Nielk Mike wrote:
(1) Yes, I hate changing lenses. It is very unpractical in the streets, subways, and in bad weather. And it takes time. So opportunities missed.
(2) Yes, nobody has yet made a 90mm fixed lens camera. But there is always a first time :-)
(3) I was using the a7cR with the Voigtländer 21, the Sony 50f2.5 and the Sigma 90f2.8. Or the Fuji X-Pro3 with the 23/35/50 f2 Fujinons. All good, but slowing me down.
(4) Because of speed I am currently carrying the RX1R MkIII and the a7cR with the Sigma 90f2.8. It works, but the a7cR is bigger than the RX1R.
Since you hate changing lenses so much and really seem to want a 3 camera solution to avoid any lens changes, why not get a couple Fuji XE-5's and add the Fuji X 14 f/2.8 to one and the Fuji 50 f/2 to the other? No more lens changes needed. Each of your three cameras won't be that much bigger than the RX1R III and both the Fuji lenses are among their best. As you don't mind cropping you ought to be ok with the smaller sensor as well. I thought I would just put that out there for the particular kit you seem to want.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Since you hate changing lenses so much and really seem to want a 3 camera solution to avoid any lens changes, why not get a couple Fuji XE-5's and add the Fuji X 14 f/2.8 to one and the Fuji 50 f/2 to the other? No more lens changes needed. Each of your three cameras won't be that much bigger than the RX1R III and both the Fuji lenses are among their best. As you don't mind cropping you ought to be ok with the smaller sensor as well. I thought I would just put that out there for the particular kit you seem to want. ...Show more →
Since I own two X-E3 and two x-Pro3 plus the Fujinons and the 14, I do that from tome to time. But: It is APS-C 24/26MP - so limited cropability compared to the RX1. And none of the bodies offer in-camera crop. Had the X-E5 on pre-order because of that - then the RX1 came as a surprise.
And when I look at the price of an a7cR with 90mm lens, I am not too far away from the RX1 price point.
Nifty Fifty wrote:
You should read my post carefully again. I didn't say that you can't take photos on the street with a 90mm lens. But I am claiming that you don't need a telephoto lens for good street photography. In fact, I find it a disadvantage. But there's no accounting for taste, which is why everyone is free to decide what he thinks of telephoto street photography. One thing is certain, however: almost all iconic street photos that are burned into the collective memory were taken with slight wide-angle or normal focal lengths, and for good reason. But I don't want to have that discussion, because it would definitely get out of hand and lead to arguments but no results. My sole point was that no one who can handle 35mm needs a 90mm lens for street. Quite the opposite....Show more →
Nielk Mike wrote:
My goal is to reduce my camera gear in size and weigth as much as I can - w/o compromising on quality. The RX1R MkIII is a perfect step in that direction. It is 35/50/70 lens with a camera attached to it.
For short to medium tele I am currently using my a7cR with the Sigma 90f2.8. Also a great combo, giving me 90/135/180 easily with very high quality. But the a7cR is larger than the RX1R MkIII. So I wounder if Sony will (in another surprise move) ever launch an RX2R with a short tele like the Sigma 90f2.8 attached? It would also be a rather small combo.
And finally (though I don't think it to be very likely): How about an RX3R with a small UAW lens like the Voigtländer 15mm? That could give a 15/23/28 combination. Three very small cameras with lenses to cover all my needs....Show more →
For a longer focal length like 90mm f2.8 there is not likely to be much size advantage in going with a fixed lens design. RX1R series benefits from a specific lens design where some lens elements extend into the body, really close to the sensor allowing the overall depth to be minimized. With a longer focal length which needs longer distance from the sensor, the depth would probably be pretty similar to A7CR + 90mm f2.8 that you are currently using.
curious80 wrote:
For a longer focal length like 90mm f2.8 there is not likely to be much size advantage in going with a fixed lens design. RX1R series benefits from a specific lens design where some lens elements extend into the body, really close to the sensor allowing the overall depth to be minimized. With a longer focal length which needs longer distance from the sensor, the depth would probably be pretty similar to A7CR + 90mm f2.8 that you are currently using.
Nielk Mike wrote:
Yes, but the body would be smaller and lighter.
Possibly. I own the RX1mkII (very similar size/weight to the mkIII) and I find the lens to be imbalanced and always use either a thumb grip or grip plate. I think Sony is more likely to come out with a full-frame QX1 before they come out with an RX1-style body with a long lens because it will either be too unwieldy or the body will be just big enough to make the difference between it and the A7c-series *very* marginal.
That body/lens combo may suit you, but that is such a niche audience that I don't see Sony delivering here.
joelRichards wrote:
Possibly. I own the RX1mkII (very similar size/weight to the mkIII) and I find the lens to be imbalanced and always use either a thumb grip or grip plate. I think Sony is more likely to come out with a full-frame QX1 before they come out with an RX1-style body with a long lens because it will either be too unwieldy or the body will be just big enough to make the difference between it and the A7c-series *very* marginal.
That body/lens combo may suit you, but that is such a niche audience that I don't see Sony delivering here.
Yes, putting a larger lens onto a small body would make holding the setup quite awkward. Tiny lens on small body works really well, but as the lens increases in size, I would think the outfit would become bothersome.
joelRichards wrote:
Possibly. I own the RX1mkII (very similar size/weight to the mkIII) and I find the lens to be imbalanced and always use either a thumb grip or grip plate. I think Sony is more likely to come out with a full-frame QX1 before they come out with an RX1-style body with a long lens because it will either be too unwieldy or the body will be just big enough to make the difference between it and the A7c-series *very* marginal.
That body/lens combo may suit you, but that is such a niche audience that I don't see Sony delivering here.
If Sony were to come out with a Leica Q clone with a 100mp sensor, GM quality 28/1.5 lens, instant crop function with 28/35/50/75/90, and build quality like a tank, for around $4,000, they would have an instant winner on their hands. I’d buy one and might never need another camera or lens.
mudlake wrote:
I’d buy one and might never need another camera or lens.
There lies the problem for Sony. They want to continue selling you more cameras and lenses through the years. They would shoot themselves in the foot if they made such a camera at $4,000.
chez wrote:
There lies the problem for Sony. They want to continue selling you more cameras and lenses through the years. They would shoot themselves in the foot if they made such a camera at $4,000.
Agreed. It’s too bad because they would sell a lot of these to people who might never buy a full size interchangeable lens camera.
chez wrote:
Yes, putting a larger lens onto a small body would make holding the setup quite awkward. Tiny lens on small body works really well, but as the lens increases in size, I would think the outfit would become bothersome.
Not at all. One just grabs the lens and holds the whole combo steady. It is not like holding an a7cr with a 500mm lens.
joelRichards wrote:
Possibly. I own the RX1mkII (very similar size/weight to the mkIII) and I find the lens to be imbalanced and always use either a thumb grip or grip plate. I think Sony is more likely to come out with a full-frame QX1 before they come out with an RX1-style body with a long lens because it will either be too unwieldy or the body will be just big enough to make the difference between it and the A7c-series *very* marginal.
That body/lens combo may suit you, but that is such a niche audience that I don't see Sony delivering here.
Not sure where you see the imbalance? When I hold the camera, the lens rest between the thumb and index finger of my left hand, and is controlled with the thumb and index finger of my right hand. It is very ergonomic.
Aug 26, 2025 at 02:23 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
mudlake wrote:
If Sony were to come out with a Leica Q clone with a 100mp sensor, GM quality 28/1.5 lens, instant crop function with 28/35/50/75/90, and build quality like a tank, for around $4,000, they would have an instant winner on their hands. I’d buy one and might never need another camera or lens.
The problem is that even with a 100MP sensor and a 28 f/1.5 lens, if you crop to 90mm with that sensor what you will be using in effect is a tiny sensor that is very close to the size of an iPhone sensor. Yeah, you will have a decent amount of MP (about 9 MP), but the max dynamic range and color depth will be only about what you would get from an iPhone. Oh, and max ISO? If you would typically max out your ISO at about 6400, then you would probably want to keep it below 600 to have the same amount of noise (said another way ISO 600 cropped this deep will look like ISO 6400 on FF, so in anything less that really good light I would want to be thinking about noise reduction in post). I am all in favor of making small crops up to 1.7X (with adjustment to depth of field, effective aperture, and max ISO kept in mind) without too much worry at all and up to 2X for almost all types of shooting. I think such crops can add very useful flexibility to one's shooting, but a crop that deep has what for me would be important limitations for almost all my shooting. Of course, YMMV.
Keep in mind that with a crop that deep the 28 f/1.5 lens will have the look and depth of field of a 90 f/4.8 lens, and you will start to see the effects of diffraction just one stop down from wide open and especially so on such a high pixel density camera. In recognizing the limitations of such a lens combined with the other image quality concerns for such a small sensor make such a big crop almost never useful for my shooting and I say that often taking a Sony A7r V with a 28 f/1.5 lens as my primary kit. Using only a 28mm lens gets you a nice range from 28 f/1.5 to a very useable in effect 56 f/3.0, but trying to push a crop to much more than that and in anything less than really good light I am not happy with the images.
joelRichards wrote:
Possibly. I own the RX1mkII (very similar size/weight to the mkIII) and I find the lens to be imbalanced and always use either a thumb grip or grip plate. I think Sony is more likely to come out with a full-frame QX1 before they come out with an RX1-style body with a long lens because it will either be too unwieldy or the body will be just big enough to make the difference between it and the A7c-series *very* marginal.
That body/lens combo may suit you, but that is such a niche audience that I don't see Sony delivering here.
---------------------------------------------
chez wrote:
Yes, putting a larger lens onto a small body would make holding the setup quite awkward. Tiny lens on small body works really well, but as the lens increases in size, I would think the outfit would become bothersome.
I muddied my point by digressing about ways Sony might be willing to pairs a large lens with a small body, but I agree completely. While I think a 90mm 2.8 (especially a non-removable one) could be smaller than the Sigma, it is never going to me small enough in shooting mode to balance well with an RX1 or QX1 style body. At that focal length you might as well go for the A7c series.
Caveat: thinking about it a bit more, a dedicated camera could have a collapsing 90mm but that would only save marginal size when not shooting.
---------------------------------------------
mudlake wrote:
If Sony were to come out with a Leica Q clone with a 100mp sensor, GM quality 28/1.5 lens, instant crop function with 28/35/50/75/90, and build quality like a tank, for around $4,000, they would have an instant winner on their hands. I’d buy one and might never need another camera or lens.
Yup. I would say at the point though, they should just release the mythical curved, medium format sensor—since we’re dreaming here.
Steve Spencer wrote:
The problem is that even with a 100MP sensor and a 28 f/1.5 lens, if you crop to 90mm with that sensor what you will be using in effect is a tiny sensor that is very close to the size of an iPhone sensor. Yeah, you will have a decent amount of MP (about 9 MP), but the max dynamic range and color depth will be only about what you would get from an iPhone. Oh, and max ISO? If you would typically max out your ISO at about 6400, then you would probably want to keep it below 600 to have the same amount of noise (said another way ISO 600 cropped this deep will look like ISO 6400 on FF, so in anything less that really good light I would want to be thinking about noise reduction in post). I am all in favor of making small crops up to 1.7X (with adjustment to depth of field, effective aperture, and max ISO kept in mind) without too much worry at all and up to 2X for almost all types of shooting. I think such crops can add very useful flexibility to one's shooting, but a crop that deep has what for me would be important limitations for almost all my shooting. Of course, YMMV.
Keep in mind that with a crop that deep the 28 f/1.5 lens will have the look and depth of field of a 90 f/4.8 lens, and you will start to see the effects of diffraction just one stop down from wide open and especially so on such a high pixel density camera. In recognizing the limitations of such a lens combined with the other image quality concerns for such a small sensor make such a big crop almost never useful for my shooting and I say that often taking a Sony A7r V with a 28 f/1.5 lens as my primary kit. Using only a 28mm lens gets you a nice range from 28 f/1.5 to a very useable in effect 56 f/3.0, but trying to push a crop to much more than that and in anything less than really good light I am not happy with the images. ...Show more →
Agreed. I love using a small 28/1.4 on my A7R5 as you know. It would still be an incredible camera for Sony to build if they could keep it Q size.
mudlake wrote:
If Sony were to come out with a Leica Q clone with a 100mp sensor, GM quality 28/1.5 lens, instant crop function with 28/35/50/75/90, and build quality like a tank, for around $4,000, they would have an instant winner on their hands. I’d buy one and might never need another camera or lens.
Looks like Leica Q3 matches your description pretty well - why not go with that camera? It already exists unlike the hypothetical camera that you wish Sony makes. Its not 100MP but at that 90mm equivalent crop I don't think 6MP vs 9MP would offer much real world IQ difference. Moreover considering that RX1R III is over $5K, your proposed camera, if Sony makes it, will certainly not be $4000, and will likely match Leica Q3 pricing.
curious80 wrote:
Looks like Leica Q3 matches your description pretty well - why not go with that camera? It already exists unlike the hypothetical camera that you wish Sony makes. Its not 100MP but at that 90mm equivalent crop I don't think 6MP vs 9MP would offer much real world IQ difference. Moreover considering that RX1R III is over $5K, your proposed camera, if Sony makes it, will certainly not be $4000, and will likely match Leica Q3 pricing.
Well, that's why I specified the $4,000 price point. I'm not willing to spend $7,000 for the Leica. Plus, the Leica's autofocus isn't anywhere near what a Sony camera could do. If I'm investing that much money in a fixed lens camera, I want it to have everything (which won't ever happen), but we can always dream, right?
Nielk Mike wrote:
Not sure where you see the imbalance? When I hold the camera, the lens rest between the thumb and index finger of my left hand, and is controlled with the thumb and index finger of my right hand. It is very ergonomic.
Once you have a camera this deep, I don't think saving a bit of width and height helps much. My phone is much easier to carry than say the RX1RII that I used to own even though its width and height are more than the RX1R II. The depth is what makes the camera harder to carry. If it was possible for RX1R II/III to be less deep but slightly wider / taller, I would take that tradeoff any day.
