything.

The thing is I think I enjoyed shooting more with the G1 (though I wouldn't go back).

I won't be buying this Sony, but I think it's a step in the right direction. When I can get 24-200mm range with good quality and a light package I will be happy to get rid of my SLR.

Who might like this camera? Maybe an amateur like me looking to upgrade his "old" Olympus C-2100 sometimes. With the Olympus I wish I had lower noise, higher dynamic range, wider angle, lower chromatic aberation, smaller depth of field available, higher ISO, better viewfinder, sometimes faster operation, better colors and higher number of pixels. I'm no longer going to buy a camera with a small noisy insensitive chip and zoom range starting around 35mm. Sony R1 is nice surprise to me -- it seems to satisfy me needs *exactly*.

How about DSLRs? My old M42 manual lenses are of no use with them, partially because of poor DSLR viewfinders (sic!). So I would have to buy a decent digital lens(es), which is no cheap thing and there's no guarantee that DSLR sensors won't change anytime soon to obsolete the lens(es) within ten years (if they don't break sooner). So tell me which DSLR with a fast good lens covering the R1 zoom range I can get for $1000. Not counting dust on chip. From this point of view the non-interchangeable lens may not be such a big problem for me -- I'm not going to buy new body each two years.

Yes, EVFs provide poor view. But I assume they've made significant progress since 1999 when Olympus C-2100 (with a poor but still usable EVF -- I'm no action photographer) was released. So I expect R1 viewfinder could provide, unlike most DSLR viewfinders, live preview, 100% coverage and usable manual focus (thanks to zooming). Missing mirror is also advantage.

Well, one can't expect a perfect camera for $1000. I don't believe the camera survives twenty years. Stabilizer, long focal lengths, real macro mode, IR control are missing. But it is an interesting, cheaper and more practical alternative to low-end DSLRs.

Milan,

Why not get the Pentax *ist-DS? it's $700 or so for just the body. It has a 1.0X viewfinder. I got to look through one, the view is similar to a low-end film SLR like an EOS 3000 or even approaching my EOS 50 (in other words: the viewfinder is FAR BETTER than the Canon 300D I tried). Also a company in Germany sells a pricey split-image focusing screen for the *ist-DS. You can use all your Pentax M42 lenses with a simple adapter.

When the DSC-F828 first came out, Michael Reichmann of Luminous Landscape made a pretty surprising review about it: he said, that as far as image quality went, the Zeiss lens on that camera was at par with a Canon 17-40L + 70-200L combo on a 10D. Granted that the ergonomics probably were poorer, but definitely this new Sony would an interesting proposition for someone who didn't want to sink big bucks into new lenses.

As for EVF speed: I can only assume it will get better. I recently got a tiny point-and-shoot camera, a Canon SD500. This camera has a tiny optical viewfinder and a 2" LCD. Lemme say.. LCD technology has improved a great deal since I last bought a digital camera. The LCD on the SD500 has a very good frame rate (20fps at least), and IT'S MORE SENSITIVE THAN THE HUMAN EYE (unless you're dark-adjusted already). And it can only get better.

I'd personally still get the *ist-DS. I kinda like the low resolution of Russian M42 glass! :)

The interesting thing I've experienced trying to use an EVF is that my eyes are focused very close, causing my brain to think in the near field mode, close inspection. When looking through an SLR, my eyes are basically focused at far/infinity and my brain thinks in motion tracking terms.

The advantage for motion is that with your eyes focused far, you can quickly use your other eye to take in the complete field and then switch back to thinking about the eye piece composure. I've done this with surf photography constantly. I'm normally a left eye shooter but switch to right eye for motion tracking purposes. Shutter blanking has NEVER been a problem, even on an AE-1. Do you guys really get lost that quick?

However, landscapes are another matter. I like the view on my 4x5 because I can see the static image as it will be. Looking through my D70 just doesn't work as well, as many have said. Once again, it seems to be a brain function thing. I'll shoot and check composition on the LCD.

What Nokin/Nonac should do is get rid of the mirror, use continuous streaming to an eyepiece digital display so your ergonomics are just like an SLR but without shutter vibration. You still have to stop the lens down but no one seems to complain about that.

I have had the F828 for almost 2 years. Have taken about 17,000 photos with it. I shoot my pets (dogs and cats) but my main shooting is vehicles for sale on eBay. My husband and I fool with classic cars to sell on eBay. One of our biggest selling tools is the great photos taken with the F828. Before the F828 I used the Coolpix 5000 with a wide angle lens. The F828 didn't take quite as wide a photo as I would liked and I missed the rotating LCD screen but photos were always in the acceptable range and I could always edit in Photoshop. I couldn't stand to use the 5000 after using the F828 because it took at least twice as long to write a photo to a card. When taking about 100 photos and I am impatient that is definitely a consideration.

I bought an Oly C-7070 for its lighter size, wider angle lens, rotating LCD screen and thought it would work better on car interiors but photos just didn't compare to those taken with the F828. The quality and quickness with which I could take up to 100 shots per vehicle with the F828 just wasn't matched by any other camera I have tried. When I read Sony had announced a new flagship camera replacing the F828 with rotating LCD screen and other new features including a slightly wider lens, I was thrilled. Just pre-ordering one has made me feel better. Glad I can use my great Sony flash, same batteries and charger. I'm excited and hope I am not disappointed.

I don't want to shoot with DSLR which doesn't have a rotating LCD screen for shooting down on engines, around corners for good interior shots,or up underneath a car to show the undercarriage. I just think the DSC-R1 could be as close to perfect as I'm going to get for my kind of shooting. I won't part with my F828 though since it will be great having a back up camera that can use all the same batteries, charger and flash.

Ellen

Orlando, Pentax *ist DS body sells for about 700 Euro here in Europe, R1 seems to be around 800 Euro. Using the old East European M42 equipment with a DSLR may be fun (I didn't know about the interchangeable focusing screen on *ist DS, thanks for pointing this out), but is less comfortable than using it on an old Praktica and is not for everyday use, so it's better to buy the camera with adequate lenses, e.g. 16-45/4 and some cheap/used longer lens, which is together about 1200 Euro. *ist DS seems to be a nice camera for conservative users and offers more than R1 in the final result, but the corresponding price difference is there.

I am with this statement "I would like to see KM/Sony come out with a full featured DSLR incorporating this chip & KM's anti-shake system. If they could develop a real-time histogram (super-imposed in the viewfinder, much like fighter planes use holograms on the windshield), I would be all over it like stink on a skunk!"

I have to say that these DSC, like the 717, 727, 828 are very good cameras regarding photo quality. My sister still have a 717 and she went to ASIA for more that 3 months and the camera is still working (the 717 has some years now, she bought it in 99 I think). I can imagine the photo quality of this camera will be very good and that is the importat thing, but the price make this camera not interesting to me. As Bob said, at 600 dollars this camera will be a killer. I think 1000 dollars for this camera is a high price, but you get 10MP, the seller will say. ;-) Just my opinion.

Bob,

Any word on whether or not the DSC-R1 camera will have infrared capabilities (via Nightshot mode) like the F717,828? I use my 717 for my digital infrared work and would consider this upgrade if it had this mode.

Thanks! Carol Watson

I'd buy one based on what I know about the camera at this point - mostly because of the wide angle lens. When I acquired my first dig cam - a Canon G3 - I immediately missed using my 24-50 lens on my Minolta 700M. The flippable viewer on this Sony is very similar to the Canon and I have come to enjoy framing my shots with it, in particular at waist level, especially for children shots. With the viewer on top with the Sony, it will seem like old times.

If I get one.

I have been using a Sony F828 for landscape work, and it is great for that application because of its relatively small size and weight, plus it handles very well. Once you get used to the EVF, it is great - live histogram is invaluable, and you can even use it with a polarizer with a little practice. Not a good camera for action photos, though - too slow. The purple fringing thing is overblown - I have never had a problem with it.

I expect the R1 to be better, mainly because of the larger sensor - should give cleaner images at higher ISOs, better shadow detail. I don't know how well the tilting LCD will work out, I haven't used it much on the 828. But not having to change lenses, and having 24-120mm available will cover about 95% of what I shoot.

I was all set to get a DSLR when I saw this. I think eventually, the EVF will replace the mirror as a framing device - it is just a matter of time until the engineers make one that is clear and responsive enough to satisfy jaded SLR users. You have live preview and histogram. You could eliminate mirror vibrations, and build lenses that have much shorter back-focus (like on the R1) which produces much lower CA. The camera itself would be lighter and simpler, cheaper to produce - the lenses would be smaller and lighter. And the concept could be adapted to interchangeable lens systems. Of course, it would be an entirely new system, but it wouldn't surprise me if Sony/Minolta came up with something like this.

For our DUTCH reading members: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sony-R1/

Hrmmm... this backlash against EVF sounds like the backlash 35mm film was given YEARS ago.

Any ways, as with any camera and it system you learn to deal with certain things and adapt to it. I have a C8080 and I love the EVF for the fact that I have the option for the EVF to display what is outside of my histogram. This is great for digital photography. I spend more time being creative with my work in Photoshop versus level and curve adjustments. True, I miss an optical viewfinder from time to time that I had on my film cameras. But, the EVF, even with its limited resolution, is very useful for me.

Also, I'd like to see DOF tests on this camera. The one other thing I really miss (and have to compensate in PS) is that my camera has mega DOF. Awesome in some respects annoying in others.

Just give the EVF some time.

But, I agree with others. I don't quite understand the "place" of this camera. 10MP APS CMOS sensor prosumer P&S, zoom lens, sure, it sounds cool. But why? Because it sounds cool?

Why this camera vs a DSLR? Here is a list: EVF - live histogram and preview of resulting shots Fixed lens - no need to change lenses, no dust, less weight. This particular lens appears to be as good as any available for any DSLR at this focal range. Good resolution, exceeded only by DSLRs costing at least $3000, not to mention the pro-level lenses you would need to go with them. Excellent color, contrast and low noise (based on preliminary reports). Why spend a lot of money for a heavy DSLR kit when one camera can do it all?

All of the above assuming that you are shooting non-moving subjects, with the focal range being adequate. It is perfect for landscape work. Hiking up and down steep slopes, grab the camera, set it on the tripod with a QR attachment, you are ready to shoot. After using the F828, I love these attributes. I have some great Nikon lenses and have been thinking about buying a DSLR. But when I realize I will have to carry about 8-10 lbs of gear to get the same range as this camera at about 2.2 lbs, and spend thousands of $, it gives me pause. I will probably put it off yet again.

If you are into sports or shooting kids or wildlife, you will obviously need something faster and with more lenses available.

only a thoroughly incompetent photographer (one who should never be spending even a tenth of this asking price on a camera) would find the electronic viewfinder acceptable. if you can't properly see what you're shooting, the final result is an absurd guessing game. that may be fine for a $75 semi-disposable gadget, but $1000 is a high price for mediocrity.

While I was exepcting a strong anti-EVF stance from some of PNET members, I'm left wondering what the problem with an EVF would be, provided said EVF has same resolution as the sensor and excellent color-balance - heck, a plug-n-play EVF, to update it once dispaly technology gets better.

Probably DSC-R1 EVF is not that good, but given the pace of technological advancement, in a few years an ideal EVF as described above will be built. Is there any principial (in physical, not phylosophical, sense) obstacle to always choose an optical EVF?

Since none of the "traditional" camera companies (Nikon, Canon, Oly, Pentax) offers a credible zoom kit lens, it's worthwhile to do the math when comparing prices with this Sony. Add a decent lens to any of the traditional camera bodies and the package costs twice this Sony.

There's no doubt at all that Asian manufacture of Zeiss lenses makes them BETTER. Have you ever compared Toyota quality with Porsche? Toyota wins, hands down.

While amateurs have always love very long lenses (birds), long lenses have rarely been used in important people pictures (HCB, Salgado, Weston, your family, interesting strangers etc etc etc).

I do wish it had 24mm equiv and f2.

...whoops...it DOES offer 24mm. I wonder about distortion? One thing for sure, it'll be better than anybody's kit lens, especially compared to 8MP (8>10 is a huge step).

So many "knowlegable opinions and speculation" for a camera that isn't even on the market yet!

I agree you John Kelly, f2 could have been perfect.

Yan, think how BIG an f2 would have to be...unless they shortened the zoom to 24-70...and that might be a good idea...

Looks loke SONY is now shipping the R1, according to their website. Hopefully some hands-on reviews from owners will show up soon.

Hey... people. All the comments above are made comparing this Sony with DSLR cameras. But these are different things. Can we compare cats with dogs..?? The only point that is equal for these kind of cameras is the money. To my opinion, in photography this is not a point for discussion. In terms of comparison. If we start saying "why by this for 1000 and not a DSLR for 800 ... this does not work. Then we must start saying " why spending 1000 to a Point&shoot film camera Contax TVR III instead of buying three SLR film camera" Do not forget the material of which is made the body, quality of batteries, manual commands etc. that compose the price of a camera (and not only of the cameras)

Somebody say that's better Canon Rebel D or Nikon D70 or Minolta D50 or Pentax *istDL etc. then I'll ask - what is the resolution - only 6 MP. What lens..?? - only 3X. The quality of lens - far from being Zeiss T*.

Dear all...

The quality costs. The comments above remind me a story from my childhood with the fox and the grapes, that goes..... the fox was not able to arrive the grapes in the tree and was sayin "Its not for me, its not mature".

This Sony we must compare with other bridge cameras. Please be on this site of discussion.

Mihail Cico

The DSC F-828 is a great camera. It may not be the Nikon, Canon or Pentax enthusiasts dream, but it is a camera without equal.

Many camera enthusiasts don't want to carry around a bag full of alternate lenses. When we go to a function, we want a camera that can provide for all the possibilities, not the promise of endless changes in midstream. A phrase like, "Oh wait just a minute while I change my lens." is foreign to us. No way in h--l is the response that fits best from my point of view.

With my F-828 I can go macro, capture portraits, mid-range or scenic photos. I can shoot from down low to up high on alternate shots without so much as a mere hesitation.

While the F-828 does not provide for changeable lenses, it does provide for a wide range of shots with the lens that is provided. It would be unwise to claim that the F-828 is going to provide the same photo quality that a 35mm camera would, in all instances, but it can rival those cameras in many instances. And the versatility of the electronic media and all the options it opens up, places this camera in a class by itself. Why? Because in part at around $700, that's about what this camera is going for now, this camera is an absolute steal.

The general photo is not the only option in this camera's bag of tricks. If you're careful, you can obtain great video in the 640 by 480 format with sound. While this isn't the major attraction that it could be with image stabilization included (it is not), this camera does lend itself to short clips at events when you don't want to carry around two or three cameras to 'catch everything'. Then there's the low light florescent mode. This feature won't win any photography awards, but it does allow the experimenting photographer to come up with some great shots in low light. In a party setting people enjoy seeing themselves in what seems like an alternate reality. And this among other options provides an absolute photographer's heaven for those of us who are not full-blown professionals, and want to delve into a myriad of experamentations with excellent results.

With an 8 megapixil chip, a seven to one zoom, a macro feature, zoom and focus rings on the lens, a TTL view finder, a swiveling back for down low or up high shots, two different memory chip formats, the USB cable connector, the movie mode, the low light features, the hot shoe, the NM-50 battery providing unequaled shooting time per charge and enough manual setting options to make a professional blush, this camera is one amazing piece of equipment.

If this doesn't interest you, and it won't appeal to everyone, that's fine. I urge you to spend more money to buy the body of your choice, then start purchasing the number of lenses it will take for you to duplicate what the F-828 accomplishes, realizing of course that you won't be able to duplicate all the same functions without a second or third camera. As I said, be my guest.

The reason the F-828 didn't do better, is because Sony failed miserably to let the public know what functions it could provide. While other camera manufacturers hawked their products with commercials in a variety of formats, Sony opted not to, or at the very least, much much less. Now Sony has probably come to one of two assessments. This camera isn't what consumers want and we'll discontinue the line, or this camera isn't what the consumer wants, so we'll morph the camera into an also ran product that consumers already have a myriad of options to choose from.

The R1 is one such camera. It won't be but a few months before other manufacturers provide a ten megapixel camera to rival the R1. The R1 will be buried in a sea of alternate choices. What a great marketing environment to place your product in.

What Sony has failed to understand, is that the F-828 was a camera that was unrivaled. To other who have reviewed what the F-818 is and don't care for it, I say go for the Pro camera of your choice. Leave the F-828 to the folks that appreciate it for what it is. And Sony, if you do replace the F-828 with something more advanced, please have the common sense to inform the public of all that your camera can do next time. If you do, I'll have a lot more company.

Sony must follow up the F-828 with an F-939. The F-939 should have between a 12 and 15 megapixil chip. It should have between a 12 and 15 zoom as well. It should provide a wider lens, on the order of the R1. It should provide image stabilization and the ability to snap a full definition photo mid-video. It should provide a 3 or 4" screen. Now that memory media is about to take a big leap with the new 5 megabyte micro-drives, Sony should also up the anti on the movie mode to 1280 x 960. It should also expand on the night photo options. If it did so, man what a camera...

If Sony produced this camera, and marketed it with an adequate advertising campaign, it would capture a very large market share. It would be a one of a kind nitch camera with massive appeal.

Instead I see Sony opting to develop a me-too product that will fail miserably. When it does, I question if Sony will opt to divest itself from still shot photographic cameras that approach the professional level. That would be a disaster after them allowing the best digital camera ever produced, to languish in ambiguity.

None the less, Sony appears headed in that direction. I hate to see it.

The R1 is the cam for people who want a Wasit Level Viewfinder so no comparason there to a DSLR.

That reason alone I see this cam as a poor mans version of a Haslleblad rangefinder.

Only if the body had the shape and size of a Canon G5 it would be pefect.

also, comparason of noise compared to 20D is made by 100% crop!!!

wouldnt the R1 result in cleaner pics if it were only reduced to the size of a 6MP? does that make sense? since i dont have the option to buy a 6MP version R1, does that make any sense at all?

and someone mentioned an f2 by shortening the zoom to 24-70, that would be super nice.

In answer to the question, where is the market for this camera, or who might be a buyer? I guess I would have to raise my hand. I started out 20 years ago with Olympus OM-2, went to Nikon FA and F2A, graduated to Mamiya 67 Pro S, and then to 4x5 and 5x7. I now use several cameras, none of them made before 1965, except for the family digital snapshot camera... we have small childen. My photographic interests are travel, portraits, and figure study. I think this camera would be an excellent choice for me, as I will still keep my 4x5, and a couple vintage cameras.

I am an amateur medium and large format photographer and i ve invested (actully dumped) my investment into this R1 instead of other DSLR after careful evaluation because of a few prevailing factors: (1) i don't ve anymore Nikon or Canon lens when i switch to medium and large format years ago and i just don't want to go back again (2) non-detachable lens avoid irritating dust in the sensor and most important of all, focus me to concentrate on making best use of the zoom lens and avoid distracting to change lens (3) the LCD allows waist level picture taking which works like a Hassobald (4) basically silent operation (5) the usual shot-and-view strange action can be minimised because you can preview the scene for over-exposed area before shooting (6) same sensor size as common DSLR. There are few shortcomings of this camera (a) much lower latitude than slide film and you ve to check for zebra lines for over-exposed area before shooting (b) meter seems always overexposed and i always need to -1EV to avoid over-exposed bright area (c) if you shot in raw mode, continuous shooting mode does not work (d) slow single focus and the continuous focus basically too slow to deem it is working.

If you have interested, you may wish to view some samples taken by this camera by copying the URL below and paste onto your browser:

http://ihome.ust.hk/~lamwkn/R1.html

Norris

this comment is in regards to a sony p100 camera, a cheaper camera than the r1, but hopefullty it may shed some light on what the consumer can expect from sony and its warranty. In Feb. 2005 I purchased a P100 camera from my local Sears store. This was the third sony camera I have had. I have had good luck with the camera in general, and meets my needs as a carpenter, using it to document my work, and for family photo's, etc. Around Thanksgiving, I noticed some of the screws were missing from the case. The camera continued to function normally, and I elected to continue to use the camera, thinking I would send it back for replacement of the screws under warranty after the holidays were over. By January, all but one of the screws were gone, and this allowed the metal case to come apart slightly. This apparently allowed dust, pocket lint, or some other foreign material to enter the camera. The camera began having problems with the zoom, and auto focus, and the lens would get stuck partly in or out, causing an error message that required the camera to be turned off, then back on. It was obvious to me that some debris had gotten inside the mechanism that moved the lens, and was causing the problems. Keep in mind, that the camera continued to take pictures, although the zoom function was useless, causing the camera to "lock up". The auto focus would usually function after a few tries. I went back to Sears, and they told me that the camera was still under the 1 year warranty, and they would have it fixed, no problem. I took the camera to the local Sears service center, and they in turn sent it to the Sony Repair Center in Texas. A few days later, I recieved a call from the repair center for an estimate for repair of the camera which was $181. The camera cost $329 new. I called the repair center, and spoke to several technicians. This is where it gets interesting. The first tech told me it was abuse and physical damage that caused the damage to the camera and that would not be covered under warranty. The camera did have significant wear, but this was only cosmetic, and absolutely did not impair the function of the camera. I told him it was my belief that the screws falling out of the camera body had caused tha camera to literally fall apart, and that in my mind that was a manufacturing defect. After debating with several technicians, such factors as corrosion (none was present in my camera, and the tech later agreed to this), physical damage (only cosmetic, and I have photo's from the camera to support its functionality) abuse (suggesting the camera had been dropped and that caused the screws to fall out), I finally was connected with the customer service supervisor. She listened to my complaint, and told me she would go and examine camera herself, and get a second opinion from some other technicians. I explained that I was taking tim off work to deal with this and would appreciate an expedient reply. She assured me that she would do this as quickly as possible and call me back immediately. I did not recieve a call back or a message from her. I called her back the next morning, and she told me that the other tech's had agreed, the camera had physical damage, and that had caused the screws to come out. I pressed her for details on what kind of evidence the techs had found to support this contention. The best answer she could come up with was that the techs had examined the threaded holes in the camera body, and could determine that the screws had not come out on their own. I expressed that the camera had been in my possesion from the time it was new, it had never been dropped or abused, and that to suggest that the screws had not fallen out on their own was tantamount to calling me a liar. I was also very curious how someone could look at a threaded plastic hole, and make a definitive determination on what forces caused the screw to come out. When I pressed this issue, it was suggested that the screw holes had split open. I asked specifically which holes had done that, since she had the camera in her hands at that moment, it seemed to me to be a straightforward question, easily answered by looking at the camera. All I got was more obfuscation, and excuses. I continued to press her and the tech department for some tangible facts, and got none. I suggested that it was a ridiculous notion to suggest that anyone could look at a screw hole and make a forensic determination as to how or why the screws came out. I recorded the 2 conversations with the Repair center, and told the customer service manager I intended for them to repair the camera under warranty, with no further delay, and if the problem was not resolved to my complete satisfaction, I would investigate alternative remedies, to include litigation, and posting my experience on camera enthusiast web sites, and consumer advocate web sites. I asked her if Sony had ever had any problems with loose screws in the past, and she replied that they had never seen the first loose screw, and furthermore, that it was impossible for the screws to come loose on their own, since the camera was assembled by robots. I offered that Sony keep my camera to use for R+D, and quality control purposes, and simply send me a new one. That did not seem like an option. After a few minutes of investigation on other digital camera web sites, it seems that Sony does in fact have a chronic problem with loose screws, even in the high end cameras costing $1000 or more. Also, there were a plethora of warranty performance issues, with similar complaints of Sony refusing to honor their warranty on any number of technicalities such as lack of sales reciept, lack of UPC code, lack of visible serial number on the product, etc. At some point in the conversation, the issue of the legibility of the serial number on my camera was suggested as a reason not to honor the warranty. The serial number is on a decal on the bottom of the camera. Fortunately, I wrote the serial number on the camera manual when it was new, so I was able to recite it back to her. In short, it seems that Sony is unwilling to honor the warranty on their products, oftentimes citing technicalities as reasons not to honor the warranty. In my case, they have offered several excuses why they won't honor the warranty on my camera. When pressed for FACTS, and specific examples of the "damage" they simply cannot offer satisfactory explanations. The suggestion that a tech can make a visual inspection of a screw hole and make a determination on how the fastener came out is totally ludicrous. I reiterated this to the customer service supervisor, and suggested that if this was their position, they may want to consider how plausible a judge, jury or mediator would find that notion. When I suggested seeking a legal remedy to my problem, I got a different tune, with the customer service rep saying something like, well since you have said that I am going to take this to another level. I am waiting to speak with them again on Monday to see what their remedy might be. In my mind all that needed to happen to fix my camera was to take it apart, and blow the debris out with some compressed air. Sony seems to think they should sell me a year old camera for $181, which I could probably find at a retailer like Sams club, or elsewhere even cheaper. Naturally, I am very disappointed with Sony especially in light of the other similar warranty performance issues. This seems to be a chronic problem not only with the camera's but PSP's, computers, Playstations, etc. It seems if you must have a Sony product, it is a wise investment to get some kind of extended warranty from a reputable retailer. Many internet retailers are not even recognized by Sony as authorized dealers, giving Sony an instant reason not to honor the warranty. I intend to pursue this until I am satisfied by Sony, and I can assure you that the administrative costs of this issue will cost Sony many times the $181 they want to fix my camera

The Sony DSC-R1 I believe is a great tool and it offers:

1- Very good image quality. 2- 24mm equivalent wide angle. 3- High resolution images. 4- Low noise up to 400 ISO. 5- Well-supported RAW format. 6- Excellent ergonomic design. 7- Solidly built. 8- It's SONY.

The Carl Zeiss zoom lens' apertures start at f2.8 at the widest angle, decreasing to f4.8 at the maximum magnification of the optical zoom, and close down to f16. This aperture range works in conjunction with a shutter speed range that tops out at 1/2000 second but whose low end varies along with the capture mode in use. With the Auto, Landscape and Portrait modes, the slowest shutter speed available to the camera is 1/8 second, while the Twilight modes extend to 2 seconds. With the Program mode, the shutter speed bottoms out at 1 second, while with the S, A, and M modes 30 seconds is possible and a Bulb mode limited to 3 minutes is added to the Manual mode.

For all exposures captured using sensitivities ranging from 160 to 400 ISO, noise reduction is applied to any exposure captured with a shutter speed of 1/6 second or longer. But, with exposures captured using the range of 800 through 3200 ISO, noise reduction is applied to exposures captured at shutter speeds of 1/25 second or longer.

Hi , I have one and it is very good. Positives are a superb lens , really very very good and the sensor. It takes CF & Pro and you can have both in at the same time and switch when one is full. Start up and shooting is very quick. The top of prism LCD is not as good for standard shooting , but brilliant for waist level as you can impose a grid for composition and verticals. Speed of focus is swift in good light but drops as it gets darker. The illuminator is not a patch on their hologram laser found on the F828. Build quality is good and everything fits and clicks well. Is it worth the money , OH yes. My personal gripes are the buffer size for continuous shooting and dropping hologram AF focus but at the price the lens makes up for everything.

The funny thing about the comments above is that everybody believes their cameras are better no matter what...I was looking to read constructive comments about the SONY DSC-R1...what I found was a bunch of nonsense and bullshit information...Some people believe that buying what in their minds is the best or expensiest camera makes them better photographers...I think is a combination...a great camera produce great quality images...but a good idea produce a terrific PHOTOGRAPHY...and nowadays we have tools and software to manipulate, alter and enhance the image such as Photoshop CS etc...I Think the SONY DSC-R1 gives great results and quality images...It all depends on you.

Regards

OG.

I own one. And I must say I'm pretty happy with it. One thing I do love is the screen. You can be on your knees, on the ground, and have a perfect shot from below. If I'd want to do that with other camera I'd have to be in a hole. I've been in a LOT of situations in which I need to stretch my arm upwards or sideways, and I just move the screen and I get a perfect look of what I'm shooting.

Please see these R1 pictures taken by Wee Keng Hor. http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=219020

regards,

I have been considering buying R1, but i feel that Sony will bring a R2 very soon. Reason everybody is citing for Sony opting out of R series is alpha. People think that since R series can eat into alpha sales, sony will not continue it. I think if at all R series will eat into dslr sales, it will not be only alpha...by introducing R2, and if its fast enough in terms of focussing and operations, sony will be bringing in customers from D80, 400D potential buyers also...and that will be good for them. Plus if R2 sells at the cost of alpha, what is wrong with it as long as sony is making money. Just my take. regards, anurag

Instead of hopping around town with my Nikon FE and zoom 35-70, I now use the Sony R1. Great camera, easy to use, delivers fine photos in nearly all lighting situations and with a more than adequate zoom lens 24-120 (love the wide angle) - who needs an SLR when this camera is around? Sadly though, my Nikons are now taking a back seat and are rarely used for street work.

Once upon a time a Zeiss zoom, of any calibre almost, would cost more than this camera does...

check this portfolio http://www.photo.net/photos/Nosac

all taken with DSC-R1.

This is somewhat controversial, but great camera. Discontinued in favor of Alpha DSLR now... yet another victory of marketing over common sence IMHO.

My opinion is: this is a Very Good Zoom with a nice camera attached to it's rear for free (remember the very same sensor as in Nikon D200, D80...). All for the price of that very zoom alone (got mine for $750 2Gb fast CF included). That's it, nothing to discuss or to argue about.

Anyone tried SONY HVL-F56AM flash with DSC-R1 ? Will they perform correctly together with regard to syncronous zoom of lens and flash? Correct exposure? AF illumination? HSS? I'd better spend $400 for HVL-F56AM than $200 on that toy HVL-F32X - but only in case if camera and flash will interoperate successfully.

Sony is really pissing me off not continuing the development of this class aps sensor fixed lens . I now own 3 R1 s hope they will out last me. mac west

It's just a sign of the times. An excellent camera construction with excellent lens is discontinued because the whiz-kids, who are now the big buyers in digital photography, need something smaller with a zoom from wide angle to an excessive 5oo. For this, even poor quality images are acceptable. As someone already wrote, it's a victory of marketing over common sense. There is no alternative to the R1, so perhaps Sony should think again and bring out perhaps an R2! I've now purchased my second R1 as a reserve camera!

Here here! An 'R2' is 2 years overdue. I'm not holding my breath... But, if we like this format of camera so much (I do!) the Fuji S100FS is the only alternative in my opinion with the research I have done. Shame that.

skeptiks?

Don´t trust me! Do you trust your own eyes?

.......you can see full size pics on pbase.com (not "flikr-size") & and everybody must be a genius -with R1 - not one bad pic.

and you can try to buy one too. only second hand... the price is $ 2000 now. they sold it with ONE K only ......all I regret - I did´nt got TWO - when I could. § § §

For those unable to find second-hand Sony R1s, take a look at the German ebay pages. At the moment you can find them being offered for around 400 Euros (approx. 500 US $) A camera seller is even offering a new R1 for 699 Euros with garanty etc. I also bought a second R1 this year, pity they've been discontinued.