RX 1 camera or Loxia 35mm2 on A7ll?

<p>Looking at purchasing a 35mm for my kit I am contemplating getting Loxia 35mm2 for my A7ll (street and event photography) however I can get a used RX 1 at the same price point. As I'm considering the pros and cons I would like to hear everyones thoughts on this subject. I love the IQ of the 35mm 1.4ZA but size is a deterrent for me. Thanks in advance!</p>

<p>A Loxia 35/2 is a very good choice for the A7Rii, especially if you don't already have a 35 mm prime for casual shooting. You can use it wide open and get sharp images with limited DOF. Sometimes it's the only lens I carry.</p>

<p>The RX1 is pocket sized, with a fixed 35 mm lens. It seems like a lot of money for a one-trick pony when a the A7Rii with a Loxia is a relatively light and innocuous package. But then I've seen people towing an SUV behind a 20' RV.</p>

Looked at in isolation, I should think the Loxia/A7II combination wins in terms of image quality and capability, but with the RX1 you could go out with two full frame bodies, get more shots without the bother of swapping lenses, and also have a backup in case of failure of either one. I would find this a tough choice but might well opt for the two-body solution.

Having a second body to avoid changing lenses is a distinct advantage when shooting weddings and events. It would make more sense that the second body use the same interchangeable lenses as the primary body, than have a fixed mount like the RX1. My primary camera is an A7Rii, but I kept my A7ii for exactly that purpose and as a backup. It fits in the same place in my backpack as a Sony 90/2.8 Macro lens, so I alternate depending on the situation.

 

If you want a very small camera capable of exceptional image quality (better than an A7ii) when traveling, the the RX1 might be the better choice, despite its limitations.

<p>Looking at purchasing a 35mm for my kit I am contemplating getting Loxia 35mm2 for my A7ll (street and event photography) however I can get a used RX 1 at the same price point. As I'm considering the pros and cons I would like to hear everyones thoughts on this subject. I love the IQ of the 35mm 1.4ZA but size is a deterrent for me. Thanks in advance!</p>

I have the RX1. While it is frustrating slow, it produces great, high IQ photos. It is hard to imagine that the A7ii could be any slower, but on the other hand it is hard imagine that IQ from the A7ii would be any better than the RXii. Another consideration is the RX1 does not have a built in EVF. there is a supplemental EVF. I always prefer a built in EVF. Despite these weaknesses with the RX1, I am keeping it.

What about the new Fuji X100F as an option to the RX1?

Fuji is the way to go.

 

Fuji lenses are second to none and the cams are cutting edge technology for Mirroless..

 

Zeiss are very good but you pay a big premium for the hype.

Ooops, forgot to mention the full frame Sony hype thing.

 

As if anyone could tell the difference between so called Sony full frame and a APC sensor on a print.

 

This has been proved time and time again on popular websites.

 

Folks love gear hype.

No difference from a full-frame sensor? I'm not sure what is proven nor unproven based on a web photo. The original in this case could be reproduced at 30"x20" without resampling. The finest twigs on the horizon are resolved. In this case I was taking a new lens out for a spin - a hammer in search of a nail. All were hand-held (stabilization in camera).

 

Sony A7Rii + Zeiss Batis 2.8/18

I would probably get an A7S (in fact, I did the switch from the A7II) and any manual 35mm lens (pre-focusing and silent shooting really makes a big difference on the street) and also the FE 35/2.8 for autofocus.

The RX1 is just too slow for those kind of photos and even more hesitant in low light.

@difference from a full-frame sensor? I'm not sure what is proven nor unproven based on a web photo. The original in this case could be reproduced at 30"x20" without resampling. The finest twigs on the horizon are resolved. In this case I was taking a new lens out for a spin - a hammer in search of a nail. All were hand-held" Edward.

 

Well Edward we are not talking about web photos....as you are aware. Again you are very aware that the two most popular websites have done comparisons from low res cameras to full frame....and professional photographers could not tell any difference on large prints.

 

If I agree with you why would anyone care about a twig on the horizon? Its about communication not about how sharp a twig is on the horizon. Hello Edward.

 

Perhaps some folk care like you Edward...so I suppose everyone to their own. Just got to watch out I get those twigs on the horizon sharp;).

Which two famous websites? A citation please.

 

A lot would depend on the subject matter, the lens and technique. Any image can be dumbed down to the point it wouldn't matter. Full frame works for me, Fuji APS-C works for you. I'm not changing my mind, and I presume you aren't either. All I can do is present the issues as objectively as possible to help others to decide.

 

For what it's worth, try shooting directly into the sun sometime and share your results.

I`ve used Leica Q which also is a "pocket size" FF-camera but with outstanding 28mm fixed lens.

It actually looks like a pocket camera which is extremely useful when you`re shooting in metro, bars, restaurants, late in the evenings, etc.

Nobody pays attention what you`re doing :)

Thanks for the responses gentlemen. Had 35mm 2.8 but sold even though very sharp and small it has no unique IQ to me compared to Loxia 35mm2

As far as FF vs crop sensors no doubt in my mind each are superior to the other in certain aspects that's why I don't mind owning both types..

But since I have $1300 to spend on either the Loxia 35mm2 which I've rented and love or the Fuji X100F.(If I could afford the RXlRII or Leca Q) I never would have posted the original question (lol) I'm left to grapple with my 1st world problem. :)

 

Thanks!

"Which two famous websites? A citation please". Edward.

 

 

Popular Edward....not famous: please read posts correctly!

 

 

Luminous Landscapes and a favourite of yours which you often quote...yes, Ken Rockwell. There are others which have also. exposed the urban myth of so called full frame and its superiority. .

 

 

Bigger sensor generally means better lowlight performance and a 28mm lense is a 28mm lens. The end.

 

 

" All I can do is present the issues as objectively as possible to help others to decide". Edward

 

 

Indeed, and I do the same to offer a more subjective balanced opinion..

The Luminous-Landscape article is dated 2013, which probably explains @Herbert's constant derision of Sony for "lack of lenses". At the time of the article, 16 MP was considered large and the Nikon D800e was considered state of the art at 36 MP. Perhaps @Herbert's data base needs updating. The fact is, a full frame sensor in a mirrorless camera provides more options for low noise, high resolution, high ISO, and better performance from a lens, in a relatively small package. With a full-frame sensor, you needn't resort to ridiculous extremes to design a wide angle lens.

 

Ken Rockwell is a character of another sort. He proclaims that sharpness is not required for good photos, then goes on endlessly about how sharp his lenses are. His website makes for interesting reading, but you can't take everything at face value.

 

@Herbert's judgement is a little jaded because he has posted nothing which requires more than an iPhone 4. His passion is representing the squalor of the streets, perhaps with a fast get-away in mind. From my point of view, not every shot needs to be a wall-sized landscape, but it's nice to know you can. I keep an eye out for predators, both 4 and 2 legged, but will probably not be the one to blink.

"I love the IQ of the 35mm 1.4ZA but size is a deterrent" monroe

 

 

Size and weight are important...who really wants to carry weighty bulky gear when there are many alternatives. I would always go for the lens against camera, a good lens is always a good lens; cameras are always being upgraded mostly minor improvements...count the pixels stuff.

 

 

 

 

"The Luminous-Landscape article is dated 2013, which probably explains @Herbert's constant derision of Sony for "lack of lenses". At the time of the article, 16 MP was considered large and the Nikon D800e was considered state of the art at 36 MP. Perhaps @Herbert's data base needs updating "Edward.

 

 

 

 

 

With the advances in micro 2/3rd and APC sensors the article is even more relevent today than back in 2013. Sony still have a lack of lenses pariculary zooms unless you are happy with DSLR size zooms.

 

 

 

 

"The fact is, a full frame sensor in a mirrorless camera provides more options for low noise, high resolution, high ISO, and better performance from a lens"Edward.

 

 

 

 

This is not a fact. The low noise improvement from full frame is not much more than a single stop and APC sensors are closing the gap. Resolution on most modern sensors are capable of wall size prints particulary with modern software techniques. The quality of the lenses and sensors are what give better technical peformance not just the size. A few months ago I remember looking at a blow up from a iPhone on a very large buiding....from street level it looked sharp and with clean tonality. We are in the age of digital. There was not any twigs in the photo Edward so I not ascertain thier level of sharpness;)

 

 

 

 

"Ken Rockwell is a character of another sort. He proclaims that sharpness is not required for good photos, then goes on endlessly about how sharp his lenses are. His website makes for interesting reading, but you can't take everything at face value" Edward.

 

 

 

 

I used Ken as an example as you often quote him, Edward...I thought his article would help to penetrate your seemily blind believe in the superioty of the so called full frame. Gernerally bulky expensive cameras with particulary large honking lenses...full frame. Marketing Hype.

 

 

 

 

@Herbert's judgement is a little jaded because he has posted nothing which requires more than an iPhone 4 Edward.

 

 

 

 

Actually that is not true as you aware, Edward. Like yourself I also enjoy photographing landscapes both natural and urban...not sure if you do urban.

 

 

 

 

"His passion is representing the squalor of the streets, perhaps with a fast get-away in mind". Edward.

 

 

 

 

Bless you Edward for putting a big smile on my face.

 

 

 

 

In my part of the world there are not really any squalid streets but perhaps in yours? Love to take some photos there.....those two legged/four legged predators sound interesting. I used to be one of the fastest runners in my senior school and won the high jump one year....great for a fast getaway and jumping walls to escape those predators;)

 

 

 

 

"I keep an eye out for predators, both 4 and 2 legged, but will probably not be the one to blink". Edward.

 

 

 

 

The cat next door ,who is very aggresive, often gives me a hard predatory look....Edward I dont even blink you would be proud of me.

Jeez, no paragraphs, makes for hard reading.

At the time of the Luminous-Landscape article, the only full-frame "mirrorless" camera was the Leica M9. The Sony A7 was on the horizon but very few people had had one in their hands. The author, Michael Reichmann, was comparing the Fuji APS-C camera with a Nikon D800e, a much larger camera. While the D800e was advertised to be without an AA filter, it actually had two AA filters of sorts - one to eliminate Moire, and the other to cancel the blurring effect of the first. The A7R, introduced much later in the year, changed that, and the A7II, introduced in December of 2014, brought new features in an highly ergonomic package. The A7Rii was first widely available in the early Summer of 2015, with the best features of both.

I don't know if Panasonic's IS is a good as Olympus. Adopting the lenses is not a problem. GX8 by Panasonic is nice, but the Olympus has 5 axis IS which works on all lenses. I believe (and someone correct me if I'm wrong) that Panasonic has 3 axis IS on non-penny lenses.

This discussion has gone beyond reason, questioning wants, needs and personalities. I confess that I respond aggressively to the last. A camera is a tool, and the correct tool depends on the job at hand. The most expensive tool is one which doesn't get the job done, for whatever reason. It is wrong to say I don't need something because you don't need it. It is entirely proper to say why I need something, or to explore a bit what other's needs might be, with solutions.

 

 

//The OP mentions he needs a tool for street and event photography. While these needs overlap, they often diverge in various ways.

 

 

//Street photography is by its nature, spontaneous. You may be primed for certain scenarios (e.g., the topic of the day in Streets and Documentaries Forum), you still must be quick to react quickly and otherwise remain relatively discrete. A small, unimposing camera is desirable, usually with a shorter than normal focal length. In a FF camera, I prefer a 28 or 35 mm lens, and find even a 50 mm is too long, but a 24 usually too wide. Rules are not engraved in stone, and it's useful to experiment, often with a single lens, looking for appropriate subjects and angles. Zoom lenses are usually much larger than primes, and take longer to operate. Those are the antitheses of "street and documentary" photography. It is unlikely you would ever need to produce a high quality enlargement bigger than 10"x8", but there are exceptions to any rule.

 

 

//Events cover a broader range of subjects. If you are paid to cover an event, you have to be prepared for almost anything. In a crowded room, you need a wide angle lens to capture small groups, to a medium telephoto to capture a host or speaker from an appropriate distance. If you shoot a rock concert from a pit, wide and fast is the order of the day. From the audience, a lens is never long enough. My concerts are generally classical, and I shoot from a distance, preferably out of sight and completely silent. My workhorse lens is a 24-70/2.8 zoom, "honking big and expensive", but it gets the job done without a lot of swapping, and without flash. I'm shooting a professional symphony concert next week, and the lenses I use will range from 24 mm to 600, still and video

 

 

//For landscapes and architecture, you need, depending on the application, nearly anything you are willing to carry. One "honking large" zoom lens is easier to carry and use than three or four prime lenses, but prime lenses are usually sharper and more resistant to flare than zooms. Not many landscapes merit wall-sized enlargements, but enough do that image quality and resolution are a basic necessity. In the past you might expect to use a view camera or medium format. Now, a small format camera, probably full frame, may suffice.

Edited February 25, 2017 by Ed_Ingold

" I confess that I respond aggressively to the last "

 

 

 

That's because of me. Otherwise you are a polite factual poster who likes to tell everyone how wonderful your Sony a7 is. I just challenge that argument.

 

My street photography is generally about discovering humanity, which seeps into to my posts on PN. Totally different personality types are a interest to me. Interesting to understand how and what makes them tick. There I've blown my own Trumpet.

 

 

 

You are a passionate photographer Edward what else really matters.

At this point in time, I am intimately familiar with the capabilities of the Sony A7xxx cameras. If there is a question regarding those capabilities, I attempt to answer objectively and thoroughly. If there is a shortcoming, such as battery life or wake-up time, that might affect the OP's needs, I discuss that too. Although I am generally aware of features in various Fuji cameras, I defer to users (or the published manuals) for details. Please don't confuse expertise with gushing. After all, it's still just a tool.

 

<p><p>It is interesting that Ming Thein gave a rather blistering initial review of the A7Rii, but now uses one with regularity. He, along with Ken Rockwell did not undergo the proper preparation for his first impressions. It was not entirely their fault. The menu is confusing, and some of the functions are not described well even in the extended manual. Where does Sony tell you, for example, that the diaphragm closes just as final focus lock is attained. This eliminates focus shift at the expense of continuous focus speed and tracking?

 

<p>Hey! the BB command for "new paragraph" seems to work. You can't double-space, however.

I don't know if Panasonic's IS is a good as Olympus. Adopting the lenses is not a problem. GX8 by Panasonic is nice, but the Olympus has 5 axis IS which works on all lenses. I believe (and someone correct me if I'm wrong) that Panasonic has 3 axis IS on non-penny lenses.

Wow, this was actually a post to another thread, don't know how it got here!