wow, a non d-slr with an aps-c sensor?!

[ReF]

didn't think anything like the sony R1 would happen for a long time! and more megs than a 20D on the same size sensor?! it'll be interesting to see how the sony-made CMOS chip holds up to the canon CMOS, as well as how that 24-120 lens holds up against SLR lenses in general. what's with the hot shoe location? not to sound like i'm knocking a product that hasn't been fully reviewed (i'm actually very interested in how well this camera will do, and how it will probably force others to take drastic actions), but some people are going to be in for a surprise when they hold the camera at chest or waist level looking at the flip out lcd while point an external flash straight up for a bounce :D

[erichlund]

what's with the hot shoe location?
Actually, the shoe location makes sense. Looking at the camera, most of the weight is in line with the lens, but the grip is to the side. Putting the flash on the grip will only tend to balance the weight of the camera, and anything that moves flash further from the line of the lens is a good thing.

Cheers,
Eric

[Coltess]

Is it just me or does it look like red eye might be a problem with such a low flash? The EVF only has 235K pixels (as opposed to the KM-A2 which has 922K for the same area.) Checking focus may turn out to be a pain.

Other than that, if the sensor is comparable to Canon/Nikon quality it would seem to be an ideal family cam.
http://sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_DisplayProductInformation-Start?ProductSKU=DSCR1

[timmciglobal]

Check out what else is missing: Movie mode. (so says sony's site)

Tim

[TheObiJuan]

If there is no movie mode why is there a speaker on the back of the camera?

I posted this in the Canon forum earlier today, I was so gitty I couldn't wait when I read it at 3 in the morning.

I may get this one if the ISO perfomance is good.

[ReF]

damn, checked the reviews and info section and under movie mode it said "no". i was hoping live preview on large sensor = movie mode on large sensor which possibly means forcing the implementation of movies on d-slrs. i'm sure it'll happen, it just means a longer wait.

btw i did think about the position of the hot shoe when i first saw the R1. it seems it will be steadier when holding with one hand but the flash will be a little lower down than usual and it will be off-balance on a tripod if the tripod mount is in line with the lens. i wonder if being positioned slightly off to the side would cause slight shadows on one side of a person's face.

[TheObiJuan]

A flash bracket ought to fix any potential problems.

[Rex914]

I knew a camera like this was coming soon (like next year), but not THIS soon. If it delivers in image quality, this could be a viable alternative to a DSLR for people hanging between the prosumer and DSLR ranges. Too bad it still forgoes the optical viewfinder...

[timmciglobal]

I don't know, I'm not impressed.

I think the F10 and S9500 impress me far more then this.

1100 is too much. 750 this might be interesting but 1100 IS dSLR level. If the lens was better maybe, 24>200 or 24>300 but 5X zoom for 1100? No way.

I don't see this competing against things like the D50 and XT.

Tim

[Rex914]

I really have to disagree with you. First of all the price is $1000 and not $1100 or $1200, but that's a different issue. This is a completely different camera from the ultrazooms and isn't aimed at taking away their market share. Instead, this is more like the prosumers from a time past like the G6. It mounts on a fast (for the sensor size) lens with a decent amount of zoom.

The point that you may have overlooked when comparing this camera to others is that it's an APS sized sensor. Being a DSLR owner yourself, you know very well how large sensors make it exponentially more difficult to produce fast and good lenses. Think of the lens mounted on the R1 as being a lens you could buy for your XT/20D. How much would a 24-120 f/2.8-4.8 lens cost? I don't know since there's no such product on the market yet. If you were expecting 28-200, I have to admit that you were dreaming. There is NO such lens for a DSLR that goes fast AND covers a lot of range is there? Remember the size of the sensor before you suggest things like that. :p

Being roughly the same size as the D2X sensor, what Sony was able to accomplish is nothing less than amazing. It's a little pricey now, but for the breakthrough product that it is, it really isn't that bad. From the existing reports like IR, it blows away any fixed lens camera to date in image quality and ISO performance. It won't be quite as good as a true DSLR, but it's pretty darned close, and it better be. It only lacks in the performance (as in quickness) department.

The only part of argument that I could agree with is that this is no DSLR killer. BUT, it's just going to make the people who truly don't need a DSLR system think twice even at this price.

Sample Images

These compare noise levels and various other things. All in all, the R1 runs circles around any other point and shoot to date including the F10. It even outpaces the E300 when it comes to noise, but falls a bit short of the other DSLR's in this area, but that's to be expected out of a first gen product.

ISO 400
(Left = Pro1, Middle = R1, Right = E300)
http://www.fotopolis.pl/obrazki/sonyR1-compISO400.jpg


ISO 1600
(Left = R1, Right = E300)
http://www.fotopolis.pl/obrazki/sonyR1-compISO1600.jpg


CA Test
(Left = Pro1, Middle = R1, Right = E300)
http://www.fotopolis.pl/obrazki/sonyR1-aberracja3.jpg

[eastbluffs]

Excellent points Rex. I'm in full agreement, this is one exciting product.

There is a market for people who want it all-in-one, and to whom SLR complexity is scary or tiresome. And who want to know the spending will stop at the camera price (like maybe a crafty spouse getting a killer XMAS gift for a spendy gadget-person).

Me; I'd recommend something like this to a camera clutz with lots of $$ who just wants perfection.

It is too bad they didn't also include IS - that would have made it a hands down best choice - especially given the ISO performance samples you provided.

I am a little curious about weather sealing. Will it draw in dust? No lense changing will help that, but still, will it withstand years of use without getting sky-spots?

No DSLR killer, but very very exciting! Yeee ha!

[ReValveiT]

Er, why not just buy a DSLR and have done with it? I fail to see what all the fuss is about.

If Canon made a 20D, or Nikon a D70 with the 'kit lens' glued on, would you buy it over the 20D / D70 ??? No. You'd laugh at it.

You could buy a 350D and a very nice Lens indeed for the price of this Sony...

[D70FAN]

While the R1 is certainly a hybrid, it is nowhere near worth $1000.

As for the lens... Nice. A 16 - 80mm f2.8 to f4.8 (on a D70). It will be interesting to see where f2.8 ends. Not really much better than an 18-70 f3.5 to 5.6, or an 18-125 f3.5-5.6. On the R1 these would be 30-117 and 30-210 respectively. The jump from f2.8 to f3.5 is not a big deal.


As for the sensor... This is a Sub APS-C size, and may well be a cropped version of the 12.4. The Crop factor (if using normal lenses) is 1.68X. So you can see that this might be a hard sell as a dSLR.

As for the viewfinder... It's an EVF. So having continuous viewing is a no brainer, as there is no mirror, and I'm sure the inherant delay is still there. Even with a poor mirror dSLR's have a big edge here. Personally I dislike EVF's...a lot. It's one of the reasons I bought a dSLR.

And again you are stuck with a fixed lens all-in-one, using adapters for $1000. So it's not as revolutionary as it looks on the surface. An 828 with a bigger sensor and better ISO capability.

[Shooter]

I think this camera is impressive... and guess what even those of you who say it is not an SLR killer have now admitted that SLR killer is in the vocabulary for these pro-sumer digicams.

George... you say 16 - 80 is the same as an 18-70? Those are two very important ends of the range that have been pushed out here. Granted we have to wait to see the quality at 16 and at 80. I'm a big fan of wide angle aI would love the extra difference from my current 28mm to 24. Next you say f2.8 to 3.5 is not a big deal. That's a whole stop... TWICE the light gets through. Show me a hand help 1/15 shot and a handheld 1/30th that are the same. It's an impressive combination.

As for the sensor, yes another unknown but it's not like there haven't been improvements in this area in the last few years. It's a large APS sensor with ISO 3200! That suggests to me that ISO 1600 will be at least useable if a bit noisy, putting this near or ahead of consumer dslrs. Judging by the photos in this thread, ISO 1600 is very useable, and I am on board with not needing image stabilization.

About the EVF, have to agree with you here... I strongly dislike these. However the latest ones don't have the lag problem of the older cameras, and EVF, for me at least, is primarily a backup. I like framing on the LCD. Honestly ever since I switched from my film SLR I have enjoyed framing on LCD more and more and my photos have had much better framing. The R1 will also have tilting lcd... some of my best pictures were in crowd shots that I held the camera above my head and shot blindly. I have also seen brilliant photos at child - level. Kids see the world from a unique perspective...

Another thing... yes the resolution is very high and I don't look forward to dealing with 4MB jpegs, but this really helps with cropping. Going from 3MP to 9 and you get another 2x zoom, effectively making this camera 10X or more to produce 3MP images (yes, we have to wait for quality and reviews).

Being 'stuck' with a fixed lens... well I was a bit tired of being 'stuck' swapping lenses and having a 800 dollar camera turn into a 2500 dollar camera. Plus using an air can on your slr to clean the sensor, or sending it in every year... that's fun. Not to mention being forced to look through a tiny hole with one eye, eliminating your peripheral vision, which in my experience leads to much weaker framing.

No, I don't actually think that it will replace the versatility offered by dSLRs. I might not buy one either, after all it's a lot of money and I'm thinking seriously of a D70s for my self-Christmas present. I'm just saying it sounds like a great camera and while the naysayers will certainly come out yapping those who end up getting it might have the last laugh.

[timmciglobal]

I don't doubt the sensor is nice I doubt anyone will buy it over the D50 or XT.

It doesn't have the single feature I was most impressed with on sony cameras, the halogram AF. People and "prosumers" understand replacable lenses > fixed lenses.

What does this offer? Does it have movie mode? Does it AF better then any dSLR? Does it have a deeper buffer and faster shot/sec? It does nothing better from first inspection then the cheaper D50.

Tim

[Rhys]

Hm....

Q: What's the difference between this and a dSLR?

A: About the same as between an SLR and a zoom compact (eg Olympus IS-10 QD).

[timmciglobal]

Oh and to add, I LOVED the Pro1 because I do think a EVF has value, but the pro1 currently runs 600$. If this was 699 at stores I would say "Watch out" but if the price point isn't significantly lower then D50 or XT or even higher I don't see anyone buying it outside of those who are "suckered" into it by a salesman claimining it's better.

Tim

[Shooter]

I agree the price is a bit high, they may be pricing themselves out of the market a bit. Up here in Canada I can only presume will get ripped off (cameras are usually significantly more than the exchange rate, so probably cost like 1500.)

Has pricing been announced for the Fuji S9000? Maybe an S9000 vs R1 thread would be interesting?

[D70FAN]

I think this camera is impressive... and guess what even those of you who say it is not an SLR killer have now admitted that SLR killer is in the vocabulary for these pro-sumer digicams.

George... you say 16 - 80 is the same as an 18-70? Those are two very important ends of the range that have been pushed out here. Granted we have to wait to see the quality at 16 and at 80. I'm a big fan of wide angle aI would love the extra difference from my current 28mm to 24. Next you say f2.8 to 3.5 is not a big deal. That's a whole stop... TWICE the light gets through. Show me a hand help 1/15 shot and a handheld 1/30th that are the same. It's an impressive combination.

As for the sensor, yes another unknown but it's not like there haven't been improvements in this area in the last few years. It's a large APS sensor with ISO 3200! That suggests to me that ISO 1600 will be at least useable if a bit noisy, putting this near or ahead of consumer dslrs. Judging by the photos in this thread, ISO 1600 is very useable, and I am on board with not needing image stabilization.

About the EVF, have to agree with you here... I strongly dislike these. However the latest ones don't have the lag problem of the older cameras, and EVF, for me at least, is primarily a backup. I like framing on the LCD. Honestly ever since I switched from my film SLR I have enjoyed framing on LCD more and more and my photos have had much better framing. The R1 will also have tilting lcd... some of my best pictures were in crowd shots that I held the camera above my head and shot blindly. I have also seen brilliant photos at child - level. Kids see the world from a unique perspective...

Another thing... yes the resolution is very high and I don't look forward to dealing with 4MB jpegs, but this really helps with cropping. Going from 3MP to 9 and you get another 2x zoom, effectively making this camera 10X or more to produce 3MP images (yes, we have to wait for quality and reviews).

Being 'stuck' with a fixed lens... well I was a bit tired of being 'stuck' swapping lenses and having a 800 dollar camera turn into a 2500 dollar camera. Plus using an air can on your slr to clean the sensor, or sending it in every year... that's fun. Not to mention being forced to look through a tiny hole with one eye, eliminating your peripheral vision, which in my experience leads to much weaker framing.

No, I don't actually think that it will replace the versatility offered by dSLRs. I might not buy one either, after all it's a lot of money and I'm thinking seriously of a D70s for my self-Christmas present. I'm just saying it sounds like a great camera and while the naysayers will certainly come out yapping those who end up getting it might have the last laugh.

Let me start by saying that I'm happy to see that the jump from f2.8 to f3.5 is now a full stop. I used to think that was f4. ;)

Second, I'm not so much nay-saying as looking a little deeper than the apparent "good stuff" to determine value. So rather than listing shortcomings lets look at the dSLR in contention:

Example: The D70s with Sigma 18-125 f3.5-f5.6 is $1129.

For $129 more you get:

A real TTL viewfinder.
3fps continuous shooting speed for 12 frames in JPEG Fine.
7X Zoom lens (Sigma 18-125).
1/8000 sec. Shutter speed.
1/500 sec. flash sync.
iTTL linked internal flash.
Arguably the best slave flash system in the world.

The option to rent (or buy) professional grade lenses like the 28-70 f2.8, and the 80-200 f2.8.

The option to buy some very nice (inexpensive) f1.8 and f2 and f2.8 fixed focal length lenses.

The option to buy some great fixed-aperture 3rd party zoom lenses like the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 and the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 (around $400 each).

The option to use VR and OS lenses, as well as the Bigma 50-500.

For the $129 difference in price, I can't really see much reason to buy the R1. Cleaning the sensor periodically seems like a fair trade-off for the flexibility of a dSLR.

[eastbluffs]

Excellent points all around.

I still believe some customers just don't want to think too much. A simple purchase and ... DONE! Sometimes less choice is better - especially for the fiscally limited. Focus on taking some great shots, not bit-n-piece upgrades.

I'm up to about 3K on my 20D. All the points George mentions makes my setup superior to the R1 (except the 500 flash sync ... argg) and I would not be one to get an all-in-one.

However; pre-packaged, all-in-one, fully integrated solutions sell well in gagetry (computers, hi-fi, cars, etc). There's a world of non-technogeeks who don't mind having the designers do all the thinking. Sure, a race car driver could criticise the latest BMW, but the Beemer is still a great car for consumers. Of course, the race cars cost $300K and beemers are 70K, but there's still a point there somewhere.

Hopefully revision 2 of this will have IS, faster shutter speed, and maybe other built-in consumer friendly features, oh, and about $150 lower price tag.

EDIT: Allow me to flip-flop. I feel a little like my younger days when I would believe the fantastic surf reports and show up on the beach at 6AM board in hand, only to have ankle-slappers laughing beneath me.

I just read the review more carefully. This thing has up to a .7 second shutter lag!

I'm out! Once again we learn, try it, await the reviews, await actual user experience and stories (and mistrust the silver-lining people). Dang!

We keep hearing warnings about "most of these people handing out advice haven't even touched it ..." Well, I feel sheepish. :o

[D70FAN]

Excellent points all around.

I still believe some customers just don't want to think too much. A simple purchase and ... DONE! Sometimes less choice is better - especially for the fiscally limited. Focus on taking some great shots, not bit-n-piece upgrades.

I'm up to about 3K on my 20D. All the points George mentions makes my setup superior to the R1 (except the 500 flash sync ... argg) and I would not be one to get an all-in-one.

However; pre-packaged, all-in-one, fully integrated solutions sell well in gagetry (computers, hi-fi, cars, etc). There's a world of non-technogeeks who don't mind having the designers do all the thinking. Sure, a race car driver could criticise the latest BMW, but the Beemer is still a great car for consumers. Of course, the race cars cost $300K and beemers are 70K, but there's still a point there somewhere.

Hopefully revision 2 of this will have IS, faster shutter speed, and maybe other built-in consumer friendly features, oh, and about $150 lower price tag.

EDIT: Allow me to flip-flop. I feel a little like my younger days when I would believe the fantastic surf reports and show up on the beach at 6AM board in hand, only to have ankle-slappers laughing beneath me.

I just read the review more carefully. This thing has up to a .7 second shutter lag!

I'm out! Once again we learn, try it, await the reviews, await actual user experience and stories (and mistrust the silver-lining people). Dang!

We keep hearing warnings about "most of these people handing out advice haven't even touched it ..." Well, I feel sheepish. :o

I don't think you were handing out advice, so much as making a case. I didn't see a single line that said "I think you should buy this great camera". So don't beat yourself up.

I'm betting that the R1 will take great pictures, and for $1000 it darned well better. But the reality is, that it is really no better (except ISO) than a Nikon 8800 or Canon S2 IS for half the price.

Buy a D70s instead... Hey, surfs up! No ankle slappers on this beach.

Being a Monterey kid, I remember Steamers, Asilomar, Half-Moon Bay, Carmel, and Big Sur Rivermouth. All point breaks...1960's, No wetsuit... Brrrr... shrinkage :eek:

[Shooter]

I don't really think too many people would buy a 1000 dollar camera without thinking about it and weighing the options... including dslrs.

The shutter release time is 0.007 seconds, not 0.7 seconds, btw (although again we need to wait for this type of thing to be reviewed).

Since it isn't a zoom lens I don't think the lack of IS is an issue... it might be on the Fuji S9000 though. Does your DSLR have IS? It's a pretty expensive feature on the ef lenses.

Oh yeah, I should have checked on the f stop thing :o

[TheObiJuan]

As fast as the shutter lag is, the camera is slow. The buffer is pathetic, especially for what they are asking.
The XT, now $659 with coupons, and the 24-105 f/4L IS $1050, would be around $600 more expensive, but have image stabilization, superior image quality, a real buffer, fast AF, real viewfinder, option for macro, super fast, long, wide lenses, better battery life, optional vertical shutter release, manual white balance control, and more.

[D70FAN]

I don't really think too many people would buy a 1000 dollar camera without thinking about it and weighing the options... including dslrs.

The shutter release time is 0.007 seconds, not 0.7 seconds, btw (although again we need to wait for this type of thing to be reviewed).

Since it isn't a zoom lens I don't think the lack of IS is an issue... it might be on the Fuji S9000 though. Does your DSLR have IS? It's a pretty expensive feature on the ef lenses.

Oh yeah, I should have checked on the f stop thing :o

Where did you find the .007 second spec.?

[eastbluffs]

The shutter release time is 0.007 seconds, not 0.7 seconds, btw (although again we need to wait for this type of thing to be reviewed).
Here's the link:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/R1/R1A.HTM
It goes down to .007 only with prefocus. Don't know why prefocus differs from manual focus, but using full auto, this review clearly says ".7"

.7 shutter release renders a camera utterly useless, except maybe as a fishing sinker or paper weight. Well, maybe nice timed night shots.

Unless that's a misprint, this really brings it all to an anti-climax for me.

EDIT: I just realized that "prefocus" is after half-pressing the shutter button. So, if your kid is doing something really exciting, you still get the back of her head. Nope; .7 seconds from button push to snapshot is too long.

However; since shot prediction is often feasible, it rises this from fishing sinker to paper weight in my book.

[eastbluffs]

Being a Monterey kid, I remember Steamers, Asilomar, Half-Moon Bay, Carmel, and Big Sur Rivermouth. All point breaks...1960's, No wetsuit... Brrrr... shrinkage :eek:
Go George! :D I'm from Hawaii and now So.Cal. Only surf now and then any more but did the daily thing not too many years ago. Got a good laugh on the "Shrinkage" :eek: comment. We get a "Siberian Express" now and then, where the currents bring us waters from the Artic. Even with gloves you have to let the fingers thaw just to work the car keys. In other words, about 5 degrees warmer than Half Moon Bay. No wet suits, you animals! Well, in Hawaii we did have sea urchins on the reefs and Portagee Maniwars in abundance in the Fall (Windward side). In So California, we're just sissy's.

Now; I'm just the guy on the beach with a camera and long-lense-envy. Well, looking forward to trying out the 70-300 APO on a sunny surf day.

[Shooter]

Hey guys, I'm on your side here. I'm not saying the dslrs are dead... (don't worry so much ok?). Coming up with an example of an SLR that costs 71% more money isn't really apples to apples right? Find me the best all in dslr for 1000 dollars, and the Sony looks competetive or even better in SOME ways... that's all I'm saying. Also I'll be the first to say the Sony is a bit expensive for what it is.

I checked out that 24-105 IS Canon lens though, and it is sweet!

Edit: actually it's not that sweet... wide end is 24 digital (I forgot Canon uses digital numbers (which all camera makers should do)) so it's too narrow for me.

[ReF]

I think whether the camera is worth $1000 will all come down to how good the lens is. I wonder how well it would do against something like the sigma 18-125. If it’s a good lens, IMO the price tag is worth it. You know how difficult it would be to make a sharp, distortion and CA controlled lens that’s roughly 14-71mm? (24-120 divided by 1.68) I would expect a lens like that in a SLR mount to carry a pretty hefty price tag. And 10mp + live preview on a sensor that size is unheard of, until now. Of course, if the lens performs equal to or below the sigma 18-125 then the whole package is ruined IMO. Why don’t I just pick up an XT with 18-125 for about the same price (8mp to 10mp is close enough and the 24mm is IMO a fair trade off for 125mm x 1.6 = 200mm) and still be able to upgrade lenses as I wish? Not being able to switch to something like a 50mm f1.8 that everyone can afford really kills a lot of the R1’s value to me. I think we also forgot that the carl zeiss lens that you pay for won’t be going with you to your next camera. I personally don’t like composing on LCDs so not having an optical viewfinder ain’t all that exciting either. Just though of something: would the fact that no mirror is in place mean cheaper/easier lens designs? I thought I read somewhere that having to account for the mirror is what’s causing some problem in designing better wide angle lenses for SLRs. Any slr/rangefinder experts out there have some thoughts to share on this?

Most of us here know very well the overall value of an interchangeable lens/high performance camera system, but think about how many people know much less. I’ve no doubt that the R1 is really going to hurt the sales of the sub $1000 d-slrs. Remember when the 300d and the 828 were new? Do you guys realize how many 828 were sold despite the superior alternative? Having worked in an major electronics chain store at the time, I can tell you that the amount of d-rebels that were sold pale in comparison to 828 sales. Even when people came and stole displays it was always either the ultra compacts or the 828, not once the 300d as far as I know. We got notified of thefts all over southern California by the way. So while this might not be a real d-slr killer, it has huge potential to being a d-slr SALES killer.

Btw, I’m definitely not going to buy this camera so I’m neither really for it or against it (haters, back off :D ). I think the real value of this camera is how it’s going to change things for the entire digital camera industry. I mean, other prosumer camera will have to keep up and d-slrs will have to stay ahead, which means we all benefit. For the point and shoot people this may eventually end the megapixel wars on cramped sensors and move “evolve” into megapixel count/sensor size wars. I’m hoping sony (or anybody) will introduce an APS sensor that can shoot movies, so us dslr owner can have that feature too :) .

[TheObiJuan]

I can't wait to see actual image from production models. The zeiss moniker really can sell sony cameras. The zeiss lens on the pro 1 was pathetic. It had heavy vignetting and was soft.
If sigma were to make an ef-s lens like the one on the R1, then I am certain it would cost around 4-500. This would put the XT with this theoretical lens at 1100-1200. Then you would still have the many options that DSLRs offer.


I am not really that pleased with the ISO performance from the sample images. Although they are good for a P&S camera, it's not representative of what an APS-C sensor should do. Pentax dslrs show less noise.

But as stated, I am eager to see the images from a production model.

[D Thompson]

The XT, now $659 with coupons, and the 24-105 f/4L IS $1050, would be around $600 more expensive
Where are you seeing the 24-105 for that price? I've only seen it for around $1250. Thanks.

[Shooter]

Excellent post ReF. The key here is recognizing that this camera (and ALL cameras) will certainly have weaknesses in some areas and many users will find that the strengths in other areas will more than compensate.

Obijuan, I think you're way off on price. If you can find me a Rebel Xt for 659 and that lens for 1059 please let me know!! And by picking and choosing the best features of different dslrs to compare with the Sony R1 just highlights the disconnect you have IMO. ($1200+ dollar Canon lenses, then Pentax noise levels, Sigma lens prices, then blanket image quality statements)

If you'll agree with me that this camera will be better than intro DSLRs for some people and some budgets then I'll shut up :) ... remember I'm not even saying it is better for me and my budget. :)

[eastbluffs]

If you'll agree with me that this camera will be better than intro DSLRs for some people and some budgets then I'll shut up :) ... remember I'm not even saying it is better for me and my budget. :) Most likely the lense is better than most kit or low priced lenses, the ISO, color, sensing, low light, etc excellent (too bad the hologrammed AF assist wasn't incorporated). I'm sure many consumers will be tempted by this. The lense may even turn out to be excellent (and true manual focus ring will help), in which case it'll be a nice choice.

Also; the 2mm distance from back lense to sensor (no mirror) should improve lense performance dramatically - who knows where all this could lead.

Possibly people will even be posting photos superior to some excellent DSLR results - showing they're onto something big. Then its down to usage performance issues.

However; given the long shutter lag for focusing and exposure, I would bet more than a dollar that most people who buy and use this camera for a few months, if given an XT or D50 with a modestly priced lense to try (like Tammron 28-75) would feel very privilaged and before long realize which is superior. The wide angle on the R1 would be about the only saving grace.

I think the R1 was focused on the lense and sensor performance, the other features secondary. We've all been making fun of the manufacturers for not doing so. Hey, they got those right at least, now for price, shutter lag, higher flash, IS, they'll have a revolution on their hands. But until this shutter lag issue is resolved, there is no chance I would recommend anyone to buy it. I'd say "you'll be frustrated, for that price, go DSLR" and it would be good advice.