Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Continuing on from the last item on the RX100 Thread.  I also have no problems with edge softness and all submissions have passed so far.

 

Very little CA too - rarely have to make any corrections.  Occasional purple fringing but easy to sort.

 

John

Edited by John Walker
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking of getting a smaller camera, so I will follow this thread.

 

Cheers,

Rob.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn, just replied to this on the old forum, then seen the post about the new forum. Quite nice.

 

My 1st test submissions passed this morning, taken with the RX100. I too was worried about the corner softness, I cropped 2 and left the other 2 which were taken handheld. So as of this morning, corner softness is not really an issue regarding QC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn, just replied to this on the old forum, then seen the post about the new forum. Quite nice.

 

My 1st test submissions passed this morning, taken with the RX100. I too was worried about the corner softness, I cropped 2 and left the other 2 which were taken handheld. So as of this morning, corner softness is not really an issue regarding QC.

 

If you do have one that is marginal on the edges, David Kilpatricks suggestion of reducing image size makes a difference on some. Worth trying perhaps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always take note of David's comments, very useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest colinspics

Thinking of getting one..but really just trying out the forum !!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth I have been processing 16MP APS-C (including Nikon A, Sony 580), 24MP full frame (A99) and Sony RX100 all taken in similar conditions, not all the same subjects of course. Though RX100 does not 'win' (the Coolpix A probably has the best optical and file quality overall) the colour, contrast and general look of the images combines with the extra depth of field to make them often the best shots from a set.

 

If they made this same sensor with either a very slightly better lens, or a simple interchangeable mount like the Nikon 1 system, they would have the best small camera around.

 

David

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now we've actually had some sunny days I've been out with my RX100 more.  Results as already mentioned are excellent.  Just one exception - it seems to get a bit excited with reds in full sun.

 

I'm using it in full auto -   The reds are easy to correct in PSE but I just wondered if I had a basic setting incorrect.

 

Any thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now we've actually had some sunny days I've been out with my RX100 more. Results as already mentioned are excellent. Just one exception - it seems to get a bit excited with reds in full sun.

 

I'm using it in full auto - The reds are easy to correct in PSE but I just wondered if I had a basic setting incorrect.

 

Any thoughts?

Can you operate the RX100 on full auto to a raw file? Many cameras don't.

 

Ken

Edited by Bizair

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Ken

 

Yes, the RX100 operates in full auto in RAW mode.

 

Regards

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth I have been processing 16MP APS-C (including Nikon A, Sony 580), 24MP full frame (A99) and Sony RX100 all taken in similar conditions, not all the same subjects of course. Though RX100 does not 'win' (the Coolpix A probably has the best optical and file quality overall) the colour, contrast and general look of the images combines with the extra depth of field to make them often the best shots from a set.

 

If they made this same sensor with either a very slightly better lens, or a simple interchangeable mount like the Nikon 1 system, they would have the best small camera around.

 

David

Don't know why Sony haven't thought of using this sensor in an interchangeable lens system.  The APS cameras are compact but the lenses are too big.  This sensor would allow a small camera body and much smaller lenses.  The sesors so good, they really don't need to work on that anymore, just make the ideal camera for it.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Continuing on from the last item on the RX100 Thread.  I also have no problems with edge softness and all submissions have passed so far.

 

Very little CA too - rarely have to make any corrections.  Occasional purple fringing but easy to sort.

 

John

I wrote that last post on the previous forum, and although the corners and the edges (on the short side especially) still look soft I do not worry about them so much after David Kilpatrick said he doesn’t worry about them…

 

The RX100 is rather addictive, since getting it at the end of February I have uploaded about 200 images (all passed QC) and more than half taken with the RX100.

 

My DSLR seems to be suffering from the fashionable defect – obesity!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I have now sold my entire DSLR system (and made a profit too as much of it was bought secondhand).

 

My entire Alamy equipment is now two RX100 (one for my wife to use), PSE10 and my PC.  Have put up a few hundred images from the RX100s without failures.  In fact nearly every image taken in reasonable light is up to scratch.  Just a matter of subject and composition to decide which ones to use. 

 

John

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My DSLR (Olympus E5) is now used for anything needing fast focus, macro lens, or when it is raining.  

 

Few enough circumstances to make me doubt whether it is worth keeping.

 

Current "light weight" walk about solution is an Olympus PEN with a 40-150 lens (EFL 80-300) on a neckstrap plus RX100 in my pocket for the nearby...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd just like to share this with you - by accident, after shooting some multi-exposure night scenes (the mode which reduces noise and gets amazingly sharp images at 3200-6400) on April 9th I left my RX100 set to JPEG only instead of RAW+JPEG. Because I have ACR set to open JPEGs by default, I didn't even notice this until checking my camera I spotted a whole batch of images I had failed to copy to my archive. That's because I copy the RAWs only. This morning I processed these missing shots, and now I am in two minds whether just to shoot JPEGs from now on. I could enable DRO+, easily shoot panoramas and more in JPEG mode without messing around.

 

The images mostly needed no adjustment at all. Regardless of ISO setting, they were all up Alamy standard though I chose to reduce some to 2400 x 3600 pixels. Shots included many taken at full aperture f/1.8 and they were just as sharp as any other setting, with enough depth of field.

 

I have obtained a GGS 'LARMOR' glass rear screen protector and replaced the hard plastic type I got initially which had become scratched finely all over. The success rate with the little camera is close to 100%.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David,

 

I shoot RAW+Jpg. I have an archive of the last two months which has the  both RAW and jpg files.  I also have a permanent archive which has RAW files only, except when I accidently shoot jpg only, (not usual but it can happen).  

 

For Alamy, I process the RAW files, but should I ?!

 

Following your post I opened up a newly processed file ready for Alamy and then opened the jpg from the camera.   The one from the camera is definitly better, so I shall use that instead.    This shot was taken in ideal circumstances and of course I will have to work from RAW if much PP is required.

 

Using the jpg could be a big time saver in this nice sunny weather.

 

Many thanks....

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting David and Peter,

 

I too shot some jpegs by mistake but had excellent results.  Thinking it must have been a fluke, I made sure that I've shot in RAW since.

 

Your postings have got me thinking now, so tomorrow with the forecast looking good, I shall switch to RAW and jpeg and do some comparisons.

 

PSE10 is very slow with RAW files so this might make a big difference to procesing times.

 

John

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One point only, DRO+ if set to a moderate value is a real lifesaver for handling the risk of highlight burnout. It only functions with JPEG and I am fairly sure from other Sony models it is disabled when you set RAW+JPEG, but I could be wrong as the RX100 seems to be able to use more modes without turning off RAW than previus models. I will check this out in difficult conditions, and see whether it's as effective is it was on some of the DSLR models. That's without using the HDR mode; I have used this on NEX occasionally, but the RX100 not so far except for extreme art-effect when testing it.

 

David

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David,

 

Not sure what you mean by "DRO+ if set to a moderate value".

 

I have DRO/Auto HDR  (Menu camera/3) set to "DRO Auto"  this appears to work identically oh jpg's shot as "Fine"  or "RAW+J"

 

Is that what you meant?

 

Peter

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. If it is working correctly on the JPEG, the raw file will look different after you open it (but the embedded JPEG preview will look the same as the JPEG). DRO Auto should make exposure compensation less critical - fixing dark shadows and avoiding burned out highlights - in JPEGs. Just checked with a quick test, DRO manual level 5 makes a big difference to an interior shot with bright windows in the JPEG relative to the raw. If you use it with RAW only, the screen will show you a contrast-controlled view, but your raw file will be much darker.

 

So with this camera, DRO is effective on JPEGs and also affects the RAW preview (and presumably passes info to Sony Image Data Converter, which I do not use); it could be very misleading when shooting raw only, to have DRO enabled. But if you shoot raw + JPEG you get two different results, a raw file you can work on, and a pre-processed JPEG which may be better.

 

David

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David,

 

I see what you mean.

 

 I made four exposures:

  1. RAW+J  DRO at+5
  2. FINE J  DRO at+5
  3. FINE J   DRO off
  4. RAW+J DRO off

For (1) and (2) the jpgs were similar with the dark areas well lit up

For (3) and (4) the jpgs were similar with the dark areas very dark

For (1) and (4) the RAW files (DNG) were differentin LR4. 

 

In (4) the dark areas were darker than in (1) but not as much as they were in the jpg versions.

 

Conclusion seems to be that I should continue to shoot RAW+J and leave DRO at +5.   This has a visible but minor effect on the RAW files, but a significant benefit to the jpgs in high contrast situations.

 

What I have not investigated yet is whether setting DRO at +5 will have any detrimental effect on jpgs in a low contrast situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My husband has been looking to replace his P&S and this post caught my eye.  While he has a "good eye", he is not very interested in the technicalities and would probably never shoot RAW.  How does the Sony compare to the equivalent Canon, Fuji etc etc?   

 

Sheila

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sheila,

 

As we were discussing earlier in this thread, the jpgs are very good, 

 

I think it is also correct to say that the RX100 is the only small zoom lens P&S to appear on Alamy's recommended camera list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I spent yesterday around Ramsgate and the village of Wingham taking around 100 images with my RX100 set on full auto.  The weather was good with plenty of blue sky and white clouds. 

 

The amazing thing is that there isn't one image that isn't good enough quality wise for Alamy.  Exposure and focus spot on.  It's just a matter of picking through and deciding which shots to use.

 

It's changed my whole outlook on photography.  No worrying about the technical side - no heavy and cumbersome DSLR to hinder me - just concentrate on the image.

 

John

Edited by John Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And, John, hopefully no spots in the skies to find :-) I could do saleable work for Alamy with just the RX100 and a netbook, anything able to plug in USB and get the files. All keywording etc can after all be done after submitting. I do like to keep my local archive complete though, so I don't do that now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • 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.