Sony RX100

I haven't shot RAW on the RX100 yet....I heard Lightroom support wasn't great yet so haven't bothered.

I can try and process some RAWs, will get out one night this week and try and shoot some stuff.

I'm well past the stage of really caring about pixel peeping though....what matters in the quality of photograph it enables me to take, and currently the RX100 is producing better results than my DSLR setup.
 
Im using photoshop cs6 to do my raw files not sure it auto corrects for lens distortion though. Might try Sonys program which does.
 

in colour! by danbroad1000, on Flickr

had a bit of fun trying this out today at my local camera shop. Eagle eyed among you might guess where this is. Anyone?

BTW, think it's a great little camera. Might well be picking one up this week. Just need to have a dibs at the LX7, which I'm sure is a top compact but might not be quite compact enough for me.. I see the point. There's a nice looking Nex7 with 18-55 in there for £499, but it's about the same bulk as my D3100 - in that it'd be a bag camera. If I'm taking the bag, I'd take the SLR.

I'm a fan of the CX sensor - and I have sold images from the V1 I owned before it - but this is the CX sensor version 2. The in-camera HDR and DRO options are great, and the function button is a cool idea, effectively a quick menu for the useful stuff. If there's two little things I didn't quite gel with at first look, it was these:

1. The front ring is always useful, the rear ring less so in the PAS modes. Front for aperture, rear for +|- compensation would have been perfect. Maybe it does and I just didn't configure quite enough in the shop.
2. The 5cm focus minimum at the wide end is good enough for narrow DOF if you're careful to separate a bit of background, but it's be perfect if the lens focused as close as the LX7 for macro.
 
Last edited:
robj20 said:
Im using photoshop cs6 to do my raw files not sure it auto corrects for lens distortion though. Might try Sonys program which does.
Click to expand...

Good point, I should check the Sony program too. Alternatives are DxO and Phase One (phase one does not run on my PC, their tech support have been unable to resolve too)
 
Some great photos on here here's one using the hdr painting mode set to low

8175322634_bec0dd369d_c.jpg
[/url] Clarence Park Bandstand Bury by Thunderbird_010, on Flickr[/IMG]
 
I've just compared the same RAW through, Sony Image converter, DxO v8 and Lightroom/ACR and from what I can see LR is correcting for lens distortion, I've compared it to the Sony Image Converter with Distortion compensation turned on/off
 
ShrubMonkey said:
I've just compared the same RAW through, Sony Image converter, DxO v8 and Lightroom/ACR and from what I can see LR is correcting for lens distortion, I've compared it to the Sony Image Converter with Distortion compensation turned on/off
Click to expand...

Thanks. Is the noise any different?
 
I can't tell any difference, more than happy with LR after this comparison (actually prefer the slight difference in colour that LR produces too)
 
Took this today, slight (very slight) sharpening, plus slight cross processed in PS. Probably the best day yet with the RX100, love it so much! I was also on my knees under the bow of the boat so not easy to keep still in this contorted angle, flip screen would ave helped, but then the camera would be bigger.

8175822331_bb6eef3bc4_c.jpg
 
Last edited:
ShrubMonkey said:
Took this today, slight (very slight) sharpening, plus slight cross processed in PS. Probably the best day yet with the RX100, love it so much! I was also on my knees under the bow of the boat so not easy to keep still in this contorted angle, flip screen would ave helped, but then the camera would be bigger.

8175822331_bb6eef3bc4_c.jpg
Click to expand...

Cracking image.

Not using your OMD much then that would of been easier to use with the tilt screen... Unless you like the RX100 more?
 
rookies said:
Cracking image.

Not using your OMD much then that would of been easier to use with the tilt screen... Unless you like the RX100 more?
Click to expand...

Thanks folks.

In fact I used all 4 of my cameras today (ep3, g5, OMD and rx100), took this after coming back from a location where I took my m43 gear. Went for a walk with only the the rx100 in my pocket
 
rookies said:
Cracking image.

Not using your OMD much then that would of been easier to use with the tilt screen... Unless you like the RX100 more?
Click to expand...

Beware the OMD screen doesn't actually tilt that much. It's not like the Panasonics
 
ShrubMonkey said:
Thanks folks.

In fact I used all 4 of my cameras today (ep3, g5, OMD and rx100), took this after coming back from a location where I took my m43 gear. Went for a walk with only the the rx100 in my pocket
Click to expand...

Glad to hear all of you cameras being used :)
 
I did think today, that I probably could live the RX100 as my only camera, if I had too, lots of compromises, but for my type of photography I probably could manage.
 
ShrubMonkey said:
And a couple more from today...

If you can't tell by now, boats are my main interest :)
Click to expand...

Where about this ? What did u take with the omd ;)
 
ShrubMonkey said:
And a couple more from today...

If you can't tell by now, boats are my main interest :)
Click to expand...

I like the angles you get on the boats. Do you sell these?
 
Here are a few from me, went out for a walk this aftrenoon.

DSC00465%20cropped-XL.jpg


DSC00457%20resized-XL.jpg


DSC00450%20resized-XL.jpg


DSC00444%20resized-XL.jpg


DSC00435%20resized-XL.jpg
 
Last edited:
Right this is interesting (maybe).

I've just taken an RX100 raw and opened it in 3 applications and then layered them up in Photoshop. By fiddling with layer opacity and turning layers on and off I can see what (if any) lens correction is getting applied.

If you open the file in Sony raw converter or DxO the default is to correct the lens - and the shift is h-u-g-e. On this particular file (shot at 20.6mm or 56mm equiv) there's a bunch of barrel distortion and it magically disappears when you click the button. Both converters are very similar - but DxO handles the vignetting a little better to my eye producing more even tones in the corners.

Open the same file in Photoshop and it gets interesting. In ACR (I checked and have the latest version) there is no option to automatically correct the lens - it's not in the database. However, when I open it and layer it, the file is almost pixel for pixel the same. I.e. ACR is applying lens correction without telling you..... (and in fact while telling you it isn't doing it, honest).

So it appears it's not possible to see the files "without lens correction". Wonder if they are fibbing about noise reduction too?

BTW to my eye the DxO is the nicest file. I thought Sony was going to win because the preview looked pretty but when it renders to the tiff it doesn't have the same kind of "real" look the DxO one does.

I'd share the file but it's like 250 MB......

ETA: that Sony converter is well slow. On a reasonably powerful machine it's painful.
 
Last edited:
Not tried any on mine with CS6, will that auto lens correct?
 
Interesting, think easiest way for me to test is set camera to raw+jpeg and take a picture of something like a door frame and see how it fares.

Edit: Never mind found out why it does this,

"The RX100 lens has a lot of distortion (especially at the wide end) but like with micro 4/3 the RX100 raw files have correction metadata embedded and Lightroom automatically applies this so you won't see the distortion. "
 
Last edited:
JonathanRyan said:
Right this is interesting (maybe).

I've just taken an RX100 raw and opened it in 3 applications and then layered them up in Photoshop. By fiddling with layer opacity and turning layers on and off I can see what (if any) lens correction is getting applied.

If you open the file in Sony raw converter or DxO the default is to correct the lens - and the shift is h-u-g-e. On this particular file (shot at 20.6mm or 56mm equiv) there's a bunch of barrel distortion and it magically disappears when you click the button. Both converters are very similar - but DxO handles the vignetting a little better to my eye producing more even tones in the corners.

Open the same file in Photoshop and it gets interesting. In ACR (I checked and have the latest version) there is no option to automatically correct the lens - it's not in the database. However, when I open it and layer it, the file is almost pixel for pixel the same. I.e. ACR is applying lens correction without telling you..... (and in fact while telling you it isn't doing it, honest).

So it appears it's not possible to see the files "without lens correction". Wonder if they are fibbing about noise reduction too?

BTW to my eye the DxO is the nicest file. I thought Sony was going to win because the preview looked pretty but when it renders to the tiff it doesn't have the same kind of "real" look the DxO one does.

I'd share the file but it's like 250 MB......

ETA: that Sony converter is well slow. On a reasonably powerful machine it's painful.
Click to expand...

Many thanks for spending your time clarifying this. Have you got a DXO standard workflow? I have a quick one for LR which I will post as an edit later
 
danbroad said:

in colour! by danbroad1000, on Flickr

had a bit of fun trying this out today at my local camera shop. Eagle eyed among you might guess where this is. Anyone?

BTW, think it's a great little camera. Might well be picking one up this week. Just need to have a dibs at the LX7, which I'm sure is a top compact but might not be quite compact enough for me.. I see the point. There's a nice looking Nex7 with 18-55 in there for £499, but it's about the same bulk as my D3100 - in that it'd be a bag camera. If I'm taking the bag, I'd take the SLR.

I'm a fan of the CX sensor - and I have sold images from the V1 I owned before it - but this is the CX sensor version 2. The in-camera HDR and DRO options are great, and the function button is a cool idea, effectively a quick menu for the useful stuff. If there's two little things I didn't quite gel with at first look, it was these:

1. The front ring is always useful, the rear ring less so in the PAS modes. Front for aperture, rear for +|- compensation would have been perfect. Maybe it does and I just didn't configure quite enough in the shop.
2. The 5cm focus minimum at the wide end is good enough for narrow DOF if you're careful to separate a bit of background, but it's be perfect if the lens focused as close as the LX7 for macro.
Click to expand...


WEX Norwich
 
Richie15 said:
Many thanks for spending your time clarifying this. Have you got a DXO standard workflow? I have a quick one for LR which I will post as an edit later
Click to expand...

Nope. I'm still on the trial of DxO. V 8 is actually very nice and pretty fast. I'd like to see your LR workflow.

Some clarification on the earlier....

the in camera jpeg, Sony converter and ACR (Photoshop / Lightroom) are all using the same corrections. Within the bounds of sharpening the pixels line up. DxO appears to be using its OWN corrections - which are very similar but not the same....
 
Last edited:
I've been using aperture and thinking moving over to Lightroom 4 till you guys talks about this new software argh
 
Relayer said:
WEX Norwich
Click to expand...

The perfect answer!

Anyway, there's 35 left in stock as of Sunday, and I took an SD card with around 100 images home to open in lightroom. Anyway, ISO 6400 looks better than the LX5 at 1600. The 24mm wide end is nice, but I'm certain I can get something useful out of the 28mm and the sweep panorama. The only issue is the wondersome close focus of the Panasonic, which the RX can't hope to match.

Still deciding, but I fear I'll be ordering one this week. Such a shame that my V1 didn't have any useful modes on its dial; I'd exchange a slowmotion video gimmick for a decent multishot composite mode anyday. In fact, much as I like the V1 I can't help feeling they went out of their way to make it difficult to get an easy shot... All that fantastic AF and shot to shot speed for little benefit...

So, unless Wex get 35 customers and no new deliveries in the next days, I might be joining the club...
 
JonathanRyan said:
Right this is interesting (maybe).

I've just taken an RX100 raw and opened it in 3 applications and then layered them up in Photoshop. By fiddling with layer opacity and turning layers on and off I can see what (if any) lens correction is getting applied.

If you open the file in Sony raw converter or DxO the default is to correct the lens - and the shift is h-u-g-e. On this particular file (shot at 20.6mm or 56mm equiv) there's a bunch of barrel distortion and it magically disappears when you click the button. Both converters are very similar - but DxO handles the vignetting a little better to my eye producing more even tones in the corners.

Open the same file in Photoshop and it gets interesting. In ACR (I checked and have the latest version) there is no option to automatically correct the lens - it's not in the database. However, when I open it and layer it, the file is almost pixel for pixel the same. I.e. ACR is applying lens correction without telling you..... (and in fact while telling you it isn't doing it, honest).

So it appears it's not possible to see the files "without lens correction". Wonder if they are fibbing about noise reduction too?

BTW to my eye the DxO is the nicest file. I thought Sony was going to win because the preview looked pretty but when it renders to the tiff it doesn't have the same kind of "real" look the DxO one does.

I'd share the file but it's like 250 MB......

ETA: that Sony converter is well slow. On a reasonably powerful machine it's painful.
Click to expand...

I did a similar test yesterday, you can see the effects of uncorrected image in DxO and Sony image converter. Given that LR and or ACR perform the correction too, I actually prefer the results from LR rather than DxO
 
Promise no more nautical boats after this, just a few more from yesterday :)

8180114499_817503a835_z.jpg


8180107361_b42938b6da_z.jpg


8180096169_3c13efc8df_z.jpg


All with slight cross processing & a little sharpening , that's all.
 
ShrubMonkey said:
Promise no more nautical boats after this, just a few more from yesterday :)

All with slight cross processing & a little sharpening , that's all.
Click to expand...

Fantastic where is this as I like taking photos like this :) what is cross processing?
 
ShrubMonkey said:
West Sussex, cross processing? . . try google for a change (y)
Click to expand...

I know what it mean just I don't see your images as cross process they look nice. Most cross process I've seen seem a lot heavier
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top