TaoTeJared said:
I have had the same thoughts - as a second camera with a 35mm lens. If you use a 35mm range on a second body and you think about it, even a D600 ($2,000) and a 35mm f2 AFD lens puts you at the same price but more weight - and for what?

For backup in case your main camera fails, you can still use the same lenses, accessories, etc.

For weddings most likely you wont need/want to manage two cameras hanging off your neck with two different lenses / settings / ergonomics (especially if you have a 2nd shooter already taking pictures). You're probably better off with one solid main camera, a few lenses to swap, and a backup body tucked away, just in case. And that backup body doesn't need to be a brand new D600 either.

That RX1 might be an excellent camera for the 2nd shooter, however. (Though again it might be preferable if the 2nd shooter uses the same gear system as the main photographer -- just in case.)

sevencrossing said:
Now if the Rx 1 had a 24mm f 1.4 then yes, I would be tempted

I think I would prefer 24mm too, and as for f1.4, msmoto is correct, it would be lovely to have, but would hardly make for a pocketable camera. I think they have done a pretty good job giving such a small camera a FF sensor and an f2!

The interesting thing about all these new cameras is the limiting factor of the glass. It appears all the new f/1.4 or f/1.8 lenses which are for either a crop sensor or full frame are so large they are the limiting factor for the size. My little Olympus E-PL2 with its very small 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 zoom is actually OK for a large purse, but not a pocket camera. And if I were to place an adapter with the 24mm f/1.4 on it...mmmm

I suspect i may look for the 17mm f/2.8 as this is the only small lens I can see which fits the micro 4/3rds mount. And, the nice part is I have only $200 in the camera as I purchased it from Ritz on the last day they were open.

But, I am still waiting for Nikon's real answer to the DX mirrorless.... with "F" mount less or an adapter.

Now if the Rx 1 had a 24mm f 1.4 then yes, I would be tempted

I have had the same thoughts - as a second camera with a 35mm lens. If you use a 35mm range on a second body and you think about it, even a D600 ($2,000) and a 35mm f2 AFD lens puts you at the same price but more weight - and for what?

I actually use my fuji X100 a ton (35mm equiv) as a second camera for the "documentary" feel or when I need something wider. It is small so it really doesn't get in the way at all. If I have a 70-200 or anything like a 50mm,85mm,105vr + it works great so I don't have to swap lenses.

I like the idea of the High ISO is better since generally I just set it on manual focus, aperture at f8 and zone focus at 6ft. That gives me everything from 4'-12' in focus. Many times it will be at iso6400 which works for B&W most of the time, but there are times where I could use a better output in color and cleaner B&W photos.

There is one thing I keep my Fuji X100 for and that is the super high speed sync with the focal shutter. I can get 1/2000 sec shutter with flash. In day light, f2 and wanting to really darken the background, it is great. If they update the x100, that would keep me on the DX for sure. I don't use it much, but it sure is nice when I can.

Yes sorry Ade Barkah, I should have made myself clear, it would be a second (or third) camera to my Nikon DSLR's.

I think you have to honestly ask yourself if any camera with a fixed 35mm lens is the right tool for performing professional weddings and portrait photography? As a second camera, maybe; but I can think of any number of common scenarios in weddings and portraiture where a fixed 35mm lens will be severely limiting.

Thinking about it over the last couple of days, in spite of the universally excellent reviews the RX1 has received, the main cause of concern for me in purchasing one, is the amateurish looks one would receive, if I tried to use it for paid portrait or wedding work....... I don't think most paying clients would take kindly to having their photographer taking shots at arms length with a P&S? I suppose I could use it in conjunction with the optional OVF/EVF, but still it's looks I think would send out the wrong signal, anyone had any experience of clients reactions when using a P&S professionally?

Funduro said:
Many people with large amounts of disposable income will buy the RX1, whether they shoot Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Sigma, Samsun, Sony or Olympus. They'll buy it to have it, to brag they have it, to make other jealous, to shoot their cats. I hope they have fun with it and I'll hope to hit the lottery this Saturday. ;-)

I don't have large amounts of disposable income, or intend to brag I have one, but am seriously thinking about putting my order in for an RX1.......Am I mad? The reviews make it sound fantastic, and if I get my folks to bring it over from the states next time they visit, it'll cost me £1800 instead of the £2600 Sony want for it here. As photojournalism/candids is my thing, and I'm getting too old to carry my D3s with a 24 1.4 all day long, do you guys think it would be a good idea? My heart says RX1, my head says Fuji X100 at 1/3 of the price.

Great Pics Andy :D

Cheers mate, yeah it was the Roger Albert Clark Rally for historic rally cars. These shots were taken in Dalby Forest in North Yorkshire.

Great shots.. this must be a vintage car rallye, correct?

Sorry try this link http://www.flickr.com/photos/90425553@N04/ . Hope this works

I attened the R.A.C Rally last night and here are my results https://www.facebook.com/#!/media/set/?set=a.440323846016664.97995.100001171566590&type=3 and https://www.facebook.com/#!/media/set/?set=a.440459386003110.98013.100001171566590&type=3 hope these links work. I had my camera set to f/6.3 aperture,shutter speed 1/60th, exp:comp:+1,ISO 800 and my SB900 flash was set on GN, +3EV asnd 20.0m

I meant to say that the Sony NEX lenses are just adequate, but not comparable to the quality of the Nikon lenses. I have not tried their latest lenses. This is one of the pitfalls of not waiting for Nikon. The NEX series works well with an adapter but you have to be comfortable using manual focusing and exposure to use them on the NEX Series.

I seriously thought about getting the Nikon 1 V1 when some of the stores were dumping them, but could not justify it because of already having the NEX C3, and NEX 5N. I like the larger Sony Alpha bodies and use them on my older Nikon lenses like the 50cm F5 mirror lens that I operate manually. But for birds in flight Nikon's AF-s and subject tracking is still the best.

I originally wanted a V1 for the extra reach of the CX Format when shooting small birds but do not like the low ISO limitation of the V1 with my older and slower lenses. Both Nikon and Sony's electronic viewfinders make shooting manually completely painless on still images. I like live view shooting on both systems, but neither works for me when shooting flying ducks that can appear and disappear on the horizon in seconds.

I will probably buy an FX compact to use whenever I want a shallower depth of field and really love the idea of one in a compact camera body. I prefer to buy Nikon because that is my primary system, but buying a few 300mm to wide angle lenses in not a deal breaker anymore for me. Traveling with the NEX Series has spoiled me.

Yes, I would like a Nikon product like this....which would accept all the lenses. But, what is so nice about the link, Adam, are the wonderful photographs of the people.....love it! Thanks!

sony just posted a gallery with rx-1 photos, don't know like You but I would love to see such a camera in Nikon lineup:
http://www.sony.jp/cyber-shot/1hand-fullsize/gallery_shitamachi.html

You're going to have and pan if you're shooting at night. The P mode on the D7000 will be your best bet using the flash in this situation and I'd use auto iso.

On metering I'd use Dynamic because of the headlights and then use a software where you can recover shadows, Nikon's free ViewNX2 software has an excellent shadow recovery. You're also going to have some noise to get rid of and for that I suggest Topaz's Denoise 5, it's the best denoise software out there and it's inexpensive.

Good luck and look forward to seeing your shots, Andy.

Oh, one more thing, get behind the biggest tree you can find! :)

Thanks for the advice, i will give it a try. I know i am pushing my camera to the limit but as with a lot of people sadly money is the problem!

Yes, spraynpray, I might even try 1/125 sec, panning at about 6-10 FPS or whatever the camera can do... no flash...wide open with a fast prime lens at f/1.4. And maybe even very slow shutter speeds, hoping to get one or two. Panning at 1/30 sec can get a few if you are very good.

Practice panning as you are pushing (or over) the limits of your gear.

OK, but shooting flash into the driver's eyes may not be good. When shooting available light, head on, the headlights will fool the light metering system into thinking there is a lot of light and the result is you get black photos of nice bright headlights and no car.. So, shoot after the headlight is off you, adjust about a stop or two (add + 2 ev) for the apparent light and test from there.

If using flash, I would try a Lumiquest soft box at about a foot over the center of the lens with the SB-900. Maybe even holding the soft box/flash about four feet above me...on a pole. This might help to eliminate any reflections from the car sides. Have your grip (assistant) hold the flash....LOL...actually, a lightweight pole can be inserted into a back pack and with a lot of gaffer's tape of duck tape made into a sturdy flash holder.

So, you did not want all this advice... but this is a monster problem and I was just working it out based upon my experiences... and what I might try. By all means be careful and do not place yourself in any danger...

msmoto said:
Well, if you had a fast prime, this would be nice... If you are a competitor, shooting from your car, a short fast prime or zoom is the only way to go, but if you are at the side of the road and can be at a check point, you may be able to shoot at a high ISO and get some shots.

What you need to do if you want to really get photos is to go out and do a dry run in a similar situation in the forest to that which you will encounter during the rally. You will then have some experience and will not totally screw up the photos when you are live.

Cheers for that. The shots will be taken from outside the car,if i can get the same spot as i normally get it will be on the outside of a hairpin bend. I am hoping to take shots of the side of the cars or even taken head on as they approach the hairpin

Well, if you had a fast prime, this would be nice... If you are a competitor, shooting from your car, a short fast prime or zoom is the only way to go, but if you are at the side of the road and can be at a check point, you may be able to shoot at a high ISO and get some shots.

What you need to do if you want to really get photos is to go out and do a dry run in a similar situation in the forest to that which you will encounter during the rally. You will then have some experience and will not totally screw up the photos when you are live.