Jump to content

Recommended Posts

 

 

Thanks, Peter and Allan (What a team!).

 

I seem to remember hearing a rumour that the lens on the Mk2 was not as good IQ-wise as the one on the original Mk1. Is that so?

 

I heard that too John. Not sure what the final cause was but if you remember there where some who were not happy with MkI lens and returned the camera to makers for repair.

 

Allan

 

I posted on the old forum about poor IQ with the mark 2. I didn't have the mark 1 so couldn't do any kind of comparison.

 

To be fair I think the cause may have been a defect in a batch of lenses. I seem to remember the word "de-centering" being used at the time. It would seem to focus reasonably well on one side, but hopelessly out on the other. The same problem was reported by a lot of UK buyers.

 

I gave up on it after only a few days and took it back to the shop, and haven't attempted to go back to it since. I have to say though that it was a nifty little camera and would be interested to hear peoples experience with the mark 3.

 

Thinking about it, I may have posted about it on this forum!

 

 

 

I've got a Mk II and never had any problems with focus. I think i've only got 2 images on Alamy taken with the Mk II and they were in a batch of Canon 5D Mk II (I like Mk IIs!) images so might not have been scrutinised. However, I did look long and hard at them before submitting.

 

John.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I just got the Sony RX100 mk3 and, so far, I am really impressed with the overall quality of the jpegs! The files are larger than my Nikon D700 and the noise is very low at higher ISO's.  My last point and shoot was the Canon G11 and this Sony is light years ahead of that camera.  I am sure photos would pass fairly easily through the Alamy QC.   Not selling my SLR's just yet but thrilled that I can now shoot, with confidence, stock worthy photos with a pocket size camera.....not a iPhone user so not in Stockimo.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have stopped using my Sony RX100 mk1 and will probably trade it in on a Canon 24-105L lens that I will put on the Canon 5D11 as a walking around kit.

 

Here are two images that helped me make the decision.

 

I shot the overall shot on the sony. It was sharp enough but I felt the shot called for even more sharpness to do the subject justice. At 100% the centre of the individual blossoms were ill defined. The blossoms in the corner were in focus but were tending to softness even at optimum aperture. In the case of the second Sony close up image at optimum aperture, there was too much depth of field resulting in a distracting background.

 

Reducing the size of the image to Alamy minimum was not an option because of the subject matter.

 

I went back the next day with a Canon 5D11 and Zeiss prime lens and reshot the images that I have posted here.

 

Of course it all depends on the type of subject matter, but the dslr will do so much more than the Sony , and give a lot more control. Remember if all you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail.

 

E6Y690.jpg

E6Y6JP.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just got the Sony RX100 mk3 and, so far, I am really impressed with the overall quality of the jpegs! The files are larger than my Nikon D700 and the noise is very low at higher ISO's.  My last point and shoot was the Canon G11 and this Sony is light years ahead of that camera.  I am sure photos would pass fairly easily through the Alamy QC.   Not selling my SLR's just yet but thrilled that I can now shoot, with confidence, stock worthy photos with a pocket size camera.....not a iPhone user so not in Stockimo.  

 

Hope you enjoy the new camera. Let us know how it works out Alamy-wise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Reducing the size of the image to Alamy minimum was not an option because of the subject matter."

 

Bill, I was a little confused by your statement quoted above. Why wouldn't you consider downsizing in this case?

 

Also, I don't think that anyone would expect that the RX100 lens -- or probably any other zoom for that matter -- could compete in the sharpness department with a Zeiss prime.  Perhaps not a fair comparison IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John:

 

My Sony is a great camera for what it does, but not the best for many subjects.

 

I did a downsize test. However the sony image still was not as sharp as it would be if shot with a different camera/lens. I decided to discard the sony file and start over with DSLR equipment that would do the subject justice.

 

The overall flowers image said to me "I need to be very very sharp". I see the potential use for this image as wallpaper, or a cropped image section for packaging. In the close up, the image said "throw that background out of focus". In both cases the Sony could not deliver.

 

The Sony is very seductive because it is lightweight, always in the pocket, and leads to important image discoveries. The Sony is pretty good for some things, but I will still continue my search for the Holy Grail of the everything camera.

 

In my flowers example, I used the Sony to explore the subject matter, like an artists sketchbook. However when I wanted to work up a final image, I took out the DSLR.

 

For me it is not a question of being a fair comparison of Sony verses DSLR, or getting the image through QC. It is a case of photographing that particular subject in the best possible way, using the best tool for the job. The subject matter dictated the choice of tools.

 

I always keep in mind that I am competing against 50 million images at Alamy and a billion images elsewhere, created by the best photographers in the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.