Sony What I Don't Like About the RX1

xdayv, no, the flash is fixed (so not like the RX100 II series).

On a side note, this is my first post to the site as an RX1 owner! Hi all...
 
I really can't find much wrong with the RX1 that I didn't know would be a compromise going in. One thing I have been noticing that surprised me is a consistent 1 to 1 1/3 stop underexposure. I did some tests with a external meter shooting the same subject with fixed lighting in manual mode on a tripod and I was able to confirm a persistent 1 stop underexposure using the built-in meter. The external meter was bang on exposure every time. I know this has been a major complaint for users of Sony's "Translucent Mirror" lineup.

Has anyone else found this?

Cheers,
Rob

(I solved the problem by mounting a Gossen Digisix meter in my Thumbs Up shoe. My exposures are bang on now and there is much less work to do in post.)

View attachment 7597

gossen digisix 2| B&H Photo Video

Hi,

I find the exposure of the RX1 to be either spot on or sometimes 1/3 over.

I had a Sekonic 558 before and I compared that to my then NEX 7, 5n, 5D2 and now the RX1. They were all within 1/3 or spot on when measuring incident light on the Sekonic and matrix metering for all three.

The NEX's had the 24mm Sonnar on them (the make sure they used the same lens for t/stop value) and the 5D had my old 35/2 distagon ZE.

Anyone else experiencing issues with exposure?

Maybe, Rob, you need to see if your aperture is opening properly because if it isn't, you may find thats where you see the under exposure value.
 
Old thread but yeah, count me in for I wish the EVF was built in. That right there is enough reason I end up using the X100S frequently even though the RX1 output knocks my socks off :) The EVF is excellent quality, I just don't enjoy the accessory as much and it does sorta stink if you want to use a flash or wireless system with the RX1.

Everything else I can deal with, even the slow write speeds and such - except the ridiculousness of not including a charger. That *still* rankles me that they could charge that much for a camera, not to mention the EVF, and then stick you for a wall charger separately. :rolleyes:
 
Old thread but yeah, count me in for I wish the EVF was built in. That right there is enough reason I end up using the X100S frequently even though the RX1 output knocks my socks off :) The EVF is excellent quality, I just don't enjoy the accessory as much and it does sorta stink if you want to use a flash or wireless system with the RX1.

Everything else I can deal with, even the slow write speeds and such - except the ridiculousness of not including a charger. That *still* rankles me that they could charge that much for a camera, not to mention the EVF, and then stick you for a wall charger separately. :rolleyes:

Jay... and other RX1 owners.

Like most of us, I am subject to the allure of a compact FF, even if it is a fixed focal length. For those who have other systems, perhaps a m4/3 system, a Fuji system, others?, AND you have an RX1... where does the RX1 fit in with your camera usage? When do you choose it rather than another combo from a system?

I am tempted to get an RX1, but then again I'm not sure when I would choose it over, say, an EP5 with 17 f/1.8 lens, or an X-E1 with 23mm f/1.4 lens... both of these options being of considerably less expense.

I know the RX1 would provide greater resolution and shallower DOF than either the m4/3 or the Fuji options, but would those elements be of such significance to justify the considerable additional expenditure?

Would you buy the RX1 again, now that you know what you know from owning one?
 
Jay... and other RX1 owners.

Like most of us, I am subject to the allure of a compact FF, even if it is a fixed focal length. For those who have other systems, perhaps a m4/3 system, a Fuji system, others?, AND you have an RX1... where does the RX1 fit in with your camera usage? When do you choose it rather than another combo from a system? I am tempted to get an RX1, but then again I'm not sure when I would choose it over, say, an EP5 with 17 f/1.8 lens. I know the RX1 would provide greater resolution and shallower DOF, but would those elements be of such sufficiency to justify the expenditure? Would you buy the RX1 again, now that you know what you know from owning one?

My setup changed several times since I got my RX1, but the idea originally was that I would be using m4/3 for my only ILC system. I wanted a FF sensor camera for the bump in IQ and shallow DoF. I also really liked the idea of sticking with a compact I could carry it everywhere as my day to day camera, and pair with m4/3 for travel. The best part with an RX1 is you can travel really light and still not feel like you made any IQ compromise.

Fast forward 9 months and now I have multiple cameras/systems and ended up transitioning to Fuji, including an X100S which overlaps an awful lot with the RX1, so it's a lot less clear where the Sony fits in. Right now I tend to take the RX1 when I am looking to travel really light, and it's usually the only camera with me. Also comes along when I expect wanting a lot of high ISO or shallow DoF since it does both very well. Subject isolation isn't everything, but that Zeiss lens has that 3D pop to it which I have to admit I really enjoy :)

If I had it to do over again I'm not 100% sure I would have bought mine, at least not if I had known I'd end up with the Fuji. It's just harder to justify the cost when I'm not using it as much as I'd planned. If I had stuck with just m4/3 + RX1 then no question it'd have been worth it. All that said, I still really enjoy shooting mine and the files almost always put a big grin on my face.
 
Jay... and other RX1 owners.

Like most of us, I am subject to the allure of a compact FF, even if it is a fixed focal length. For those who have other systems, perhaps a m4/3 system, a Fuji system, others?, AND you have an RX1... where does the RX1 fit in with your camera usage? When do you choose it rather than another combo from a system?

I am tempted to get an RX1, but then again I'm not sure when I would choose it over, say, an EP5 with 17 f/1.8 lens, or an X-E1 with 23mm f/1.4 lens... both of these options being of considerably less expense.

I know the RX1 would provide greater resolution and shallower DOF than either the m4/3 or the Fuji options, but would those elements be of such significance to justify the considerable additional expenditure?

Would you buy the RX1 again, now that you know what you know from owning one?
Don,

As always, it depends. The greater resolution is not a huge issue to me - I don't print that large and only occasionally crop enough for it to matter. The shallow DOF is a really nice capability to have, but I've never felt limited by the shallow DOF capabilities of my APS or even m43 gear. But there's just something about the quality of the lens and sensor in the RX1 that are still very compelling. The DR, the low light capability (well beyond anything else I've ever shot with), and the malleability of the raw files in processing are treats beyond belief. There's also something fairly indescribable about the way the lens renders that's grown a LOT on my over time. And the camera and controls are also a pure joy to use, something I'd never have thought I'd say about a Sony based on past experience. The ONLY downside for me is the non-permanent nature of the EVF - far from a deal breaker but this is the one area where the X100 / X100s just beats the RX1 with a stick. Overall, to me, the RX1 is absolutely worth it - to many, it wouldn't be. The X100s is clearly a better value and for most probably the most rational choice. Or one of the Fuji ILC bodies with the coming 23 f1.4 (although given the price of the 23mm and the likely price of any coming X-Pro 2 body, you're not coming in all that much below the cost of the RX1 - but of course you're not limited to that one lens with the Fuji ILC....

If you're the type of shooter who likes to change focal lengths a lot, either using a zoom or a number of primes with an ILC, then the RX1 obviously doesn't make sense. You'd want an ILC with a comparable focal length instead. Over time, though, I've realized that I'm happiest walking around with one camera with fixed focal lengths. For this, the RX1 is my favorite camera unless I'm out specifically to do street shooting, in which case the Nikon "A" is my tool of choice. It's nice to have one "no compromises" camera at my disposal and the RX1 is that camera for me. As a pro who's spent a LOT of time with full frame DSLRs over the years, the subtle charms of the RX1 are probably less important to you - you've been there and done that and probably still have some of that gear at your disposal for when you want to pull it out... For me, the RX1 is the only full frame digital I've ever owned and its become by far my most used camera for everything but street shooting (and it's not bad at all for that when it's all I have available and some street opportunities present themselves). If you want various focal lengths easily available at any given time, don't get the RX1 - you probably wouldn't use it much or enjoy it much when you did. But if you're a prime shooter who likes to wander around with a single focal length a lot of the time, and something in the 32mm range (turns out the RX1 is notably wider than it's claimed 35mm - probably one of the reasons I've come to like it as much as I do), you simply won't do better. You'll do very nearly as well with other options most of the time, but not AS well and definitely not as well under more challenging lighting situations.

Whether those difference are worth the big price differences is clearly a personal call. To me it was - I would ABSOLUTELY do it again knowing what I know now. With much less hesitation than I initially bought it too! To anyone else, I can't say...

-Ray
 
I have been using RX1 for last 3 weeks and I am happy with it. On my vacation I used it with Oly 45mm/Panasonic 35-100mm lenses with more reach for portraits. Yesterday it was my only camera for walk around and was surprised with the shots that I got as it is the same places that we go...

AF is slow and it doesn't come with a viewfinder, but the IQ is worth it. I had no trouble focusing nearly total dark conditions at night. I bought a grip and Oly 17mm viewfinder ($60), but usually I use the screen. Too bad they didn't produce it in nex 6/7 form, but the nex and the P&S division (RX1 & RX100 producer) are competing depts. in Sony so different bodies and viewfinders for both. I was working on the files yesterday and it gives you additional latitude compared to apsc sensors. The lens is one of the best 35mm lenses and wide open it is sharp enough for me. Also the bokeh is very good. Again it depends on your bokeh choice, but it has much smoother bokeh then comparable new Fuji 23mm 1.4:

First Look: Fujinon XF23mmF1.4 R - Fuji Rumors

In comparison you can check the FM forum which has 93 pages of RX1 images:
Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II Image Thread

Compared to Sony 24mm, Oly 17mm, and Pana 20mm, it gives more pop and 1-1.5 stops of dof. It is usually diminishing returns for higher gear, but lately cheaper deals are coming esp when FF Sony is on the horizon (It will be in NY expo in a month). But it will not have the f/2 lens of RX1...
 
AF is slow .......
Just to qualify serhan's comment, AF is slow, but only in comparison to the faster m43 bodies, the Nikon 1, a few really quick compacts, and pretty much any DSLR. But for the mirrorless market in which it lives, I don't find it particularly slow. I'd say its as fast as any Nex I've tried, as fast as any Fuji with the possible exception of the X100s and then only in really bright light and not by much. It's for sure not fast compared to your faster AF cameras, but its not slow for most of the company it keeps. If you're shooting a Fuji right now, I don't think you'll find it slow at all...

-Ray
 
Jay, Ray, and others... thanks for the thoughtful input on the RX1. There may be one in my future.

Gear budget for the moment is being allocated to: this week I have a Ricoh GR ordered up and a Canon 17-40 f/4 for my 5DMkII body. The latter will be resurrected in use as a landscape camera for images to be printed large. I know the Ricoh GR won't be up to snuff as a head to head replacement for the RX1, but it may help meet the desire for a handy, compact fixed lens APS-C camera.
 
Hi,

I find the exposure of the RX1 to be either spot on or sometimes 1/3 over.

I had a Sekonic 558 before and I compared that to my then NEX 7, 5n, 5D2 and now the RX1. They were all within 1/3 or spot on when measuring incident light on the Sekonic and matrix metering for all three.

The NEX's had the 24mm Sonnar on them (the make sure they used the same lens for t/stop value) and the 5D had my old 35/2 distagon ZE.

Anyone else experiencing issues with exposure?

Maybe, Rob, you need to see if your aperture is opening properly because if it isn't, you may find thats where you see the under exposure value.

Aside from my minor complaint, metering can be a tricky art in itself. Consider the difference between incident and reflective metering on the same subject in the same light and this becomes immediately obvious. Then it becomes a point of training your eye to sense the best look. I find that incident readings at the subject look more natural to me than reflected readings from the point of shooting (which perhaps ironically makes my original post irrelevant). I will check my aperture operation though.
 
Don,

If you're the type of shooter who likes to change focal lengths a lot, either using a zoom or a number of primes with an ILC, then the RX1 obviously doesn't make sense. You'd want an ILC with a comparable focal length instead. Over time, though, I've realized that I'm happiest walking around with one camera with fixed focal lengths. For this, the RX1 is my favorite camera unless I'm out specifically to do street shooting, in which case the Nikon "A" is my tool of choice.

If you want various focal lengths easily available at any given time, don't get the RX1 - you probably wouldn't use it much or enjoy it much when you did. But if you're a prime shooter who likes to wander around with a single focal length a lot of the time, and something in the 32mm range (turns out the RX1 is notably wider than it's claimed 35mm - probably one of the reasons I've come to like it as much as I do), you simply won't do better. You'll do very nearly as well with other options most of the time, but not AS well and definitely not as well under more challenging lighting situations.

Whether those difference are worth the big price differences is clearly a personal call. To me it was - I would ABSOLUTELY do it again knowing what I know now. With much less hesitation than I initially bought it too! To anyone else, I can't say...

-Ray

Ray... I've been one to like zooms for the variable focal lengths and/or using several primes to cover various focal lengths. I never head out with a single focal length and the intention to make it work for whatever I might find.

SO.... it sounds like it is time for me to do that! Certainly, I could simply grab one of my m4/3 bodies and one prime lens and do the same thing. But having a "serious" compact with large-ish sensor and fixed focal length lens is something I want to experience and explore. I do need that.

I ordered a GR and received it, but unfortunately, it wouldn't recognize a memory card, so it will go back to B&H when they're back from holiday. I very much like the size, feel, and ergonomics of the camera. In the meantime, I ordered another one from another source so that I can get to work with it before B&H returns from holiday. The GR was a much easier buy (vs. the RX1) because the cost is comparatively so easy to swallow. So it will be my "gateway" camera to a "serious" compact fixed focal length camera.

THe RX1 will probably follow suit fairly soon... I vacillate between buying a used one for the cost savings vs. new. I never buy used cameras, so buying one used would be a bit of a stretch for me in that regard... but less of a stretch financially. We shall see.

You're right, I do have a lot of experience with FF through years of using the 5D and 5DMkII bodies, so perhaps I may not be quite as "wowed" by the RX1 output as someone new to FF might be, but then again, all I've been shooting for the last two years has been m4/3 and my LX5, so working with the 6000x4000 latest-Sony-sensor pixel files from the RX1 may prove to be really exciting to me.

As usual, thanks so much for your detailed, well-thought out replies to my questions. And, also as usual, thanks for sharing so many very inspirational images. You are an exceptional photographer and we all benefit from not only seeing your work, but hearing your thoughts!
 
I like your quote very much:

"Be kind... everyone you encounter in life is fighting battles you have no awareness of."

Chris

Chris... the original is said to have come from Plato. I saw a movie once which illustrated this concept and reflecting on the people I knew in my life, I realized how very true it is that nearly everyone, at least at particular times in their lives, is fighting one battle or another (physical, emotional, financial, legal, etc.) and just trying to make it through another day. This is something that we rarely consider as we move about the planet interacting with others. Life, while amazingly good at times, is frail, tentative, uncertain, quite often difficult for most people. Nearly every one of us is struggling with something troublesome, in some way or another... and if we aren't at this particular moment, we are sure to be at some future point.
 
Thanks for your response. I do think this is true, but hard to remember at times. I was walking in London once with the local vicar and said to him how some people were lucky because they didn't have problems. He was so shocked that he stopped and said "Oh no, there are problems behind every door in the parish!" Sounds like Plato got there first.

Anyway, hope you love your RX1 as much as I do. Photography is interesting again as I learn the techniques of fixed focal length after all the years of zooms or at least interchangeable lenses.
 
Back
Top