Sony Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1 - first impressions and low light shots

Thanks Ray. For me, the RX1 has been a surprise and a delight! I'm very impressed with it. Sony appears to have put a lot of work into getting it right. I agree that ISO performance is outstanding and while chasing my kids it's nice to have the ability to shoot at high ISO and still get clean images. Like you, the AF performance has been better than I was led to believe. No complaints.

One aspect that I've taken for granted is how good the EVF is. It does not really feel like an EVF like so many others do; it is almost like looking through an OVF. To be sure, it adds some clunkiness to the camera, but I keep mine on anyway. However, I'm not afraid to frame "at arms length" either.

I hope to see a 50mm f/2 RX2 this year or next.
 
Sony personally followed me around the internet, pm'ing me, ensuring me my car photos would be better with Rx1, better karma, and my green chili chicken enchilada's would have more kick, because of Rx1.

Amigo, the B@W conversions are cool, but........ Set the camera itself to black and white in the creative mode menu. You will see what I mean, the ooc black and white images are tremendous, and better then conversions, albiet you will not get a color image as a backup. But give it a try.

I have shot several concerts in lowlight with autofocus, never been a issue, this camera focus's just fine.
 
One aspect that I've taken for granted is how good the EVF is. It does not really feel like an EVF like so many others do; it is almost like looking through an OVF.

That's interesting, and good news. EVF improvements are really steaming along. Each iteration seems to bring some development.
 
Sony personally followed me around the internet, pm'ing me, ensuring me my car photos would be better with Rx1, better karma, and my green chili chicken enchilada's would have more kick, because of Rx1.

Amigo, the B@W conversions are cool, but........ Set the camera itself to black and white in the creative mode menu. You will see what I mean, the ooc black and white images are tremendous, and better then conversions, albiet you will not get a color image as a backup. But give it a try.

I have shot several concerts in lowlight with autofocus, never been a issue, this camera focus's just fine.

I'll no doubt experiment with that mode Lucille, but I'm funny about stuff like that. I had a Ricoh GRD with a great jpeg B&W mode and I'd play with it but I always went back to shooting raw. Mostly because I generally don't think about whether I'm shooting in B&W or color until after the fact anymore. I used to in the film days, obviously, but I'm really happy to let the shot tell me what it wants to be when it grows up, and neither I nor it seems to know for sure at the point of conception. So I try to avoid shooting in pure B&W and foreclosing the option. I could probably process them differently and come a lot closer to the in-camera processing, but I'll have to play with it a bit first.

-Ray
 
I'm curious about the OOC b&w jpegs. Can you post some examples?

I haven't shot any Karen. My next time out with it I'll try to remember to shoot a few. I think there are two options - high contrast and rich tomes or something like that - one is actually an in camera HDR process and takes a few seconds to process, the other not. I'll leave it to Lucille to post some of hers, or link to them. In the meantime, Steve Huff had a couple of pretty nice ones in his review of the camera, so that might be worth a quick visit...

-Ray
 
LOL

Well, that is part of the problem. It's certainly pricey for me, mainly because I'm happy with what I have and have decided to spend more on going places to make photographs.

In reality though, I just would not get the value from the camera. I would get much more value from an interchangeable lens system. That's certainly no reflection on the camera.

As far as the actual camera goes, I don't think I would dislike much about it. The lack of a built-in VF is a real negative for me. It's my preferred way of shooting. I dislike add-ons, and prefer optical.

The IQ is certainly coming across from everyone as very good. I have to wonder though why some people would need it. Many people never print, and certainly not large prints. So all that goodness seems a bit lost.

All of which is highly personal (as it should be), and in no way means I am negative about the camera.

At $2700 + $3-400 for the viewfinder I would probably go with a D800. However I still a quite a few Nikon G series lenses so it would make more sense. I still prefer optical viewfinders. I have been using my D700 quite a bit lately with some manual focus lenses (Voigtlander and Nikon AI-S). I had forgotten how much I like that camera since I started using Fuji cameras. I will probably upgrade to a D800E next year. Much as I prefer FF, I would not be able to see the value in a $2700 fixed lens camera with no viewfinder. $2000 + a viewfinder would might make me interested though. :) I think I will stick with Fuji.

What is the top shutter speed for this camera?
 
Very cool Ray, I will look forward to more posts as you spend time with it. I agree with everything you said pretty much, right down to my very first reactions out of the box being, in order: 1) wow, that is the nicest lens cap I have *ever* seen, and 2) ...no charger? SERIOUSLY? :rolleyes:

Great tip about the eyecup on the EVF, I hadn't even thought to try the smaller one but I will probably do just that next time I use it & see if it makes it feel less imbalanced. On the AF topic... generally it's really quite in the realm of acceptable to me, and I have very rarely experienced hunting or missed focus. What I *do* have issues with is the "slow and steady" AF resulting in missed shots on moving targets, especially indoors/low light. It's not horrible, but what can I say, the m4/3 and Nikon gear has spoiled me... I like being able to consistently nail focus on an eye in a dark room. As a result it's frustrating shooting the RX1 for some things like indoor parties (similar to my experience w/the X-E1 & 35mm lens). On a related note, the fact that focus peaking is only available when also magnifying is really annoying. With a decent focus peaking implementation, magnification just isn't needed for me, so forcing the two together is irksome. I'm sincerely hoping they fix that in the first firmware update.

The high price of this camera has had me seriously considering returning it or reselling it many times over, but the image quality, rendering, high ISO performance and the build quality as you described in your initial impressions is exactly why I've still got mine. It's got some quirks (I really don't like the Sony UI for instance - thankfully I spend almost no time in menus after setup), but man can that thing put out some gorgeous images when the photographer does their part!
 
Yowza!

And, it's 35mm!!! 35, Ray, not 28!!! :tongue:

Hence, my restraint to this point! If it had been 28, I probably would have tried it right away and would have found a way to buy it. It's still one of the things that may keep me from it - I sold the X100 because I didn't really love the focal length. BUT, I was also still trying really hard to find "the perfect street camera" at that time and I knew the X100 wasn't it and that contributed to me not using as much as I should have. I'm not under any illusion about the RX100 being something I'd use much as a street camera - all off my other cameras already play that role as well as I could ever hope for and my shooting style and images work pretty much the same with each, so I don't think I'm still looking for that.

So, if I buy it, I won't buy it with street shooting anywhere near the forefront of my thinking - i already know i can use it well enough in that context on occasion, but I'd clearly be buying it for other types of shooting, where I'm less religious about my focal length. I had a lot of fun with the new Olympus 17 the last few times I shot with it too, in a mixed context, and that probably pried my mind open a little about this. Although ironically that'll probably be a victim of the knife if I either buy this, or the X100s, or the Fuji 23 f1.4, one of which is very likely to happen - m43's role seems to be changing quite a bit for me - probably mostly reduced to longer focal lengths (where the killer AF is really critical) and the 12mm so it remains one of those "perfect street camera" options. A big part of what has me hoping i keep this camera is a month vacation this summer we've already bought and paid for to a place with some of the most amazing light I've ever seen. There won't be a lot of street shooting there (not many streets!), so my emphasis will be really different. The kind of deep blue skies this camera was finding the other night, and water and plenty of natural and man made beauty, are EXACTLY the kind of thing I'm going to be after - in COLOR even, while we're having paradigm shifts - and I've never shot with a camera that handled that kind of light like this one.

It's still possible that after spending time with this and the X100s and the X-Pro, I'll decide that the Fuji sensor will do this same job well enough and I'll skip this camera - I'm in very early days right now and there's a very good chance I'll be less enamored with this camera after a month of use. OR that I'll be totally into the X100 or Coolpix A and simply decide I'd rather spend a whole lot less money on one of those. Or neither, and I might just eventually get this focal length for the X-Pro.

I'm blown away with this full frame sensor and beautiful lens right now. If I still am in a month, this will be my big camera buy this year. If not, it won't. I'll let you know how it goes!

-Ray
 
The high price of this camera has had me seriously considering returning it or reselling it many times over, but the image quality, rendering, high ISO performance and the build quality as you described in your initial impressions is exactly why I've still got mine. It's got some quirks (I really don't like the Sony UI for instance - thankfully I spend almost no time in menus after setup), but man can that thing put out some gorgeous images when the photographer does their part!
The Sony UI on the RX100 is part of what scared me off this one initially. I never got comfortable with that one. But, as you said, I don't see having to interact with the menus much at ALL with this camera - I've already got two programmable buttons I haven't figured out what to do with yet! And yeah, between the lens and sensor, the RX1 can make some awfully pretty looking photos if, as you say, the shooter does his or her part...

And the AF on this camera won't get in the way of how I'd be using it at all - it seems more sure footed than the Fuji's if not really faster.

-Ray
 
At $2700 + $3-400 for the viewfinder I would probably go with a D800. However I still a quite a few Nikon G series lenses so it would make more sense. I still prefer optical viewfinders. I have been using my D700 quite a bit lately with some manual focus lenses (Voigtlander and Nikon AI-S). I had forgotten how much I like that camera since I started using Fuji cameras. I will probably upgrade to a D800E next year. Much as I prefer FF, I would not be able to see the value in a $2700 fixed lens camera with no viewfinder. $2000 + a viewfinder would might make me interested though. :) I think I will stick with Fuji.

What is the top shutter speed for this camera?

1/2000s to 1/4000s depending on the aperture.

And this is what I don't understand. When you want a mini van, why is a sports car even a consideration. Size and simplicity is what the RX-1 is about. If you are looking for a large DSLR with interchangeable lenses, why is the RX-1 even in the mix. It is not about the sensor size.
 
Back
Top