I have been an avid purchaser of Sony photographic products for many years. Most recently I purchased the DSC 828 in 2004 and was very happy with the results (albeit of the sophisticated point and shoot variety),. This year I purchased a Nikon D70 which is an amateur photographers dream. I will definately purchase the D200 instead of the R1 for two reasons. First, I prefer the benefits of a DSLR (versatility, speed, interchangeable lenses) and dollar for dollar Nikon is making a better camera. Notwithstanding, I would have purchased one of these for family use since a point and shoot is easier to use. I am a gadget nut and this is a juicy gadget.

Unfortunately, the SONY DRM fiasco has spoiled my attitude about this company. For that reason I am not going to make an impulse purchase of this product and I suspect many others will have the same view this Xmas shopping season.

Got my Sony R1 just yesterday - ordered from Ritz on Tuesday and had it 48 hours later. Spent 6 hours "playing" with it and making a few test shots. Overall: love It - hence 5 stars.

The downside: oh how I wish the EVF provided about 5 times the resolution so that critical focusing (manual) was possible. And I could live without its herky-jerky display. But that pretty well wraps up what I don't like!

The few natural light indoor test pictures I made were beautiful; at ASA 400 (which I used used for this limited micro-test) resolution and color rendition were superb. Think I'm going to love this sharp, fast lens. That extra few mm at the wide angle end of the range means a lot too; "big sky", "indoor" and "close groups" will be a LOT easier to manage - and the 10MP image will take advantage of it by holding detail (those who say "MP doesn't matter" haven't thought it all the way through - as the angles grow wider it means a LOT).

Camera handling is great. Feels like a good SLR. This is certainly no heavier or bulky than my old Canon F1 - lighter in fact. The R1 exudes quality. Just plain feels good in the hand.

The controls and settings were mostly simple to figure out. What took me longest to discover was how to access playback mode - the button is unlabeled - actually had to look on the little "read me first" cheatsheet included in the box : -) Otherwise, I found myself able to "sync" with the designer's logic quite easily - everything I need for creative control is right there. I'm quite sure that with just a little practice, things like manual bracketing, selecting ISO, shutter speed etc. will be very fast in the field - I don't forsee much fumbling. Big plus!

I especially like the external LCD viewfinder. With the screen lying flat on top the camera becomes reminiscent of a medium format camera like a Yashica 2-1/4 or a mini RB67. I LIKE those machines and the R1 fills that part of my "does it all" wish list better than I expected. The R1 is even quite usable when held straight overhead by the simple expedient of holding it upside down. Not as easy to manipulate setting controls in this position of course, but that's both understandable and quite acceptable.

Shooting response speed was fine. Apparrently it's not able to take extended bursts of shots at several frames per second - bang, bang, bang, bang.... but I couldn't care less. I don't do that kind of photography. Guess it would be an issue if I were into sports photography (or weddings, which are a sport of a different kind) - anywhere one wants to shoot a huge number of shots and sift through them later for the perfect shot. But that's not my cup of tea.

Bottom line: the ability to feel like both a good SLR OR a medium format camera makes this, for me, a smash hit. I look forward to wringing the most out of technical capability - at least until a 20MB version with a hi-res viewfinder comes out a few years down the road.

Actually use the camera before you give it a rating. Nobody wants to hear your opinion if you have never used the camera.

Got my Sony DSC-R1 on Saturday, Nov. 19. I expected to order it from Amazon, but I was in the mall shopping and found that a local retailer had it for $948.88, so I bought it immediately. It took a couple of hours of play to figure out the controls. As mentioned in the review below, the toughest control to find was for playback (hint: it's the button with the blue arrow to the right of the viewfinder perfectly blended into the viewfinder's facia so it's hard to see). The value of the electronic view finder becomes evident when trying to compose a picture in tough lighting conditions. Seeing the image change in the viewfinder to reflect what will be captured as you select different points on the frame for the exposure level is immensely helpful in determining how the picture is going to look. I don't think you can do that with a DSLR. Having heavily cropped pictures and then printed them at 8x10, I could not see any pixelation. The amount of detail is astonishing. There doesn't appear to be any noise (albeit shooting at a low ISO setting), and there don't seem to be any artifacts typical of digital cameras. The printed colors, without any software manipulation, are spectacular. Overall, after two days of use I think this is a great camera. The only downside I've found is the flash seems underpowered, and the AF assist lamp is pretty lame. Sony should have stuck with their laser system. In response to Chris below, the image on the LCD can be zoomed for manual focus simply by pressing the zoom button (it looks like a magnifying glass).

I'll admit up front that I'm an optics snob. Having worked with the best optics ever made in my work has helped to refine my biases. So far, I've owned three of the DSC-series Sony cameras that used Carl Zeiss optics. First up was the DSC-F707, a 5 MP camera that we still have and use. It has taken over 11,000 images and is still going strong. I also had a DSC-F714 that met an untimely demise by bouncing down a cliff in the back country. I still get upset remembering that loss. Next up was the DSC-F828, an 8 MP camera that got loads of bad press over purple fringes. We still have our 828 and it has taken over 6,000 excellent images.

I haven't actually bought the new 10MP DSCR1, but it's on the short list. I have a friend in the business and he was kind enough to loan me his demo for the last 3 weeks and I've given it a good enough workout to know I want one bad. Why? It is a step up compared to the 828 and I like having more pixels for cropping after the fact and getting maximum detail. I'm not going to regurgitate the specs and features since those are covered well by the Amazon spec sheet. What I will do is tell you what I see when comparing images taken by the 707, 828 and DSCR1 of the same subject under controlled conditions.

First off, more pixels are better. You can find plenty of professional opinion that disagrees and they will talk about optical considerations, CCD size, etc. All I can do is look at the images for myself. The 10MP images from the DSCR1 do provide more useful detail and also provide more usable image contrast. These differences are subtle if all you do is display the entire image on your home computer monitor. I see more detail in the shadows at full image size. The surface of backlit water looks wetter in the DSCR1 images than in the 828. But it's when you enlarge the images that the increased pixel density shows its advantage. Copy stand resolution tests lead me to believe that Sony has made improvements other than just increasing pixel density because images with high color saturation and sharp edge detail look better than I would have expected by just increasing the image size by 25%. Maybe Zeiss has made some lens improvements?

I'd say that the user interface is slightly improved by the new viewer. The DSCR1 sits in the hand a bit better than the 828 and especially better than the F707. I also spent a fair bit of time comparing "film speed" between the 828 and the DSCR1. At ASA400, I see a less noisy image from the DSCR1 than from the F828. At higher speeds, both cameras yield images noisier than I'd like to tolerate, but in low light, you get what you get. I'm still not ready to make comparisons on the autofocus capabilities of the DSCR1 vs. the F828. Initially, I thought the DSCR1 had problems, but after fiddling with it a while, I got decent results in most situations. Unfortunately, most consumer digital cameras have a ways to go in the action photography arena.

As an aside, I mentioned that my old F707 is still alive and ticking. A good friend that is a serious photographer bought the first Digital Rebel made by Canon. He retired it a year ago after having the CCD cleaned 3 times. The cleanings didn't work. He bought one of the new models that's not supposed to need to be cleaned. It's due for its first cleaning now. This will remain a problem for SLR digital cameras. I love the flexibility of being able to use a specific lens, but only do so in my film cameras. The CCD of a digital camera is so sensitive to dust, I'm just not willing to deal with it. Everyone I know that has used an interchangable lens digital camera has had dust problems. Until this problem is eliminated, I'll stick with cameras like the DSCR1.

Before I begin let me say that I have owned this camera a total of 1 1/2 weeks at this point, so this is just a chance for me to share with you my first impressions. I will update this review at a later time once I've feild tested the camera further.Let me say that I have owned and used a Sony F-828 in my business and personal life since the camera came out 3 years ago.I still think that it is probably one of the finest cameras ever made to this day, is the R1 a fitting successor? No, I don't think so because the R1 is a step in a completely different direction in terms of design than the 828. Anyone who follows and stays current with technology could have told you that the 828 was to be the last in the Sony "F" series cameras when Sony announced it over a year ago, even then they said thier pro line was going to go under radical changes. The R1 is the result, it is intended as a direct AFFORDABLE alternative to digital SLR cameras (Nikon D200 10.3MP $2,400 body Only, Canon 5D, 12.3 MP $3600 body only need I say more?)Yet at the same time we are given a chance to see where photography is headed. The R1 erases alot of the lines of seperation between SLRs and fixed lens cameras. 1. live preview capability with a CMOS sensor. 2. Same versitility with exposure controls.3.Improved high ISO performance. and finally lens configurations that quite literally save you thousands and thousands of dollars! Examples? the R1 24-120mm, the Samsung pro815 28-420mm!!Digital SLR speed, Resolution and performance with a fixed versitile fast lens. That is the future of photography, that my friends is the the R1 and a bag of chips.
The first thing you notice about the camera is the wieght (it is heavy) I bought the camera mainly to do portrait work, but if you take it into the feild be prepared for a work out! All of my trials are done out in the feild and I can tell you this will be spending alot of time on a tripod, Unless I start lifting weights!The next thing I love about the camera is the LCD screen wich is quite practical and useful. But beware the "Auto" mode on the LCD/EVF selector. A sensor in the LCD senses your body when you get too close (like waist level shooting) and shuts off the the screen! The controls in general are spead out over the camera and once you get used to thier placement are really quite comfortable to use.(It took me about a day)The one thing I was glad to find missing was that infernal "MOVIE MODE" This is a still camera folks remember!? If my kids wanna make movies I can get them a cheap camcorder that would do a better job anyway, so to those of you who are moaning about it, get over it, buy a camcorder!The one thing that I have heard about the R1 and read in all the reviews I've checked out is the amazing pictures it takes, I concur this camera takes breathtaking images wich made up 4 of the 5 stars I
gave it. I have been more than happy so far with exposure & focus in this camera, and operation of the lens is smooth as silk, If there is to be a R2 however, I would like to see the same camera with a 12X or 14X capability (That would make this camera as near perfect as any I've ever used) That and expand the burst capability. This camera is lightning fast but only at 3 shots per sec then the buffer fills.It is these two things that kept me from rating the camera perfect. Alas like my beloved 828 I fear the R1 is destined to take a verbal pounding from skeptics and SLR owners who resent the ever closing gap between SLR and fixed lens cameras. But like the 828 the R1 is destined to outlive its opposition and sit at the forefront of advanced camera design.I mean you can buy a 20D anywhere, but last time I checked theres a four week waiting list for the R1, and since Sony has stopped production on the 828 they are nearly impossible to find. Sony once again has shown us that its not fair that the pros get all the good stuff! I love Sony for that.(this coming from a pro!)Is the R1 the future of digital photography? Yes, I beleive it is, and it is long, long over due.

ISO Noise has been claimed to be a problem on this and every other fixed lens camera worthy of note, and you wanna know what I think? I think people need to stop using places where we exchange information (Like here at AMAZON) to stop venting thier anger when someone comes along who does it just as fast or as good for less money. Bottom line is this, If you are clueless as to how to use your camera chances are you can get some pretty horrible images. Most ISO test are done using either a completely black or grey surface, hey man, if you want to take pictures like that there are a bunch of camera's that go for about $800 less than this one.With the ISO set at 3200 on the R1, I did in fact notice some noise within the image, but with just about any photo editing program even a novice would have no problem fixing the shot to make a fine print, that is If you even noticed. Of course if you take pictures that are all black or grey well I just don't know what to tell you! The burst mode in the camera is the single downer with the R1 (and the SLR boys are jumping on this one) The R1 is fast as lightning but the buffer fills in just 3 shots.After doing a little digging I was told that this is because of overheating in the CMOS sensor and because of power consumption. If you don't mind paying $700 to $3000 more for a comprable, faster SLR (Nikon D200 or D2X, Canon 20D, 5D) Then go for it. Don't forget to buy your lenses while your at it and find a good service center to keep it all clean. Cha Ching Cha Ching!!In closing having addressed the few negatives that the "whos who ever" have been able to come up with let me leave you with this, The R1 is a genuine innovation in technology. It states in big beautiful affordable color that the days of overpriced, heavy big camera bag carrying sell your kids into slavery cameras are over. The R1 and the F828 are similar in this one respect- they broke down the walls and let us all know what it feels like to have the good stuff, let us know that you don't have to spend a mint to get great pictures. Sony started that mind set, now Panasonic, Olympus, Samsung, and others are coming around. Even Nikon to some extent is(D50 is great example). Canon? Well lets not hope for a miracle here! Just remember more expensive does not mean better, it just means you paid more.I beat out expensive camera users for work everyday, its you that makes the pictures not the camera.

Get on the waiting list...Buy this camera. SLR's are on the way out, this my friends is the future of photography and from here it looks very very bright!
Thanks for your time and as always Happy Shooting!
(Check out the images I've posted for more info)- SiNMiN

I have owned the 505 and 707, both excellent cameras. The only shortcoming in comparison is the macro ability, but you can buy a Sony macro lens to fix that. The viewer is excellent, the memory stick is fast. Flash regeneration is incredible and battery life is superb. It may be heavier than the 707, but it doesn't feel like it. I do miss the moveable lens as I used it to shift the balance when I wore it strapped on my neck.

This camera is misleading. I had very nice experience with 717 it perfectly sharp camera on the edge of its time, but not this one. The image quality is pure bad. If someone claims that is is good, or ever above that "outstanding" you should see an optometrist and reevaluate your driver license. This camera produces muddy, fuzzy images and no Carl Zeiss and no sony reputation can correct someone vision. I like the idea of LCD on a top, it is extremely comfortable for taking portraits and landscapes but the final image quality is below any evaluation, it is pathetic.
Camera on this price-point addresses well off people who have some extra money to spent for their lovely hobby but this time I gave my money to Fuji, I've got S9000.
One more thing it is a range of ISO this camera has to offer. Assuming that 160 and 200 are the same, and 800 is so noisy that is wouldn't see any real use we have $1000 camera with TWO iso to choose from, literally: 200 and 400. I don't like the attitude that SONY took on this segment of the market: they think that I'm moron who stuck with a brand and they can feed me whatever they have. Sorry, but you got strive more.
One more question to Sony it is where heck the video? One of the great reason why people buy cameras of this sort is THE VIDEO! I don't want take my camcorder with me anymore! My Fuji e550 was great on video and this $1000 monster can't do it? Common! Guys you are way off road.

Initial reviews of this camera inspired me to believe that the new R1 camera would be less ergonomic than my old SONY F828, but I'm pleased to say that's not the case. The new R1 is better balanced, and very comfortable in the hand. The ability to use the camera with the viewing screen in a number of positions is an advantage. Buttons are positioned in more intuitive spots on this camera-- it takes less time to figure out where everything is. I was able to pick up this camera and figure out most of what I wanted to do with it within a half an hour of opening the box. Save speed to a 2GB memory stick pro was very pleasant-- with it taking just slightly over a second to write 20MB worth of raw image to disk.

And the photos, well now... those were nice. My father will inherit my F828 this XMAS (since it will be his first digital camera)... I will miss the movie feature on that camera a little-- but not nearly as much as I will enjoy the image quality this camera can deliver.

Both Sony and Carl Zeiss deserve ample praise for producing the best high-end digital still camera currently available. Indeed, the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 is the subject of a superb test report in the January/February 2006 issue of American Photo, in which the headline reads, "...combines the convenience of an electronic viewfinder camera with the image quality of a D-SLR". The magazine compared its performance with a Canon Rebel XT and two EF-S Canon zoom lenses at various ISO settings; judging from the pictures I saw, the Cyber-shot yielded images with better contrast than the Canon's (However, the American Photo article observed that the Cyber-shot images were slightly grainier at an ISO range of 160 to 400, more noticeable at 800, and especially so at 1600 and above; at 3200 the images were unusable in stark contrast to those from the Canon Rebel.). The Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 has an ultra-wide Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* zoom lens (24mm to 120mm), whose optical performance I truly believe is second to none, and which American Photo recognizes as an "image-quality breakthrough".

The camera itself is quite handy and ergonomically superb, weighing less than a similar D-SLR with a corresponding zoom lens. It probably resembles more a 6 x 4.5cm medium format SLR than a 35mm D-SLR in its overall appearance. The Zeiss zoom lens has T* multicoating to reduce flare and enhance contrast of images, but perhaps more important for the user, has an easily grippable zoom ring and another for fast manual focusing. If there is indeed a major weakness, it does not come with an optical image stabilizer, but I think that photographic situations regarding such usage would be quite rare, even with this camera for the typical user. However, I suspect that those most interested in this camera will want highest image quality for most photographic situations, and here the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 truly excels. So I agree with the American Photo reviewer that this camera represents a major advance in image quality for compact digital still cameras.

Let me say this first , No matter how expensive is your camera it won't really give you a better pictures. It's the photographer behind the lens will compose and captures that momment in time. Of course you can't compare a $1,500.00 DSLR and a $150.00 Point and shoot Pocket Digital Camera. Through the years I bought HP 2 megapixels, 3 Meg Samsung (My Daughter Pam has it) Sony FD100 1.3 meg that uses disk and memory stick ( I stll use it)Last December 2004 I bought a Nikon D70 6.1 meg DSLR KIt, SB 800 Flash and 70-300mm Zoom lens Total $2,000.00 is it better than my 1.3 Sony not if you compare the same picture on 4X6 size. I just bought a $450.00 Canon Printer (through Amazon no problem or complain) that produced a 13"X19" Amazing Pictures. That where a small megapixels and DSLR really shine.
I used Sony F828 for a week (Sorry Circuit City) and return it and settled for Nikon D70 SLR. Looking back if I did keep the F828 (8 Meg) I think I will be happy. Except I will stuck with one lens. But that one make pretty good pictures , even my Sony F100 with 1.3 meg. have a lot of good memories with my families. You know the saying you always get what you pay for. You Cannot compare a Honda and BMW. The most important is we all love Digital Photography and if you can afford a expensive Digital Camera go for it. If you are happy with the one you got now, just enjoy and take a lot of pictures. I luv visiting www.dpreview.com and actually download beautiful pix taken from different camera model and reading diffrent owners review. I check out a lot of Photography Books in Public Library where I learn and improved my composition.Sometimes my wife do really complain about how expensive my hobby, But once she see the quality of the pictures I taken recently,she is happy camper.
During my reading of Popular Photography Magazine which I have subscription for almost two years now. I found out the New Nikon 200 used a 10 meg CCD made by Sony. What's that telling you...Think about it and make a conlusion why is that so...
By the way Nikon D70 has amazing Battery power I don't count how many anymore after 500 shots.. Read your manual thoroughly and practice , practice, look at the magazine and newspaper and study how they make that beautiful shots.
Merry X-mas and Happy New years to everybody..

I've had this about 2 weeks, and agree with the previous entusiastic comments. I'd add that the results with flash on this camera are extreordinarily good

The lens is excellent, in image quality, aperture and zoom range. I bought the camera after pricing an equivalent set of lenses for Canon DSLRs.

The Hasselblad/TLR style waist level viewing option is excellent.

The F828 has some functions not found on the R-1, e.g. Infrared capability (nightshot), ultraclose macro (almost touching the lens) and movies.

EVFs are still not up to the level of optical viewfinders in following action in dim light. On the plus side for the EVF, you do get to see white balance and histograms, with a "zebra" overlay on the areas of the image that will be overexposed, a fine feature.

I have the 717, the 828 and now this. I know it's not a Digital SLR so I don't expect it to be. It takes unbelieveable photos! The controls are different than the DSC-F828 but they are easialy learned. The lens is fantastic and low light performance is great.


James hatsis (Sony Fan)

James1@OconeeAirService.com

Many other users and serious reviewers have provided sufficient background on Sony's "top of the line" digital DSC-R1, so I'll steer clear of needless repetition and get right to my point: this is not just a great digital camera, it's a great camera by any standard. {credibility break, sorry} My background? 2,500 pictures in the R1, about the same in a Minolta A1 and another 3,000 or so in an older Sony (I forgot the model--it had a rotating lens) that spent 5 years on a boat with me in the South Pacific. Before that, over 40 years of serious photography with everything from pinhole cameras to the Hassey.

Here's the bottom line: the R1 is about the size of the 501c but less than half the weight with just the 'standard' lens. If I include all the extra lenses (I use a wide-angle and a moderate tele) plus the spare backs and film, the bag tips the scales at over 25lbs. Are the pictures as good? (trick question) Technically, no; there will be no razor sharp poster-sized prints from the R1. The truth is that many of the really great shots with the Hassey are still in my head: too much fussing with lenses, changing film, worrying about exposure and poof! The shot is gone. Of the thousands of digital images I've captured, there are many that would match the best from the medium format in terms of qualities that matter to me.

What's the best feature of the R1? Coming from the 501c, I really like the top-mounted LCD! It is much easier to use than even a tilting, back-mounted LCD (like the Minolta A1), particularly for candid shots. Plus when it's vertical, it's like a "sports" finder in that you can easily see both what's in the picture and what's not. Second best is the lens: I checked the Carl Zeiss site for info on their lens designs to compare to the 501c, but they haven't posted the specifics of the Vario-Sonnar in the R1. There are a few very good testing-oriented site on the `net that have uniformly lauded the lens design. As might be imagined, (or maybe not, judging from some uninformed whining about "features" elsewhere) designing and building lenses is not easy. To get a zoom lens that goes from 24mm to 120mm with a flat field and good color performance is nearly impossible, hence the almost unnoticeable barrel distortion at the wide end.

My third favorite feature is the CMOS sensor: it truly makes a difference in the quality of the mega-pixels not just the fact that there are over 10 million of them.

What's not to like? Well, several users have commented on the lack of interchangeable lenses, true, but to what end? To get a higher quality lens? Not likely. A larger aperture? Yes, you can, but not in a zoom. To get a really long telephoto or mirror lens? The only valid complaint, IMHO. So, there is the option of the 1.7 tele-extender that get's you something between 200mm and 400mm depending on how aggressively you manage the digital smart zoom feature. (Don't even think of complaining about the "extra" lens! This is about the lack of replacement lenses, remember.) I have one on order, so I'll save my comments for later.

There has been a lot of carping about the "noise" at high ISO (1600 and above) and it is true: if you try to hand-hold when you should use a tripod and fudge the ISO to overcome the shake, you will get noise. Mount your R1 on a tripod and shoot at 160 and the problem goes away because the built-in noise reduction kicks in. Even is you must shoot at higher speeds, using a tripod and setting exposure to take advantage of the noise-reduction program will make a big difference, from my informal testing. Photography is all about working with limitations, so consider it an advantage to own such an imperfect camera!

The only thing that I've found less than desirable is a compression of dynamic range when shooting Adobe RGB. It shows up as a right-skewed histogram, but post-processing in Aperture fixes it. The image is "muddy" but clears when the white slider is moved to the left in setting luminance. This could be due to several factors, so I'll do some testing and report back.

My summary is that this camera will not make you a better photographer, but taking lots of pictures and not showing the bad ones will help, and believe me, you will be able to take them with greater ease and enjoyment with the Sony DSC-R1 than with anything else on the market for the same price. If your excuse for not taking pictures is that there is either too much equipment or not enough, this one my dear Goldilocks, is "just right".

Have been into top end photography at a Home User level over thirty years, from the Cannon A-1/F-1 to the big boomer Nikon film and digital cameras. The Nikon digital cameras did a good job but had severe limitations and inside photgraphy was a night mare, if you had time to "fiddle" with it it did a good job.

Sony came out with this beauty and thought- Sony good stereos and impossible crack codes on DVD's that I can't break. But a camera? Well after I read the manual (important), and preped eveything from the first photo to the last one of my Pit Bull puppy getting beaten up by a Parrot #500+ there have been nothing but GREAT photos, if there were blown shots it was my doing. The resolution, the ease, of everything really makes this a fun camera to use.

The only recommendations I can make, is to get the Sony Flash, and make sure you get a L O T of memory when you get your memory stick or cards. A spare battery pack or two wouldn't hurt.

I can think of no other camera out there that will give you the product that the DSCR1 gives you for the amount of money you pay for it. It was the best money I have spent on a camera since the Cannon A-1. I strongly recommend this camera, if you are on the fence with the others and have this on the table, the Sony is the best choice. Above all else have fun with whatever unit you all decide on!!!

OVERALL IMPRESSIONS: The best camera+lens package you can get for $999. I originally bought a Canon Rebel XT as it had great reviews and was supposedly compatible with my film Rebel lenses, it turned out they weren't and the camera was less than impressive. I returned the Rebel XT and bought the R1. Sony did an outstanding job with this camera by incorporating so many features and a fantastic lens for under $1000. Prospective buyers, never understimate that SLRs need a good pricy lens in order to perform as well as the Sony R1. The resolution is excellent. I was a bit concerned at reviewers who found the camera slow. It is true that it's not the fastest, but for most purposes it does just what I want. I think 3 shots per second is fast enough for me. Sure, 5 / sec is better but frankly, 3 / sec is VERY fast. Some complain that you can't shoot fast in RAW but I personally only use RAW for landscapes and staged pictures, not rushed shooting. My point is that Sony made the right technology trade-offs and used good sense. After much research I settled for the R1 now I'm using it, I confirm it's the best camera in the market today at this price point.

COMMENTS: These are not problems but things to be aware of:

- the camera is pretty big and heavy compared to models today. No issue for me, but some may care.

- there is a bit of learning curve to master the camera. You buy a race car, be ready to spend more time learning the commands than getting an automatic sedan car. Same for the R1, the manual is long, there are many options, which is what I wanted. Again, some may care and in that case I'd advise a point & shoot with many scene modes pre-programmed.

- that's it. Well done Sony.

I did my research before I bought this camera. I have a Canon 20D camera and the R1 is better as far as image and color. It's feels solid. I also use it in the studio and it's amazing how the detail of the pics are. So if anyone looking for a camera with high detail images and don't need interchangable lens and shoot sports. It's a great choice!

a little disappointed with this camera. It is an ok camera, but for this price it was a let down.

it takes a while to get used to all the features. You change one little thing and it drastically changes the shot, and you cant figure how to get back. when you place it back in same position, you meter still isnt right. white balance.... cant figure out how to customize it. ahh well

I really got it for the night shot featured on other sony cameras, but silly me, i mustta overlooked the fact, that they discontinued that on this model, HUGE let down. .looking to trade it up already for a f828 or a Nikon.

This a great cam. No doubt. I would buy one today, but there is no support for this cam in the area of camera raw opening software. I use photoshop, but ps won't open the raw files of this cam. I use Raw Shooter Premium '06, but no support for this Sony cam. Bummmer.
If support arrives I will buy instantly. No support at the above companies, and no reasons why there is no support.
If you can live with the Sony software included you will be very happy with this cam. Else..... wait.

This has to be one of the BEST digital cameras. I received it Friday, and immediately removed it from the shipping material and began snapping shots. One of the Easiest cameras I have ever used, I've owned approximately 7 other digital cameras, from the NIKON 8700 down. This is the best of the lot. The only fault I can find to complain about, I need someway to attach the lens cap to the carrying strap/camera. I've been know to lose many lens covers. Now the good parts, EXCELLENT manual, EXCELLENT location for each button. You will need to read the manual to find out how each of the buttons work. Love the quick start up, the quickness you can snap photos. The software that comes with it, is GOOD but I use other software, which I am more use to. The focus ring is quick and easy to use, the AUTO FOCUS is also excellent. The detail of the photos I've taken is EXCELLENT, the various shutter speeds, what more could a person want.
If I could rate this camera higher I would.

After I owned and satisfied using Sony's F717, I decided to buy DSC-R1. It is absolutely a legend. It's all function users friendly and easy to care. (little bit heavy particularly while using with ext. flash and ext. lanes) The shot taken by DSC-R1 look you as professional photographer even you are new born. You don't have to be pro to use this camera, just need to afford one grand.

This is truly a great camera in the range. Only thing, you feel stretch when you need to buy its accessory like ext. flash which I recommended must. The wide conversion lanes and filters also the great choice to attach with this monster.

Your raw mode problem, I contact Sony they sent me the following

Thank you for contacting Sony Style Customer Care.

In regard to your question, the F828 had a different file extension *.SRF which was a Sony Raw extension, that was changed for the DSC-R1 to *.SR2 which is built in to the Adobe software. If the software is not updated there is a plug-in from Adobe @:

http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=3267


Thank you for choosing Sony Style!

This is a great product for anyone. However it lacks certain features that will be demanded by pro's such as a better multi shot feature.

I bought this camera based on the reviews and on the superb Zeiss T star lens that is 24mm-120mm (35 mm equivalent)-the range I normally shoot in. The camera has all the bells and whistles and more to satisfy the advanced amateur and pro. (A friend of mine wants one to shoot weddings.) I shot photos at 3mp and the prints were like postcards! It is a little bulky, but still light enough to carry. Some reviewers didn't care for the screen display being at the top of the camera, but that was not a problem for me. The camera functions are well thought out and are numerous. Being able to use a compact flash card or memory stick is a plus. The camera even tells you how many minutes are available on the rechargeable battery.

The only quibbles I had were that you cannot delete all the pics at once that you want to get rid of; you must do them one-by-one. I ordered the HVL 32X flash unit and I don't care for the location of the hot shoe off to the side on the grip, but I plan to solve that by using it on an overhead flash bracket.

The camera arrived with Russian language characters in it and it took awhile to figure out how to change the language to English. The instruction book pretty well outlines all the functions, but it can be confusing in parts. My suggestion is that if you are going to get this camera and pay the price for it, get the training DVDs that are available so you can learn all the nifty functions.

It is a superb camera, well worth the price just for the incredible lens.

I am an avid amateur photographer. This is my 5th digital camera. I currently own a Canon Pro1 and this Sony R1. I purchased the R1 after selling my dust prone Canon EOS 300D with FD 24-85mm USM lens. Yes after many years using SLRs (digital and film) I am finally fed up with dust problems on the (digital) light sensor and manufacturers who in the main (Olympus is the exception), try to pretend the problem doesn't exist. Has Canon or Nikon ever tried to clean a sensor on a desert field trip? They don't even sell cleaning kits! These have to be purchased from third parties.
OK so how does the R1 compare? Obviously more megapixels than the EOS 300D. Much better price performance from the Zeiss lens. The lens is simply superb and would cost a $1000 if you bought the equivalent SLR lens(es) from Canon or Nikon. The wide angle performance (24mm equiv) is amazing! For backpacking trips the R1 is big and weighs 1kg so I wont be selling my Pro 1 any time soon. Apart from the lens the other main advantage of the R1 over every other camera I have ever owned or used, is the live histogram. Effectively you Photoshop the levels BEFORE you take the photo rather than afterwards at home - when you then discover your out of dynamic range!
My only quibbles with the R1 are:
there's no movie mode and, as is well documented,
it has a small frame buffer and so burst mode is not up to par - it does match the (discontinued) Canon 300D however.
ISO noise is not quite as good as the Canon DSLRs but it is quite similar to, or better than, the Olympus DSLRs.
But hey! The worst noise is blobs of dust in what is supposed to be a clear blue sky! I will not buy another DSLR until the manufacturer has a fix for dusty skies.

I just came back from my holidays. I wanted to buy a camera good enough for the next three years and you know what? I found it. This camera has a great picture depth (10.3) and it has amazing features such as the Auto Focus. The AF in this camera is just amazing, just with simple clicks the camera will always find the target you're looking for; it doesn't matter if its day, night, rainy, snowing, crowdy, whatever it is the camera will find it and focus it perfectly. The mixture of the lenses and the out-of-the-box zoom is awesome, all the detail you're looking for is going to be there when you download your pictures to a storage device. If you want to get PRO just buy any of the other accessories available to this camera and become one. I love this camera, it has a great price, great features, it will be with you for a long time not only because of its features but because you can add more accesories to it to make you feel a PRO

I have owned my R1 for about a month now, have taken over 1000 photos and am delighted with the camera.
Let's get the bad news out of the way first and why I only gave it a 3 star rating.
The R1 is:
Very expensive - on the par with entry level DSLRs with lens kits but can't compete with their speed nor their versatility.
It's a large and heavy camera.
Uses proprietary battery
Does not have image stabilization!
Does not do videos.
This is a horrible mistake on the part of Sony, they price this camera with the DSLRs and then fall short on delivery.
In short, the R1 is marketed on the same plane as DSLRs but can't compete with them.

Pros:
This camera with it's swiveling LCD viewer is super for portrait work. It's ultra sharp lens will best all SLRs as far as portrait photography is concerned.
With the swiveling LCD you can go eyeball to eyeball with a toy poodle playing in the grass.
You simply can't do that with any DSLR!
The R1 is also excellent for candid photography because you can shoot at waist level instead of being conspicuous by holding the camera up to your eyes. In fact, there are many, many times when the R1 performed when other cameras stopped.
Exposure, focus and color are excellent and on the par with any DSLR.
The controls are easy to find after just taking a few pictures.
Battery life is excellent and you should not have to buy a second battery.
The 10Mpixels make cropping a breeze!
You can toss 50% of a photo and still have enough to print a 11 X 14.
The camera looks better than most DSLRs but can't outperform them except in the areas mentioned.
If you have longed for a camera that shoots from waist level like the famous 2 1/4 film cameras of days gone by then the R1 is for you.
If you photograph a lot of toddlers or pets then this camera is for you.
If you shoot a lot of fast-action sports then this camera is not for you.
If you are a birder then this camera is absolutely not for you.
If you do people shots for groups or clubs then you will love the R1.

I have previously been unsatisfied with digital cameras primarily due to the shutter lag phenomenon. I really like capturing the "moment" and in my years as a film photographer (mostly portraits and theater) was happy to say I wasted very little film.
Well, I found most digital cameras, by introducing a long delay between the moment the shutter is pressed and the image captured, were a source of great irritation... until... the DSC-R1 came along. I did my first "shoot" this weekend, and not only did I not waste time (and miss shots) but almost every picture turned out to be what I wanted it to be. On top of that, the superb resolution, the preservation of details in shadow, the wide angle at one end and the one button "zoom boost" (which some folks might ignore, but which effectively increases the zoom -- and without a noticeable loss in image quality)... all of this adds up to one great camera.
Sure, I wish it were a little lighter, less expensive, and so on. But this is the digital camera I've been waiting for!

Excelent Photo Qualities, great detail on large prints. High quality lense, from wideangle to telephoto shots as simple as point and shoot. Manually ajust F-Stop and Shutter Speed for Field of Depth or Stop Action Shots. Everything from Metering to a grid viewfinder to make profesional photography simple. A major name brand body alone would cost three times as much for the 10.3MP format. A great camera.

I like this camera, but have one major problem with the system. The viewfinder is a small video screen, as opposed to an optical viewfinder. This has certain advantages, I believe, but for me this is the turn off. I like to see the image on an optical viewfinder and be able to better see the depth of field, the focus, etc. This is a fatal flaw for how I like to shoot photos, and why I have to go with a DSLR, even with the mirror-flopping that goes with it. For regular snapshots, however, where I don't need to pay attention to the details I don't have a problem with looking at the image on a LCD screen. For taking regular snapshots, however, this is kind of overkill - I like more compact digital cameras for this purpose. Hence I like either compacts or digital SLRs better for their purposes.

A Carl Zeiss 24-120 zoom--the stuff of dreams. My dreams, anyway. So I went for it. I have to say, this camera is a horse--it is enormous--but the weight was not troublesome in the least (in fact it aids stability).
But the plastic housing is scarcely any better than on a $5 single-use camera--it really looks and feels cheap.
The playback button for reviewing images is carefully hidden behind the expansive eyecup, where it is nearly invisible and almost impossible to find by feel.

The autofocus is nothing short of pathetic. It grabs, loses, grabs again, hunts around a little more, and after about two or three seconds of this little dance finally gives the OK. For my test shots I refused to endure this, so everything was focused manually.

The real kicker was comparing shots made with this camera and my Panasonic FZ-15, which has a far smaller sensor. OK...a brief time out. Anybody remember their basic math? You NEVER mix fractional and decimal values...unless you make digital cameras. The imaging chip in my Panasonic is supposedly "1/2.5 inches". Couldn't they simply have said "four-tenths of an inch, or one centimeter"? This nonsense is as infuriating to me as the proliferation of non-existant words, such as "proactive". Nope, no such word--doesn't exist.
But back to photo quality, which is where I was headed. For my test both cameras were set at ISO 400 sensitvity (which should have given the Sony a HUGE advantage), and both were set to record "monochrome" or black and white. My subject was my "zen master"--Ichi, my cat, illuminated only by window light. The shots from the Panasonic are consistently sharper than the Sony--all of them. I have to attribute this to that psychotic autofocus system in the Sony--even with an AF assist lamp, it had trouble in bright window light.
The Sony got its big fat horse's rear kicked big time by my two year old Panasonic.

What has happened to Sony? Last year it was a recall of millions of imaging chips for digital cameras, this year there was the recall for millions of incendiary computer batteries. I've said it elsewhere in other reviews on this site--Sony's days are numbered if they don't clean up their act. Companies like Samsung are poised for the kill and are also hungry--hungry enough to eat Sony for lunch.

By now you'll have surmised I elected not to keep "Horsey". I'll resume my search for the next phase of my life in digital imaging, meanwhile being very thankful for that Contax G2 I just bought. A REAL CAMERA.

A great travel camera. I leave my Canon D20 kit at home. In fact, I find myself using this thing all the time--it's very easy to use, love the ergonomics. The only caveats--high ISO ratings are way too noisy, not nearly as good as the Canon. Also, the excellent lens is too short at the telephoto end. Otherwise, one of the best lenses out there. Battery performance is excellent. Bulky, but light. Buy a high quality protective filter, like a B+W or Hoya. Use it and enjoy!

I have owned numerous digital cameras, but have never found the "perfect" one, until now. You will simply not believe the incredible photos this camera will produce. It's not small, but it fits great in the hand. I have simply not been able to take a bad picture with it yet. The photos aren't just a little better than other cameras, they're absolutely superb. You will not regret buying this camera.

DSC Series camera all have a CCD imager defect that will leave screen blank after you use the camera for 2 or 3 years. (Do a google search. You will find out what happened.) Sony knew this problem years ago. But refuse to fix it. They will wait until the camera fail and then charge you $300 to fix it. That's what happens to my DSC-F717. Ever wondering why Dell, HP etc all recall Sony battery for laptop, but Sony did not recall their own laptop battery? Sony will never fix their own problem. We the customer have to pay for their mistake.

Waist level finders have always appealed to me whether using an SLR or a medium format camera. So when the R1 combined a waist level capable finder with a giant CMOS imager and a wide zeiss lens, I had to give it a try. I am not disappointed.

While it is not the fastest focusing camera out there,it is great for anything short of quick moving subjects. Images are sharp, sharp, sharp. Image stabilzation would be nice, as well as faster focus. But with even these shortcomings..the R1 is worth every bit of its price.

Am now hoping for an R2 upgrade of the R1---will be on it like white on rice.

I have had this camera since July 2006 and have grown to love it. To see what kind of photos it can take, take a look at Eric Pouhier's work on pbase.

I took it on a three week tour of Europe with my 14 year old son in August. I took along two memory cards (1 and 2 gb) and also took along an 80 gigabyte portable Wolverine drive which worked flawlessly (I only used up about 6 gb). The Wolverine's charger had no trouble working on overseas voltages (nor did the Sony's). If you're used to travelling with an slr, the sony will pleasantly surprise you. If you're used to travelling with a compact point and shoot, the Sony will seem huge.

I also have a Canon 20D SLR which is also great. I mainly use the Canon for bird photography with a 300mm image stabilized lens. The Sony is basically useless for bird photography (unless you have an extremely cooperative- or dead- bird). For most other purposes, the sony is better than an slr. It takes great portraits and landscapes. It's fabulous in cities and for photographing buildings (great wide angle). It is also fun for candid shots using the lcd view finder.

I just had my R1 for a week now and I love it. In summary, it's an awesome camera. Takes great quality pictures with true colors and great details. I got it for $650 and at that price, I'd say it's a bargain. If you're in the market for a full size professional digital camera, R1 is the camera you've been looking for. In addition to the awesome quality pictures it takes, 5X zoom, long battery life, CF and memorystick options, swifel LCD screen, etc.. makes this camera even more competitive.

I recently bought this camera as an upgrade from my Sony 8.0 MP 828. This is my third Sony SLR-like camera, with my first one being the 5 MP 717. I upgraded to this one in order to get photos that were as clear and as sharp as possible from the miniature items that I buy and sell.

As I found with the 828 when upgrading from the 717, there was a significant learning curve over previous cameras. However, now with my third Sony camera, I've discovered that the learning curve lasts for about a month - then one can start taking photos with good results.

The learning curve with the R1 was as predicted. Out of the box, the camera is impressive, if only just in size! It is probably double the weight (or at least close) to a 717, and is probably 25% larger than the 828. The lens is a whopping 67mm - a full increment larger than the 828. The next thing you notice on the camera is the lack of an LCD viewfinder, which Sony took off the camera and placed on an adjustable screen on top of the camera. Quite novel.

A quick walk around the camera shows that Sony learned from the cumbersomeness of the 828 with regard to adjustments on the camera and made the R1 very "user friendly." The camera is easy to hold (though heavy) with one hand, and the photographer is able to make the adjustments with his other - definitely making it two-handed operation. It seems that just about everything has a button on the back or side of the camera, and once you learn where everything is, it is easy to change the exposure, etc., with just a quick adjustment.

For what I do (and if you're planning to use it for photographing small objects, this is something to keep in mind) the major initial drawback was the focus length of the camera. Unlike the 828, where you could be within inches of the object and shoot beautiful closeups, this camera requires at least a foot, if not more, in order to focus. Once you get it to the right focal length (and after the purchase of a macro filter - a must have) the shots are glorious. HOWEVER, what does a long focal length with detailed photos mean? You MUST have the camera stabilized (tripod, etc.) in order to get good shots. Hand-held detail shots are a no-go with this camera. Also, if you like to take .mpg movies through your camera, you'll be disappointed. This camera does not have that capability.

As far as plusses, the camera is super high quality, and is relatively easy to use. The lens is fantastic, and the rest of the camera seems to be as equal in quality. I've gotten used to the LCD viewfinder, and have been able to use it for some great shots that I might not of otherwise been able to view with the fixed viewfinder.

I will also add that my wife has gotten quite savvy with this camera, which is a first for her. She has been able to get some phenomenal photographs, particularly portraits, thus far. She loves this camera!

Would I buy another? I'm not sure. I'm a fan of getting new toys, so I had to have it. However, I think my 828 may take better (or at least easier) close up shots. I must admit that I haven't taken this camera on a road trip just yet to take outdoor photos, and I can only imagine that with the lens and processor that it will be terrific. My word of advice would be: if you HAVE to have the highest-end quasi-SLR, then this camera is for you. Overall, I'm happy with this camera, but I just don't know if it might just be worthwhile moving over to the quality SLRs that don't cost much more than this, such as the Canon 20D. Though I'll happily use this camera for now and am giving it five stars as there are no significant detractors that I have found with it, I believe that my next upgrade will be to a quality SLR.

well, i finally bought the sony r1, after along wait for the price to drop, and read all reviews on it..i got it for 565$.
what i like about r1:
build quality, good zeiss lens, 24mm wide angle, iso change on cam just a botton..great colors balance, low noise and high iso, big cmos sensor, use both pro stick and cf card, long battery life , displays batt life in mins, useable high iso at 400, top view and swivel lcd, manual tele zoomring, good raw files.
what i dont like:
battery charges in camera is a big draw back, while you charge the batt, you cant use the camera to shoot, bad feature, hope sony improves it on next camera. the camera design is so weird, the grip is over size, off balance on hand, view finder housing is over size, to use external flash you have to go to menu and change it everytime, and change back to use pop up flash, cant use both flashes, missing OIS(opical image stabilizer), its heavy and big, tele at 120mm is at f4.8, AF is not that fast, its kinda slow, especially in dark, sony should learn from this cam and improves it on next camera, im sure they will.the price is abit too high for a point and shoot, no video mode, macro is too far from subject, about 15 niches.
other than that i love to use it, its my main camera to walk around with, i love the image result quality, thats why i bought it, i know no camera is perfect yet.for the price i paid im not complainning. its a dslr wanna be, very close to dslr results.
i strongly suggest to any one who wants a back up to dslr..

Well this is not my first digital camera, I had the G5, G6 and A620. I am used to them focusing real well the first time around most of the time. I expected the R1 to focus well the first time I shot, it didn't though so I was very dissapointed in this. I found out that some of the auto focus features need to be turned off in order for it to focus better it does help alot but focus is slow. For the money I spent I expected better in the focus area. The lens is great and the photo quality is very good. It's just not that quick. Battery life is very good. The camera feels pretty good in the hands but I would have liked to see metal. I don't like plastic on cameras. I want to feel I own something when I hold it. I don't care about how light it is. I am happy with my camera at least by the fact that the quality of shots is as good as any digital slr. I am glad it has a good lens I don't like having to buy alot of lens so Sony did good in this aspect with the R1. If I knew what I know now I might not have bought the R1 maybe I would have went for something else. If something else was a little better in the speed area and focus. But when I think about it there are not many choices with something that has a good lens already and is not a mirror reflex where one has to worry about dust. This one is better in that respect. This is why I give the camera a 4 because Sony could have perfected this camera but they did not.

When Sony put out the DSC-F828 back in 2004, the camera was immediately tagged "the flawed jewel" by many reviewers. The reasons were obvious: with the new four-color HAD sensor, incredible ergonomics, and multiple control features often paralleling a DSLR, Sony positioned the device to become the camera of choice for pros and semi-pros who wished to have a second camera to escape from carrying around a DSLR and a set of lenses on every trip. Unfortunately, the camera, though taking wonderful photographs for the most part, suffered from strong purple fringing ("chromatic aberration," as they say), and it was one of those love-hate relationships. Most people loved their F828, but just were aggravated that Sony had chosen to release such a gorgeous unit with such an obvious flaw.

We don't have to say the same for the DSC-R1, and it is worthwhile to report that most all the issues surrounding the F828 have been corrected in the R1. In fact, the DSC-R1 outpaces all current non-DSLR's by a significant amount in the ostensibly most critical area: image quality. The camera is capable of producing some of the most beautiful images one will ever take with a non-DSLR rig. In fact, SO good, that one will begin to seriously question whether a DSLR is even necessary for most people who are non-pros. The camera does most everything that a DSLR will do, and to boot, has a built-in lens that, if calculated for an equivalent cost for a DSLR, would easily cost twice as much (some say even more). And those pictures are just gorgeous. Striking detail, rich color, surprising sharpness, and few missed shots. To boot, battery life is superb, the best I've seen in a camera thus far. And the lens, while only providing a 5x optical zoom, also provides a very wide 24mm landscape shot, and so there is actually a tremendous range between its widest and most zoomed settings.

Now the caveats. There are indeed some factors which do not make this camera a "no brainer" for everyone. And, without fanfare, let me list some of them for consideration before you make the plunge to purchase one.

First, the camera has an unusual physical design which lends itself more to waist-level shooting, with the user looking DOWN onto the top of the camera, where the LCD can be seen. It is true that the LCD pops up and can be positioned upright so that one can shoot straight-ahead, but at 2.2 pounds, let me know how far you go until you decide arm fatigue forces you to rethink your decision. Although I personally actually prefer the waist-level shooting of the R1, one must admit that it is somewhat unconventional, and not everyone will ever get used to it. Some downright hate this physical configuration.

There are a few specification issues one should taken note of before purchase. The optical zoom tops out at 5x, which is not all that bad, but many people may wish for a greater zoom amount. (A Sony add-on lens boosts zoom by 1.7x, but this add-on is expensive, extremely heavy, and quite bulky.) Macro focus performance is not nearly as close as the old F828; one must be a good number of inches away from any object, even when "macro" is selected. Also, the RAW mode images, while of superb quality, take up a whopping 20Mb per image, quickly overwhelming both your storage and your patience as you try to copy, open, and transfer files. And because the R1 was released before the specifications for the new Memory Stick Pro Duo were released, the camera can only accept up to 4Gb Memory Sticks (although the R1 does have a second slot for Compact Flash which also accepts up to 4Gb, making your total potential memory capacity equal to 8Gb.) The camera is also just old enough not have included anti-shake technology, so that feature is not present on the R1.

Finally, there is one area where image quality does take a small hit, and that is in the level of distortion when shooting at the camera's widest "(i.e., 24mm) setting. Particularly when shooting buildings, but in reality for most any venue, the wide-angle setting will produce significant inward bending (vertical perspective distortion) of the image, requiring you to use an image editing program, such as Photoshop, to correct the image. If you are not familiar with this phenomenon, a photograph of a building, for example, with this type of distortion will make the sides of the building not appear to be vertically up-and-down, but rather appear as though the building is tilted inward on either side, as if the two sides of the building would eventually meet each other if extended long enough. This is not an insurmountable obstacle, as one can correct this relatively easily with image editors, but it is one of the few areas in which the camera underperforms. However, when looking at the overall image quality of shots the R1 takes, its pretty easy to forgive this one issue.

Having said all of this, the final summary comes after using the camera over time, viewing the images it produces, and comparing it to other fine cameras on the market. You'll find few people who own a R1 who will say anything other than the images it takes are superb. And the reason why is because the photos ARE superb. If you find that the minor issues concerning this camera are of little concern to you and that the physical design of the unit is one to which you can adjust (or even, as me, can like), then this could be a great find for a semi-professional, non-DSLR camera. It may be somewhat of a "flawed jewel" like its predecessor the F828, but with fewer outstanding issues and greatly improved picture quality over the F828.

I pre-ordered this camera from Sony way back in November of 2005. It was shipped to me before Christmas that year. Ever since, I have used the camera as a stock photographer and a family photographer. The personal photos have been excellent and print very sharp to at least 8.5x11 (though in Photoshop the linear dimensions are poster size).

Unfortunately, the main failing has been in the color noise and artifacting for stock photography. Because I do not use a tripod for on-the-fly outdoor shots, I have gotten used to either spending hours with Photoshop fixing the "purple fringes" (also cyan and red shifts) or just submitting the full-sun shots and hope the inspector will tolerate a bit of color noise for the shadier areas.

The lack of any image stabilizing process (as the newer Sony/Minolta cameras have) is the major problem. Because my acceptance rate is less than 50%, and the most common reason given for rejection is color noise and artifacting, I'm waiting for the release of Canon's new DSLR (the 40D?), which might or might not have the same MP resolution as the Sony DSC R1, but it's a true SLR with image stabilization. For prosumer use, therefore, the R1 is not adequate because of its lack of in-camera image stabilization.

Nonetheless, the built-in flash is bright enough for most medium- and close-range use (especially since it's positioned right above the lens, minimizing the outline shadows where the flash is offset), the focal range goes from wide angle to medium telephoto, the Sony tripod with remote control works fine with this camera (if you can tolerate using a tripod), the memory cards in 2 formats (MS and CF) allow for great utility (e.g., in-camera backup), the interfaces are handy (I back up in the field on an iPod 80GB), iPhoto runs fine with the R1 connected, and the camera's fake shutter sound can be turned off for absolutely silent candid photos (especially since people don't realize that you're focusing using the top-mounted LCD viewfinder). The diopter adjustment of the optical viewfinder can be set precisely.

Not so nice is the placement of the hot shoe for the external flash to the right, above the grip/battery compartment. The shadows cast are dense and distracting, although the Sony smart flash works extremely well. Also, I have lost 2 Memory Sticks and 1 Compact Flash card--all 2 GB--until I read on the web the recommendation that memory cards should be formatted by the camera rather than by a computer. I did that with one card which I eventually filled with pictures of our first grandchild (a couple of hundred photos), when the camera suddenly showed "Format Error." I couldn't get a professional recovery company to rescue anything, even when I said they could open up the card to get inside, voiding the money-back guarantee. So...I've been deleting pictures one by one, using the camera itself (very tedious), rather than having the R1 or my iMac do the re-formatting. (A couple of e-mails to Sony resulted in polite replies, but no action.)

Another limitation of the R1 is that it is hard to protect it. The Sony hard-leather case is so strangely shaped that putting the cover on and taking it off take too much time for field use. So I use the camera without the rather costly leather case I bought from Sony.

The LCD viewfinder, being on top of the camera, puts off subjects who are in groups waiting for their souvenir photo because they think you're adjusting the camera instead of composing the picture. So I find I use the optical viewfinder most of the time, especially with the superimposed grid to help me align vertical and horizontal planes. I do wish that Sony had provided some kind of bellows hood for the optical viewfinder. In bright sunlight, the LCD viewfinder is hard to see, and the bright reflections in the optical viewfinder requires me to wear a baseball cap or use my hand to shade it.

The self-timer (with camera on a tripod) is excellent--people can be warned that the amber light will flash slowly when the self-timer is on, and will flash rapidly just before the shutter trips. Still, if I have forgotten to turn on the audio shutter sound, people stand there for a few seconds, not realizing the photo has been taken.

After a year and a half of using this camera, I am very glad I had it as my starter camera for semi-pro photography. And I still have another year and a half to go on the service/repair extended warranty I bought and have not needed. But I'm saving money to take a step up, perhaps to a true SLR from Canon or Nikon.

1. I've had the R1 essentially since it came out (2yrs?).

2. As has been documented in many reviews--> this is a camera that can produce excellent results, IF you shoot in RAW.

3. With the above being said, this camera will or will not work for you mainly depending on the type of photography you normally do.
a. Poor macro: the in camera macro ability is a joke--> if macro is important, you'll need to get the screw on close up filter.
b. Obviously fixed lens 24-120mm. I think that 24mm is going to be wide enough for most folks (including me... most of the time). However, I would think that most folks may want to shoot more than 120mm episodically. There is a wide angle convertor lens (which is good) and a tele convertor lens which is terrible (read my review on that).
c. Burst rate: terrible--> only 3 shots in JPEG. Thus, if you're into sport, shooting action shots, taking shots of the kids--> forget it. And by the way--> fast focusing is not a strong suit with the R1 either.
d. RAW write times: slow and subpar for this caliber of camera. And as noted above, if you want to get the highest quality image, you really need to shoot in RAW.

4. Translation: if you're mainly into landscape photography--> this might be a very good camera for you. However, like me--> you'll find that the lack of the ability to shoot beyond 120mm, the lack of true macro capabilities, the slow RAW write times (when you really want to capture a fleeting scene)... can all be very frustrating--> which then brings the realization upon oneself of "perhaps this is why most (all) professionals use DSLRs." It's a great camera which is capable of excellent images, but the poor performance is a significant limiting factor which becomes more and more apparent over time and in different shooting situations.

I have owned my R1 for nearly a year now and I must say that I am confident that I made a wise decision. I debated going the dslr route and decided against it after exploring the R1 option. I found this camera loaded with the features that I wanted and I didn't feel hampered by the fixed lens. The picture quality is outstanding! The lens is sharp and wonderfully bright! There is no fringing or wide angle distorting. The digital crop is very impressive and the live preview (one of the reasons I went with the camera) is a wonderful feature.
The bang for the buck that is available with the R1 is quite impressive. I am a very satisfied customer.

I have had mine for over 2 years and I LOVE this thing. In my opinion it is a classic digital camera. I have taken so many stunning shots with it, and when I hand it to others, less skilled than I, they take them too. It's true, that a camera can't make you a better photographer, unless it has a superb noise reduction algorhythm, a spectacular lens, a big CMOS chip and a fast response time. It turns on so quickly that I can leave it off and turn it on for a grab-shot, and extend the spectacularly long (530 minutes plus!) battery time indefinitely. The only down side is that I end up keeping so many shots, well over 5000 now, that my poor drive is full! I really love this thing. It's been all over the world with me, contributed to high-end visual effects jobs, created truly memorable shots and therefore gifts, web content, commemorations, art pieces etc. that I will never part with it. Find it for sub-$500 and you will never look back. I also recommend the instructional DVD they sell here. Moderate production value, but high instructional value. This camera is not a simple snap-shooter if you want to make art, so the DVD is the fastest way to learn the features and refresh memory. VERY helpful indeed. The added feature that it uses two different memory media if nice too. I am currently carrying 12 gigs of memory!!! That translates to something over 2,700 10mp JPEG pictures! I will never max out. Impressive, huh? Well, I think so!

Enjoy it! I love mine so much.

Lekfx

This camera is the best thing i've ever invested in..Crystal clear photo's easy to operate and fun to shoot..I even bought an extra battery and fast action soccer photo's are fantastic..buy it..you will love this camera..video's are awsome too..oh yea the disk that organizes you film is supurb..enjoy..