HDS Systems        
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 31

Thread: Sony RX100

  1. #1
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,272

    Default Sony RX100

    I am NOT a photographer/photography buff, but am looking for a camera that offers a little more than your basic point and shoot. I would like to be able to "play" a bit with aperture settings and shutter speeds

    One other, very important criteria–the camera needs to be small. Oh, and preferably less than $500. The Sony RX100 (I, II, III) and a few other Sony models seem to fit the bill, but are there other cameras to look at? IIRC, I read somewhere that Canon offers a similar (better?) camera.

    Thanks in advance for any advice, opinions, knowledge and/or experience with the RX100 or similar cameras.
    Having a right and doing what's right is not always the same.

  2. #2
    Flashaholic* SCEMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Crimeafornia
    Posts
    1,239

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    I bought a mint RX100 for my med cruise vacation last summer to pair with my Pany FZ200. After reading the forums for best settings and some testing I settled upon the best config for my needs. My research was well rewarded and the RX100 produced some great images. The RX100's size allowed it to travel everywhere in my pant pockets. There is a steep learning curve to get the very best results however.
    Last edited by SCEMan; 10-01-2015 at 09:31 PM.

  3. #3
    *Flashaholic* StarHalo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    California Republic
    Posts
    10,363

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Couldn't be happier with my RX100; a $3000 DSLR would not be able to keep up with this camera when shooting kids and near-field sports/action. Be aware that most of your money for this camera is going towards some serious pro features, so unless you plan on upping your photography game (I know of a very good book), you could go cheaper for simpler.

  4. #4
    Flashaholic* monkeyboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,326

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Quote Originally Posted by StarHalo View Post
    a $3000 DSLR would not be able to keep up with this camera when shooting kids and near-field sports/action.
    Sorry, but that's just not true. I also own the RX100 (mkI) and the AF is the weak point of this camera. It can't even come close to the cheapest DSLR in terms of AF performance. It's still a very good camera though, for other purposes but not for sports.
    Last edited by monkeyboy; 10-02-2015 at 08:31 AM.

  5. #5
    Flashaholic* SCEMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Crimeafornia
    Posts
    1,239

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Quote Originally Posted by monkeyboy View Post
    Sorry, but that's just not true. I also own the RX100 (mkI) and the AF is the weak point of this camera. It can't even come close to the cheapest DSLR in terms of AF performance. It's still a very good camera though, for other purposes but not for sports.
    Very true. Although I refer to the RX100 as my "pocket DSLR", it excels at low light and indoor scenes due to its fast lens. However this also makes accurate AF problematic when shooting fast action "wide open".

  6. #6
    *Flashaholic* StarHalo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    California Republic
    Posts
    10,363

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Quote Originally Posted by monkeyboy View Post
    Sorry, but that's just not true. I also own the RX100 (mkI) and the AF is the weak point of this camera. It can't even come close to the cheapest DSLR in terms of AF performance. It's still a very good camera though, for other purposes but not for sports.
    Indoors in low light maybe; once it has lock, hold down the button for 10fps for up to half a minute before it slows. You have several hundred images to choose from, DSLR guy got maybe a couple dozen..

  7. #7
    Flashaholic* monkeyboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,326

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Quote Originally Posted by StarHalo View Post
    Indoors in low light maybe; once it has lock, hold down the button for 10fps for up to half a minute before it slows. You have several hundred images to choose from, DSLR guy got maybe a couple dozen..
    You'll have several hundred images to chose from and every single one of them will be out of focus.

    The Sony A6000 is a camera that can also do very high FPS but can also track AF much better than the RX100, but even that can't beat a cheap DSLR for sports according to Tony Northrup (The author of your book).

  8. #8
    Flashaholic* Overclocker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    1,587

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    RX100 is nice and compact. sensor size is 1-inch so is a lot better tha point and shoots but is still quite small even compared to micro-4/3 or aps-c. that's a 2.7 crop factor same as nikon 1 cameras, needless to say won't give you tons of bokeh

    take note the max aperture f/1.8 only happens when you're zoomed all the way out

    no lens interchangeability

    no IR remotes

  9. #9
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,272

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Thank you for all of the replies. Some of it is way over my head. Any comments on the pros/cons of the different "generations" of the RX 100 (orig. II, III and even IV)? The IV is way over my price limit...but could it really be worth the extra cost?

    by Overclocker: "take note the max aperture f/1.8 only happens when you're zoomed all the way out" Yes, this is one of the things I noticed about these cameras--the max aperture settings are so/too low. I think my old SLR camera from many years ago, had a standard lens with max f16.

    Lens interchangeability and IR remotes aren't features I'm looking for (at least right now). I was originally looking for a a really small, inexpensive camera to always carry around, but started re-thinking upon noting the "limitations" of those cameras...
    Having a right and doing what's right is not always the same.

  10. #10
    *Flashaholic* StarHalo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    California Republic
    Posts
    10,363

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Quote Originally Posted by flashfan View Post
    Any comments on the pros/cons of the different "generations" of the RX 100 (orig. II, III and even IV)? The IV is way over my price limit...but could it really be worth the extra cost?

    by Overclocker: "take note the max aperture f/1.8 only happens when you're zoomed all the way out"
    My only experience is with the III and IV; I prefer the III as it gets better battery life, but the IV does 4K video if that's your thing. Expect to pay ~$800 as everyone knows what it's worth (but this is still cheaper than a new interchangeable lens camera kit.)

    Lower aperture number is "better", check out that book above if you want to read up on it.

  11. #11
    Flashaholic* SCEMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Crimeafornia
    Posts
    1,239

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Quote Originally Posted by flashfan View Post
    Thank you for all of the replies. Some of it is way over my head. Any comments on the pros/cons of the different "generations" of the RX 100 (orig. II, III and even IV)? The IV is way over my price limit...but could it really be worth the extra cost?

    by Overclocker: "take note the max aperture f/1.8 only happens when you're zoomed all the way out" Yes, this is one of the things I noticed about these cameras--the max aperture settings are so/too low. I think my old SLR camera from many years ago, had a standard lens with max f16.

    Lens interchangeability and IR remotes aren't features I'm looking for (at least right now). I was originally looking for a a really small, inexpensive camera to always carry around, but started re-thinking upon noting the "limitations" of those cameras...
    I don't believe you'll find any cameras the size of the RX100 with an f1.8 aperture at anything other than WA. Or IR remotes or interchangeable lenses either. I certainly wouldn't want to deal with the dust issues of interchangeable lenses on a pocket camera. The RX100 is a worthwhile upgrade from the ever improving smartphone cameras and allows (with simple mods) the ability to easily add filters if desired. I've captured many nice shots using a C-PL.

  12. #12
    Flashaholic* Overclocker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    1,587

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Quote Originally Posted by SCEMan View Post
    I don't believe you'll find any cameras the size of the RX100 with an f1.8 aperture at anything other than WA. Or IR remotes or interchangeable lenses either. I certainly wouldn't want to deal with the dust issues of interchangeable lenses on a pocket camera. The RX100 is a worthwhile upgrade from the ever improving smartphone cameras and allows (with simple mods) the ability to easily add filters if desired. I've captured many nice shots using a C-PL.

    well we don't know if the OP really needs the cam to be rx100-small. personally i travel w/ nikon j1. definitely not as small as rx100 but it's small enough for me. has IR remote (extremely useful). uses nikon 1 lenses. i got the 50mm equiv f/1.8 prime lens which i use 90% of the time

    but if there's a way for a remote shutter release on the rx100 using smartphone app then i might consider it

  13. #13
    Flashaholic* SCEMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Crimeafornia
    Posts
    1,239

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Quote Originally Posted by Overclocker View Post
    well we don't know if the OP really needs the cam to be rx100-small.
    Good point. But he didn't mention a desire for lens interchangeability or IR remotes either.

  14. #14
    *Flashaholic* StarHalo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    California Republic
    Posts
    10,363

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Quote Originally Posted by Overclocker View Post
    but if there's a way for a remote shutter release on the rx100 using smartphone app then i might consider it
    Yes, the RX100 has a phone app that shows you the live view on your phone, allows you to tap to change the major parameters of the mode you're in (ISO/aperture/shutter/exposure/etc,) I've played with it a few times, it's certainly better than your basic garage door clicker remote. Another app allows you to fire the shutter by waving your hand by the back of the camera, haven't tried that one yet.

  15. #15
    Flashaholic* Overclocker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    1,587

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Quote Originally Posted by SCEMan View Post
    Good point. But he didn't mention a desire for lens interchangeability or IR remotes either.
    yep. but now he might be! LOL. he said: "I was originally looking for a a really small, inexpensive camera to always carry around, but started re-thinking upon noting the "limitations" of those cameras..."

    to me that sounds like a phone camera. back when phones cams weren't good enough i carried this casio S600 literally everywhere. but now the integrated cams are good enough


  16. #16
    *Flashaholic* StarHalo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    California Republic
    Posts
    10,363

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Quote Originally Posted by Overclocker View Post
    "I was originally looking for a a really small, inexpensive camera to always carry around, but started re-thinking upon noting the "limitations" of those cameras..."

    to me that sounds like a phone camera.
    There's some validity to that; it's been estimated before that your typical film SLR camera with store-shelf Kodachrome film was good for an equivalent 6 megapixels of detail. The 8 megapixels of the iPhone camera can in some ways compare to that in some situations, and you can even download free apps that allow you to do manual settings (what there is to control, there's no aperture to adjust for example.) The camera phone is definitely the best deal going for anyone who wants full-auto point-and-click photography, but once you start getting concerned about "limitations", it's time to invest in something more serious.

    For almost 20 years now when I've gone shopping for a camera, my criteria is to get as close to the professional SLR feature set as possible in a compact format; the Sony RX was the natural choice this time around, and it's really paid off, this camera has actually made me a better photographer..

  17. #17
    *Flashaholic* StarHalo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    California Republic
    Posts
    10,363

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Still getting great results from mine..

  18. #18
    Flashaholic* SCEMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Crimeafornia
    Posts
    1,239

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Although impressive for a phone, my iPhone 6 can't replicate this RX100 shot:

    Last edited by SCEMan; 10-13-2015 at 10:48 AM.

  19. #19
    Flashaholic* Overclocker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    1,587

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Quote Originally Posted by StarHalo View Post
    Yes, the RX100 has a phone app that shows you the live view on your phone, allows you to tap to change the major parameters of the mode you're in (ISO/aperture/shutter/exposure/etc,) I've played with it a few times, it's certainly better than your basic garage door clicker remote. Another app allows you to fire the shutter by waving your hand by the back of the camera, haven't tried that one yet.

    nice. i'm just a little concerned about the speed and convenience of the whole process

    with a simple IR remote you just set the cam then you press the remote. quick and easy. no need to take out your phone, load the app, establish connection w/ the camera, fiddle w/ the settings, etc

  20. #20
    *Flashaholic* StarHalo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    California Republic
    Posts
    10,363

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    That's true, it's obviously not going to be as fast as a simple button remote, but it's also not an extra thing you have to carry. My leather cover case over my shoulder is the entire camera setup, and I'll have the phone in another pocket; I'll transfer a good image to the phone, process it in Pixelmator, then mail it, post it here, etc. No wires, no "docking", no waiting until I'm at a PC, it's a complete self-contained studio. The picture linked in post #17 was shot, processed, then posted here in a few minutes using this system.

    Don't forget creative uses for the remote; put the camera in a safe place in a room with kids, or outdoors with wildlife, then go elsewhere and have a seat, relax, watch the action and snap at your leisure..
    Last edited by StarHalo; 10-13-2015 at 12:33 AM.

  21. #21
    Flashaholic* mattheww50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    SW Pennsylvania
    Posts
    1,049

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Quote Originally Posted by StarHalo View Post
    There's some validity to that; it's been estimated before that your typical film SLR camera with store-shelf Kodachrome film was good for an equivalent 6 megapixels of detail. The 8 megapixels of the iPhone camera can in some ways compare to that in some situations, and you can even download free apps that allow you to do manual settings (what there is to control, there's no aperture to adjust for example.) The camera phone is definitely the best deal going for anyone who wants full-auto point-and-click photography, but once you start getting concerned about "limitations", it's time to invest in something more serious.

    For almost 20 years now when I've gone shopping for a camera, my criteria is to get as close to the professional SLR feature set as possible in a compact format; the Sony RX was the natural choice this time around, and it's really paid off, this camera has actually made me a better photographer..
    In my experience from digitizing almost 10,000 Kodachrome® 35mm slides, I think the resolution is a little better than 6 megapixels, but not much. Definitely less than 8 megapixels. That's the point at which the pixel size pretty much matches up to the grain size in Kodachrome I/II/25. While 8 megapixels in the Iphone® sounds great, the reality is the optical system limits the useful resolution to something considerably less than 8 megapixels. You can calculate the Dawes diffraction limit from the diameter of the lens, and because of physical constraints on the size of image sensor and the size of the optical system, it is very difficult to get the resolution above about 5 megapixels. The Pixel size is smaller than the diffraction limit, so you end up resolution considerably smaller that the number of pixels would indicate. By contrast the Sony RX100 has a very large sensor for a point and shoot , and in fact the pixel size in the sensor is about 3 times the area of a pixel the typical phone and low to mid range point in shoot camera. You can apply the Dawes diffraction limit to the Sony's optical system, and it really can delivery a 20 megapixel image in many circumstances. the larger sensor also tends to improve the signal to noise ratio in the images, which has a profound effect in very low light situations. The difference is further impacted by the relatively high powered DSP in the Sony that among other things is able to correct for certain types of optical aberrations in the optical system.

    It is kind of like the difference between the GPS chip in many smart phones (it works, but you don't need, and aren't likely to get 2-3 meter accuracy), and a dedicated GPS device which with WAAS often can achieve 2-3 meter accuracy.

  22. #22

    Post Re: Sony RX100

    DxO Mark measures an average sharpness of 6Mpix for RX100 II lens across the whole zoom range, which (I believe?) should be decent for this kind of camera.

    http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Sony/S...-RX100-II-Lens
    http://www.dxomark.com/About/Lens-scores/Metric-Scores
    In God we trust, all others bring data.

  23. #23
    Enlightened
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    23

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    I think the Sony A6000 or A5000 would be good. It is compact and has interchangeable lenses.
    HL3 | S30 | i3S EOS | SR52UT | FD40

  24. #24
    *Flashaholic* StarHalo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    California Republic
    Posts
    10,363

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Quote Originally Posted by Lumiture View Post
    I think the Sony A6000 or A5000 would be good. It is compact and has interchangeable lenses.
    Totally dig the interchangeable lens systems, with the caveat that mass and price at least double. I'd kill for a Nikon 1 J5 with the universally lauded 32mm f/1.2 lens, but that's a single focal length camera for $1500. Add another lens, now the price continues skyward, you need a way to carry more than one lens, etc.

  25. #25
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Blue Ridge Mountains, VA
    Posts
    2,362

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Quote Originally Posted by mattheww50 View Post
    In my experience from digitizing almost 10,000 Kodachrome® 35mm slides, I think the resolution is a little better than 6 megapixels, but not much. Definitely less than 8 megapixels. That's the point at which the pixel size pretty much matches up to the grain size in Kodachrome I/II/25. While 8 megapixels in the Iphone® sounds great, the reality is the optical system limits the useful resolution to something considerably less than 8 megapixels. You can calculate the Dawes diffraction limit from the diameter of the lens, and because of physical constraints on the size of image sensor and the size of the optical system, it is very difficult to get the resolution above about 5 megapixels. The Pixel size is smaller than the diffraction limit, so you end up resolution considerably smaller that the number of pixels would indicate. By contrast the Sony RX100 has a very large sensor for a point and shoot , and in fact the pixel size in the sensor is about 3 times the area of a pixel the typical phone and low to mid range point in shoot camera. You can apply the Dawes diffraction limit to the Sony's optical system, and it really can delivery a 20 megapixel image in many circumstances. .
    If you scan film that has a fine grain structure like Fuji Velvia at a rate of 300 DPI or better you can get an image better than most pro DSLR cameras made today.

    We're attempting to equate lines per millimeter that is discernible with pixels, Not and Apples Apples comparison.

    Like you, I had tens of thousands of slides that I needed to do something with. My old Leaf 45 scanner was too slow for bulk 35mm scans. I ended up finding a Nikon scanner that has an automated strip film feature. Something to think about if you have a large number of slides or negatives to scan. OBTH, don't bother with a flat bed scanner unless you want it for line art, besides being slow, they frequently show rasterizing of the image.

    My new iPhone 6s does well compared to the older cell phone cameras. I you need to use the flash though, it's slow to lok on and it holds the led light for a couple of seconds before the exposure happens.

  26. #26
    *Flashaholic* StarHalo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    California Republic
    Posts
    10,363

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Quote Originally Posted by NoNotAgain View Post
    If you scan film that has a fine grain structure like Fuji Velvia at a rate of 300 DPI or better you can get an image better than most pro DSLR cameras made today.
    Bear in mind a pro full-frame camera is now 40-50 megapixels..

    Other news: The Sony RX100 at the pet shop; shooting through the glass, no flash or tripod, .jpg image with no processing - zoom on in there, plenty of detail:


  27. #27
    Flashaholic*
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Blue Ridge Mountains, VA
    Posts
    2,362

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Quote Originally Posted by StarHalo View Post
    Bear in mind a pro full-frame camera is now 40-50 megapixels..

    Other news: The Sony RX100 at the pet shop; shooting through the glass, no flash or tripod, .jpg image with no processing - zoom on in there, plenty of detail:
    Nice picture.

    Canon offers two different 50 MP cameras. Until you get to the medium format camera/backs, there aren't any higher pixel available.

    The Nikon D810 I've got is 36 MP, along with a couple of DX format D3200's (24 MP). Depending on what I'm shooting, I may shoot in RAW or a mix of RAW and jpeg. Cheaper cameras typically don't give you the option of recording both at the same time.

    The digital back for my studio camera is 40MP but needs to be connected to a computer and is only suitable for still life work due to using a raster scan for the three colors.

    There are times that a compact camera is neat to have. For me, if I go to an airshow, i need the high frame rate, fast auto-focus. I get vendor VIP tickets and in return they usually want to have a usable image for showing their management what sponsorship is paying for.

  28. #28
    *Flashaholic* StarHalo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    California Republic
    Posts
    10,363

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Gotta have telephoto for the air show. The D810 sat on my wish list until the a7R II came out, one of these days..

  29. #29
    *Flashaholic* StarHalo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    California Republic
    Posts
    10,363

    Default Re: Sony RX100


  30. #30
    *Flashaholic* StarHalo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    California Republic
    Posts
    10,363

    Default Re: Sony RX100

    Playing with exposure bracketing/HDR with the Sony RX100; the key to photographing Christmas lights is to do it at that moment of sundown when the lights are just on but the environment is still visible. But if you've got a good camera, you can get the same results in the dead of night - this pic isn't much to look at composition-wise, but note that you can see individual colors of light spilling out from the string, the exposure is low enough that nothing is washed out to white, yet everything in the setting is plainly visible, and you can still see the stars in the sky. No noise, no gradients, just a clean picture like any other day, even though it's night. That this comes out of a sub-$1,000 camera the size of a deck of cards just doesn't even fit in my head..


Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •