Sony RX100

I finally got the RX100M2. My first impression was that the colours were rather mute. But I realize that it is a very advanced and great camera; perhaps with more potential than I will ever be able to exploit, at least in the short term.

The one time I tried the video, I found there were some external noises recorded. I wonder whether it is from the zooming.

Checking online, I realized that there is a firmware update, v. 1.10 which is supposed to reduce lens buzzing. Does anyone have any experience with it? Do you recommend that I update the firmware? Would the guarantee cover it if anything went wrong? I realize that there is a risk. I also learned that there is no way back to the old version once I update. I wonder if there might also be unwelcome differences from the original firmware. I would appreciate any feedback from anyone who has run the update.
 
well... I have updated 100s of cameras motherboards graphics cards etc over the years as long as you follow the instructions and make sure the battery is well charged it is a non issue nowadays
 
PhotographyBuff said:
I finally got the RX100M2. My first impression was that the colours were rather mute. But I realize that it is a very advanced and great camera; perhaps with more potential than I will ever be able to exploit, at least in the short term.

The one time I tried the video, I found there were some external noises recorded. I wonder whether it is from the zooming.

Checking online, I realized that there is a firmware update, v. 1.10 which is supposed to reduce lens buzzing. Does anyone have any experience with it? Do you recommend that I update the firmware? Would the guarantee cover it if anything went wrong? I realize that there is a risk. I also learned that there is no way back to the old version once I update. I wonder if there might also be unwelcome differences from the original firmware. I would appreciate any feedback from anyone who has run the update.
Click to expand...
Are you Shooting raw of JPEGs? Not noticed mute clouts I have to say, but if you're shooting raw they obviously will need processing.
 
As some know I bought a used RX100 Mark III last week, but I think it's got a small issue. I noticed that the odd shot was softer than I thought it should be so I did some tests shooting a brick wall. Every 6-8 shots or so was soft compared to the rest tested through a range of apertures from f2.8 to f5.6. Shutter speed was at 1/250 to avoid any possible camera shake, focal length was 24mm equivalent. Softness was throughout the frame, although obviously magnified towards the edges. After I'd reviewed the images I started to question what the problem could be, and wondered if it was steadyshot as I have noticed that I can't handhold shots below 1/40 which I found odd as on my EM5-II I can handhold at 80mm equivalent at 1s, yes 1s ;) So I tested again without steadyshot and the issue appears to improve considerably. Only under the the highest of scrutiny is the odd shot ever so slightly soft, so much so that it's a none issue as far as I'm concerned. So it does appear that steadyshot is causing the issue (although of course this still can't be confirmed) but I was wondering if anyone has had a similar issue.

Here's the 1:1 crops, although I'm not sure how much use this will be as this forum doesn't seem to like images linked from photobucket for some reason and makes all shots look soft.
Notice how the shots at f5.6 are underexposed by 0.7ev too despite the camera being on auto ISO.

F2.8 sharp then soft
f2.8%20sharp_zpsidesysrm.png

f2.8%20soft_zps4o4jg12k.png


f5.6 sharp then soft
f5.6%20sharp_zpsqgeesfbe.png

f5.6%20soft_zpscsewnugj.png
 
Last edited:
Strange, I can hand hold at 1/10 without much issue? That said, it's easy to induce camera shake due to its small form.
 
odd jim said:
Strange, I can hand hold at 1/10 without much issue? That said, it's easy to induce camera shake due to its small form.
Click to expand...
Thanks. Wondering if it might've been a software glitch as since I've been switching steadyshot on/off it appears to be more consistent. Without steady shot I can HH at 24mm at 1/3 and 70mm at 1/30 consistently, and then with SS on I can now HH at 24mm at 1s (4/5 shots) and 70mm at 1/10. Much more like I expected. I'll keep an eye on it, as I said hopefully just a software glitch.
 
odd jim said:
Are you Shooting raw of JPEGs? Not noticed mute clouts I have to say, but if you're shooting raw they obviously will need processing.
Click to expand...

I am shooting JPEGs. I like the colours of my 10 times cheaper Panasonic Lumix FH4 more. And it seems that the dynamic range is poor. Any areas of sunlight seem to be easily overexposed.

Does anyone know some settings that will ensure good colours and good exposure? There are settings under creative style. And saturation, contrast, and sharpness have a range of +3 to -3. Which combination would be the best for JPEGs?
 
owenb said:
well... I have updated 100s of cameras motherboards graphics cards etc over the years as long as you follow the instructions and make sure the battery is well charged it is a non issue nowadays
Click to expand...

On the firmware page, they don't mention Windows XP among the supported OS-s. I have Windows XP. I downloaded it and the updater seems to work. Should I still beware of updating it on my PC?
 
PhotographyBuff said:
I am shooting JPEGs. I like the colours of my 10 times cheaper Panasonic Lumix FH4 more. And it seems that the dynamic range is poor. Any areas of sunlight seem to be easily overexposed.

Does anyone know some settings that will ensure good colours and good exposure? There are settings under creative style. And saturation, contrast, and sharpness have a range of +3 to -3. Which combination would be the best for JPEGs?
Click to expand...
The dynamic range is very good on the RX100, better than some FF bodies if you trust DXO. There's certainly nothing wrong in that area.

The RX100 has absolutely loads of jpeg setting to tweak.

But I'd suggest shooting raw anyway.
 
odd jim said:
The dynamic range is very good on the RX100, better than some FF bodies if you trust DXO. There's certainly nothing wrong in that area.

The RX100 has absolutely loads of jpeg setting to tweak.

But I'd suggest shooting raw anyway.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the information. Mine is the RX100 II, not the RX100 I. Maybe the dynamic range differs. I will update the firmware, hoping that the JPEG quality will improve. I am wary of shooting with RAW since I shoot a lot of similar scenes with different exposures etc, and 20MB each will simply take too much hard disk space.
 
PhotographyBuff said:
Thanks for the information. Mine is the RX100 II, not the RX100 I. Maybe the dynamic range differs. I will update the firmware, hoping that the JPEG quality will improve. I am wary of shooting with RAW since I shoot a lot of similar scenes with different exposures etc, and 20MB each will simply take too much hard disk space.
Click to expand...
The MK2 is the same if not slightly better with DR etc.

If you're running XP and are also wary of HD space it might be time to upgrade your PC hardware.

The RX100 shooting raw produces stunning results. I never use JPEGs with it.
 
Last edited:
PhotographyBuff said:
Thanks for the information. Mine is the RX100 II, not the RX100 I. Maybe the dynamic range differs. I will update the firmware, hoping that the JPEG quality will improve. I am wary of shooting with RAW since I shoot a lot of similar scenes with different exposures etc, and 20MB each will simply take too much hard disk space.
Click to expand...
External drives are very cheap, always worth shooting RAW IMO to give you more flexibility. I find the RX100 files refreshingly small ;)
 
snerkler said:
As some know I bought a used RX100 Mark III last week, but I think it's got a small issue. I noticed that the odd shot was softer than I thought it should be so I did some tests shooting a brick wall. Every 6-8 shots or so was soft compared to the rest tested through a range of apertures from f2.8 to f5.6. Shutter speed was at 1/250 to avoid any possible camera shake, focal length was 24mm equivalent. Softness was throughout the frame, although obviously magnified towards the edges. After I'd reviewed the images I started to question what the problem could be, and wondered if it was steadyshot as I have noticed that I can't handhold shots below 1/40 which I found odd as on my EM5-II I can handhold at 80mm equivalent at 1s, yes 1s ;) So I tested again without steadyshot and the issue appears to improve considerably. Only under the the highest of scrutiny is the odd shot ever so slightly soft, so much so that it's a none issue as far as I'm concerned. So it does appear that steadyshot is causing the issue (although of course this still can't be confirmed) but I was wondering if anyone has had a similar issue.

Here's the 1:1 crops, although I'm not sure how much use this will be as this forum doesn't seem to like images linked from photobucket for some reason and makes all shots look soft.
Notice how the shots at f5.6 are underexposed by 0.7ev too despite the camera being on auto ISO.

F2.8 sharp then soft
f2.8%20sharp_zpsidesysrm.png

f2.8%20soft_zps4o4jg12k.png


f5.6 sharp then soft
f5.6%20sharp_zpsqgeesfbe.png

f5.6%20soft_zpscsewnugj.png
Click to expand...
OK so following up on this I contacted the shop I bought the camera from and they advised me that it wasn't anything to do with steady shot and it was tolerances within autofocus which are to be expected with a camera like this. My previous experience (and belief) with contrast detect systems was that they were arguably more accurate than phase detect and they either missed and were totally out of focus, or achieved focus and were tack sharp. So of course I put this to the test, taking a few hundred test shots handheld, on tripod, steady shot on/off, various shutter speeds, manual focus, and autofocus using small single spot, large single spot and wide.

Results show that sharpness does fluctuate in any AF mode, any shutter speed and whether handheld or tripod (such as the results above). MF is tack sharp in all scenarios.

So it does appear that the shop was right and it's tolerances in AF. The question is whether this is normal and just something you have to put up with, or whether my camera's AF is not as good as it should be? Any thoughts?
 
Who's switched from a 5d3 across to a RX100 mkiv? I went from a 40d to an RX100 mki and saw very few drawbacks (for 95% of my shots) - the portability for me meant I took more and better photos
 
aserota said:
Who's switched from a 5d3 across to a RX100 mkiv? I went from a 40d to an RX100 mki and saw very few drawbacks (for 95% of my shots) - the portability for me meant I took more and better photos
Click to expand...
Tbh I doubt many. It's more of a side fun easy option (as very good as they are!) rather than a replacement. It's a great complement to a larger setup.

I couldn't replace my DSLRs with just an RX100 as I'm fairly demanding.

That said, for 90% of 'normal' people :) it would be more than enough and I've taken some of my best landscapes with mine, but that's a lot more down to where I've taken it!
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
Tbh I doubt many. It's more of a side fun easy option (as very good as they are!) rather than a replacement. It's a great complement to a larger setup.

I couldn't replace my DSLRs with just an RX100 as I'm fairly demanding.

That said, for 90% of 'normal' people :) it would be more than enough!
Click to expand...

Agreed, I normally shoot Fuji XE2 - but if I just want something to slip in to my pocket or travel even lighter I take the RX100m3 out with me....very capable - but not enough to ever be my ONLY camera.
 
damianmkv said:
so i bought the mk2 last year for my wife as she was planning a trip to NYC with her friends..with the exception of her friend dropping it, it look like its done OK. I'm actually a bit gutted as i love these shots so i'd love to have gone and she's also shown my photography up a bit :) new york city at dusk by damianmkv, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Great photo! Is this RAW or JPEG?
 
JPEG - I turned raw off as I thought my wife wouldn't use it much. Ho hum, still munching through the shots but my laptop has had it so PP is taking forever :(
 
I hope she's pleased with them - she has been asleep since half 5 yesterday, bless
 
She's got some great shots there!
 
Thanks Jim. Almost finished looking through them - having a laptop that constantly says 'not responding' is getting right on my nerves :(
 
damianmkv said:
Thanks Jim. Almost finished looking through them - having a laptop that constantly says 'not responding' is getting right on my nerves :(
Click to expand...
Doh!
 
damianmkv said:
2 shot stitch through PSE11 - not 100% with the job it did but beggars cant be choosers

bright lights of the big city by damianmkv, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Very good pics. :clap: Compliments to the Photographer, though that may be you, as you seem to had done a rights grab. 'by damianmkv' ;) :LOL:

Seriously, I'm sure she is very happy with them. If I had a significant other who was going somewhere like that, and could take pics like that, I think I would have at least left the camera in RAW+Jpeg just in case. ;)
 
To be honest, I had no idea and I ( without doing her down ) don't think she did either but she did message me saying that I'd love it there so she'd try and take some reasonable shots.

She hasn't had the time to look at the edits yet, maybe later
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
Tbh I doubt many. It's more of a side fun easy option (as very good as they are!) rather than a replacement. It's a great complement to a larger setup.

I couldn't replace my DSLRs with just an RX100 as I'm fairly demanding.

That said, for 90% of 'normal' people :) it would be more than enough and I've taken some of my best landscapes with mine, but that's a lot more down to where I've taken it!
Click to expand...

I think I'll grab a newer RX100 besides the 5D3 for a few months and then decide the fate of the DSLR. This is now the 3rd holiday I've been on and have shot photos on my Galaxy S6 - which seems madness (but luggage restrictions and portability are winning).
 
toying with selling my mark2 now I have ventured back into dslr world..Although part of me says keep it
 
Lots of great shots, am also toying with the idea of picking one of these up

Love my 5d Mk3 but portability is an issue and don't like carrying a bag all the time so miss a lot of opportunities
 
I've had a Sony RX100 for the last 18+ months. It's my first real camera and I've loved it.

Unfortunately I think it's now faulty - if I zoom in it sticks at 1.2 then makes me turn off and back on. The problem continues to repeat. I've reset it to factory settings.

I'm sending it off to Sony to repair - cost is £117.

Thanks to the camera I've developed a real interest in photography. I really wanted a DSLR but having seen some of the mirrorless cameras I want one of those instead.

I've got my heart set on the Olympus EM1 or EM5.

I will still use the Sony, especially when mountain biking, or when it's not ideal to bring more equipment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top