Originally posted by zdwagner Hmm... well I don't remember my Olympus XZ-1 having responsiveness problems as bad as this when shooting raw, and that camera is a generation behind this one (though that doesn't mean it didn't; my memory is pathetic). I personally think that in this age of my phone having more computing power than a laptop from 5 years ago, there's really no reason for a camera to have these responsiveness issues.
I think it's great if you enjoy using the camera in its current state. I'm sure lots of people will. However that doesn't mean that excuses should be made for an issue that is easily solved with a faster processor or better engineering or both. Why would I want to buy a less responsive XZ-2? Sure, it's prettier, and if you're concerned solely with how your camera looks, then MX-1 is your bag. But, as pointed out in the review, the cameras essentially share the same sensor and lens, and both have a tiltable screen. Sure the Oly is more expensive (definitely too expensive), but there's still no reason a camera in the MX-1's price range and sporting the MX-1's feature set, should have these issues.
Just because it's a compact camera doesn't mean it shouldn't be incredibly responsive.
You need a) to check comparisons across a few sites to make sure the MX-1 really is significantly less responsive and b) bear in mind that beefier imaging processors cost more so the sticker price tends to increase. If the sticker price increases too much, sales are bound to suffer. For myself, I don't think I am making excuses - I took about 100 RAW shots this morning and did not feel an issue with responsiveness but then I am a one-by-one person and don't expect instant action from a compact camera. However, I did not buy this cam intending to use it for RAW only but for RAW occasionally and my guess would be that the majority of buyers would think the same. Some would not want RAW at all, perhaps not even know what it is. It's possible, too, that a firmware update will improve things, if they need improving.
My main feeling about the reaction to the MX-1 and the several similar cameras on the web - absolutely not to your measured comments, I emphasize - is incredulity at the crassness of so many of the remarks, that these cameras are missing features compacts as a class were never intended to have and that $499 doesn't get you the features and performance of a high-end full-frame, etc.
If I wanted a high-end compact and could afford it I would buy a Sony RX1 without a second thought. But back in the world most of us can actually afford, the MX-1 strikes me as fine to be getting on with as a lightweight, go-anywhere item along with my two main Pentax cams.
I'm hoping that Pentax will issue a new Ricoh camera or two later this year, a GRD V for example. If so, those cameras may be really blazing in all ways and the best of their breed for some kinds of photography but for a lot more money.