Richard Coombs Posted August 25, 2013 Share Posted August 25, 2013 My quest for lighter and more compact cameras has brought me to the Sony NEX's and Fuji X series cameras, all of which I am happy with, despite my occasional complaining of the Fuji X Trans sensor, which for most of my stuff is actually ok. A lot of my decisions are based on members findings and recommendations on this forum, which I find very useful. Based on what I have read around here about the RX100, I took a flyer and bought the Sony RX100 II. Nice little camera, fits in my trouser pocket, helps me blend in with the tourists and does not draw attention. Never likely to be my main camera, but it certainly ticks some boxes. Now, are you guys seriously telling me that the files this thing produces go through QC? Ok, its not the original RX100 that has been discussed in other threads, but as far as I can see, it is the same camera, except for a couple of tweaks. Tilt screen, hot shoe, and supposedly an upgraded sensor with better high ISO performance, not that I use high ISO, or very rarely anyway. I'm going to take it back to the shop. It could be a duff one, but I doubt it. There is no way I would send files from this thing to any of my clients, or indeed, Alamy QC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted August 25, 2013 Share Posted August 25, 2013 I haven't tried either of these cameras, but I think that David Kilpatrick mentioned in another thread that images from the RX100 II might not be as good as those from the original RX100. Sony is odd this way. For instance, their DSLRs can be very inconsistent. Sometimes the newer ones have poorer image quality than the ones they replace. However, I suppose this sometimes happens with other camera manufacturers as well. In the long run, it seems that it's often more about marketing than anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Kilpatrick Posted August 26, 2013 Share Posted August 26, 2013 I have the RX100M2 here. OK, it's got some neat and wonderful improvements, but those do not include image quality as far as I can see so far. First of all, it's giving exposures which are between two and three times more than the original camera for the same nominal ISO setting (which rather screws up all considerations of improved noise levels) and secondly, it's slightly softer overall and the lens on my test sample is squiffy towards the entire right-hand end of the image. I'm probably sticking with my Mk I which has produced many QC viable pictures equal in quality, objectively, to any decent DSLR with a comparable zoom lens. I have two or three more days of testing to decide if I am mistaken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCat Posted August 26, 2013 Share Posted August 26, 2013 Mk? Paulette Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReeRay Posted August 26, 2013 Share Posted August 26, 2013 Mk? Paulette Mark 1 version as opposed to the Mark 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gervais Montacute Posted August 26, 2013 Share Posted August 26, 2013 I have the RX100M2 here. OK, it's got some neat and wonderful improvements, but those do not include image quality as far as I can see so far. First of all, it's giving exposures which are between two and three times more than the original camera for the same nominal ISO setting (which rather screws up all considerations of improved noise levels) and secondly, it's slightly softer overall and the lens on my test sample is squiffy towards the entire right-hand end of the image. I'm probably sticking with my Mk I which has produced many QC viable pictures equal in quality, objectively, to any decent DSLR with a comparable zoom lens. I have two or three more days of testing to decide if I am mistaken. That's a bit worrying and slightly disappointing. I was going to get the Mk II as my carry round camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Coombs Posted August 26, 2013 Author Share Posted August 26, 2013 Interesting observation David. I cant say whether my version has a soft bias right or left with what I have done, but for sure, it is excessively soft toward the outsides of the frame. That said, it seems pretty good at maximum aperture at the wide end. I would like to try the original RX as a comparison, but probably wont get the opportunity. I reckon, looking at the results from the II, I would be in for an SOLD award from QC, so I'm going to bale out of this one for the moment and stick with good old APS-C. From what people are saying, the original version would seem to be somewhat better. Strange, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might be an advantage with an updated version, not so in this case it would seem. It would be nice to hear from anyone who has tried the II. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Jordan Posted August 29, 2013 Share Posted August 29, 2013 I have the RX100M2 here. OK, it's got some neat and wonderful improvements, but those do not include image quality as far as I can see so far. First of all, it's giving exposures which are between two and three times more than the original camera for the same nominal ISO setting (which rather screws up all considerations of improved noise levels) and secondly, it's slightly softer overall and the lens on my test sample is squiffy towards the entire right-hand end of the image. I'm probably sticking with my Mk I which has produced many QC viable pictures equal in quality, objectively, to any decent DSLR with a comparable zoom lens. I have two or three more days of testing to decide if I am mistaken. David, What you describe about the lens "squiffy towards the entire right-hand end of the image" is exactly what I had with my RX100 Mk 1. As we discussed elsewhere, Sony fixed this under warranty ( leaving it just slightly squiffy all round). I thought mine was a rare exception so interesting that you have the same problem with the Mk2. What is Sony QC dept. up to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Betty LaRue Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 Click on my image #, and most of the images you see on the first page and next are from the RX100, with the exception of a few, like the restaurants. I find this camera extremely sharp and absolutely love it. Forget about the new version and get the 100. Look at the images shot inside of a doctor's office. I sat in a corner while my sister's eyes were being examined, and put the camera on auto. No flash. Auto ISO, I think the upper limit was set on 800 ISO. There is no way I could have lugged my big DSLR around, getting shots like this, without attracting undue attention. Any noise looked like film grain, not color noise. Very pleasing. I have not had an image rejected from this camera. It's amazing. I'm also shooting with a Nikon D800, so I know what a good image looks like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Walker Posted August 31, 2013 Share Posted August 31, 2013 I agree with Betty LaRue Look at the first 6 pages of my portfolio (set at 120 per page) - all but a couple of older images were taken with my 2 RX100s set on full auto. To me it's the ultimate pocket p&s stock camera. It's disappointing to read David's comment about the MK2 IQ - the fold out screen was a very tempting addition. Will be interesting to hear of any updates on this issue. JW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gervais Montacute Posted September 1, 2013 Share Posted September 1, 2013 I was hoping David would come through with his final results on the RX100 MkII by now. The images on your page John look very sharp with the RX100 Mk I. Perhaps that's the way I will have to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Coombs Posted September 1, 2013 Author Share Posted September 1, 2013 I got a full refund on the II. From what people are saying about the original RX100 I might be tempted to try it later on. We tried another II that was in stock at the shop and the result was the same unfortunately. For reasons best known to themselves, Sony would appear to have cocked up what was otherwise a good model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trevor Chriss Posted September 1, 2013 Share Posted September 1, 2013 Have just had accepted my first images from the Mk1, purchase about 10 days ago. Corners leave a bit to be desired but downsized them a little, passed QC no problem. I'm happy, which is rare ask my wife! This was only meant to be an additional camera, no plans to sell my D700. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Walker Posted September 1, 2013 Share Posted September 1, 2013 Found this in-depth review on the MK2. I don't know anything about the reviewers so no idea how accurate or reliable the review is. They do seem to rate the camera and the new features highly. http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/sony_cybershot_dsc_rx100_ii_review/ John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Coombs Posted September 1, 2013 Author Share Posted September 1, 2013 Interesting review John. I think from a point and shoot perspective its probably very acceptable. From a serious Alamy standard camera, it falls way short. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisa Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 I just looked and my last ten sales were all taken with my SONY RX-100 instead of my neck breaking Canon (nicknamed 'Big Boy'). A couple of decent sales too, $200 two weeks ago and one today for $165. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Coombs Posted September 2, 2013 Author Share Posted September 2, 2013 Lisa, thats both interesting and encouraging. Your post might make me look at the RX100 (original version) Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ann Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 Lisa, if SONY RX-100's small size helped you capture your photos, especially after earliest page, that's a definite plus - strikes me mainly as a good example of how a photographer who gets to STRONG (news) situations, and uses STRONG skills to effectively capture the scenes, can make STRONG sales - even when using a basically adequate camera. I just looked and my last ten sales were all taken with my SONY RX-100 instead of my neck breaking Canon (nicknamed 'Big Boy'). A couple of decent sales too, $200 two weeks ago and one today for $165. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Kilpatrick Posted September 2, 2013 Share Posted September 2, 2013 I've had plenty of time with the RX100II and my conclusion is that sample variations are mostly responsible for opinions on the camera. It definitely works better in low light but due to the way its exposure metering has been changed from Mk 1, the actual gain is between 1/3 and 2/3 stop (as you would expect from the change to back-illuminated CMOS). The additional softness is also just what would be expected from large sensel wells, and not significant (it reduces colour moiré more than it does sharpness); the lens on my II mainly suffered from a soft right hand side at wide-angle only, and is actually much better than my Mk1 at the tele end (in fact, so good at the tele end I would prefer it any day over a Canon 24-105mm L used at f/8 on a 6D at 105mm). So - I have a Mk1, I'm happy, I work mainly at wide-angle, mine's fine. I would not buy a MkII unless I wanted to use the iPhone remote viewing and control, and for that reason, I am considering it. I could sell my 7 inch monitor and HDMI cables and all that stuff, and just use my iPad and a MkII. You can even zoom the lens wirelessly while viewing the image and shooting, from a camera over 10 metres away (e.g. on a pole). So some thought is needed, but I like both these cameras enough to consider even owning two. Sounds pointless and might indeed be. The WiFi is FAR easier to use than the 6D and it really works fast and easily on iPad or iPhone. You could shoot and send pix from a demonstration for example using a 15-20ft pole (about the longest it's easy to handle). Gary Friedman sent me a brillliant joke shot of himself using this rig to er, look though an upstairs bathroom window... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gervais Montacute Posted September 3, 2013 Share Posted September 3, 2013 Thanks David for the précis. So..... What I sort of gather is the Mk II is going to be OK for shooting just about most things stock wise? Especially tele photos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Green Posted September 4, 2013 Share Posted September 4, 2013 Hi DWI have the old model for sale new on eBay or their home page for $565 AU. They also have the MK11 for sale at $805 AU. I got all my gear from them. I tend to leave the Nikon 800E and all its lenses purchased this year at home. The RX100 MK1 camera is just so convenient for a 70 year old retired man. I do still use the Nikon at home in a studio situation. I look upon the Nikon now as like my previously owned large and medium format cameras and treat it with the same shooting techniques. Not good news about the MK11 model, I was going to get one for my partner maybe time to wait for the MK111 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gervais Montacute Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 I am going into my local city centre today to look at one for the first time. Lots of helpful, albeit slightly conflicting reports so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Kilpatrick Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 It should not be soft. You must have something seriously wrong. Also, noise should not be present at all at 160. That's not possible to explain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Betty LaRue Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 I'm very happy with my RX1, so I'll stick with that. Apparently there are a few more unreliable copies with the RXII. Also apparently, if one gets a good copy it is worth having. I'll wait around and see if Sony comes out with a new one eventually, RXIII, and then, if the reviews are great, I may give the One up for a new version. I'll be shooting my RXI in St. Croix, US Virgin Islands before long, and am eager to see how it does with beaches and palm trees. Of course, my trusty D800 will be the main. But after a day of shooting with it, and when my sis and I are wandering about the island and going out shopping and to dine, the little RXI will be the camera with me. I can really understand why so many Photographers are going small. I would wager that most of the photographers contributing here are middle-aged or more, and most of us in that age bracket put up with some aches and pains. It is so enjoyable to have something that weighs almost nothing with me, and having the knowledge that I won't see a photo op but....OOOPS, shoot, darn and curses, I didn't lug the big one along and didn't have a little one! The best camera is always the one you have with you. Although I must admit when in Bar Harbor, Maine, hubby and I went out to eat seafood. I didn't bring my Nikon, but had a G9 with me. As we ate, looking out over the water and moored boats with dark blue threatening clouds hanging over, the setting sun broke underneath the clouds from behind and lit up the white boats. Spectacular! There was still that dark and dramatic sky, but everything below lit beautifully. My G9 gave me soft and mostly unusable images. I nearly cried. Sometimes something miraculous happens, and we have a short window of time. Minutes, sometimes seconds, to come away with something special. I had that opportunity, but my camera was not up to the job. Or, who knows, I may have been so excited I had camera shake! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Rees Posted October 3, 2013 Share Posted October 3, 2013 I've enjoyed the RX100 but don't think I'll bother with the new version. I'm more interested in seeing if Panasonic can get their bigger sensor in a similar sized body, if this rumour is true http://www.43rumors.com/gm1-with-full-electronic-shutter/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.