Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Sony RX-100: The Spotter's Pocket Rocket  
User currently offlinedvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1741 posts, RR: 11
Posted (1 year 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 9559 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I picked up a new toy today: The Sony RX-100. This little camera, I believe, will find its way into the pockets and bags of many aviation photographers. That's a tall order for a fixed lens digital camera, but there's so much to like about this that even if you don't buy the RX-100, it will certainly make its competitors take notice. The camera is only 3/16 of an inch thicker than a Canon S100, yet it has a sensor three times the size and a lens with a brighter effective aperture on the short and long ends. It still fits in your pants pocket and nobody would notice it's there, unless your pants are skin tight.

I've been looking for a small alternative to my walkaround kit and to have as a partner to my SLR. For taking window shots and in-terminal shots, a big SLR attracts way too much attention. I also wanted something I could take on vacation and leave the big kit at home without feeling like I was sacrificing image quality or manual controls. Thankfully, the camera delivers on both fronts.

I considered mirrorless cameras (Specifically, the Sony NEX series) but decided against them due to cost and the fact that I don't really want to get into another lens system. They deliver in terms of IQ and controls (especially the NEX-7), but the price and investment was too much for me, even though I'd be able to use many of my Alpha accessories.

Its chief inspiration (and rival) is the Canon S100, which is a nice camera, and I did like the S90 when I used it, but small-sensor IQ leaves a bit to be desired. The larger sensor compacts either had fixed lenses or were not pocketable. The RX-100 looks like the Goldilocks camera that I was searching for. The sensor is the same size as the Nikon 1 series (1 inch diagonal), but with twice the megapixels and (perversely enough) better image quality. The lens is also excellent, though in my short period of time testing the corners at wide angle can be a little soft at wide apertures.

The physical controls look similar to the Canon S100, save for a few changes. A rotating ring circles the lens barrel, and this ring can change its function based on the user's preference or the Fn key. You can have SLR-like full manual control with the front and rear control rings. Manual focusing is a breeze, because it has both focus peaking and magnification - the in-focus areas light up like a Christmas tree. Combine that with the very smooth lens barrel, and it's hard not to like manual work. The focus acceleration could use some tweaks as sometimes it feels slow to change focus when turning the barrel, but that's usually a consequence of focus-by-wire systems.

The GUI is taken right from Sony's flagship SLR, the a77 (not the NEX series). This is very good news, as the a77 has lots of configurability and great features like multi-frame noise reduction, HDR compositing, and sweep panorama. These aren't a.net features, but they will make your life easier in average shooting. You can customize the majority of the buttons to your preference of functions, making for a powerful camera that an advanced user will love. This isn't the Nikon 1, there are no training wheels here (save for Auto/iAuto modes). The lens is small enough to poke through a fence, which is always a plus. It also has a built-in pitch/roll level, which will hopefully cut down on those pesky level rejections.  

A big plus is that camera does shoot RAW. Adobe Lightroom/Camera RAW doesn't support it yet, but I expect that will be rectified soon. Based on results from Luminous Landscape, the camera is perfectly usable up to ISO 1600, while 3200 is acceptable and 6400 is only OK in a pinch. This is about the same usable range as most DSLRs that are a few years old, which is quite impressive. The JPEG engine is not as good, but I'm not buying this to shoot JPEGs. Fortunately, the camera empties its buffer quickly, and its continuous shooting (2.5 FPS with continuous AF and 10 FPS with focus fixed on the first frame) gives enough options that you'd be able to grab what you need. I believe the IQ of this camera will be perfectly fine for a.net and I will be putting it through its paces when I go traveling during August.

The camera feels like it's built for work. The body is all metal, and the buttons and controls feel responsive and tough. There's no digicam lag in any of the operations. The barrel ring has no click stops; it's completely smooth. It does play a clicking sound through the speakers. This is better for focusing and zooming, but less so for discrete operations like changing the aperture or shutter speed. Operations are always fast and responsive, and I don't feel like I have to wait for the camera to change settings, modes, focus, or fire the shutter.

If you are looking for a discreet camera with good controls and image quality, you'd be remiss not to check out the RX-100. No, it won't unseat your SLR, but it does punch well above its weight class and it's definitely a worthy tool.


From the Mind of Minolta
16 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineviv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 29
Reply 1, posted (1 year 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 9404 times:

The one-inch sensor will seriously limit the capabilities of the camera.


Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlinedvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1741 posts, RR: 11
Reply 2, posted (1 year 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 9386 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting viv (Reply 1):
The one-inch sensor will seriously limit the capabilities of the camera.

I don't find this to be the case at all. Obviously it's not a full frame camera, but I've been seriously impressed by what it's been producing even in the limited testing I've been able to do so far. A one inch sensor is still far bigger than any point and shoot sensor. Plus, you can actually fit it into your pocket, which you can't do with the mirrorless cameras or a G1X. Noise only starts getting obnoxious at ISO 3200. It's really the combination of teeny tiny size, image quality, lens range, and controllability that really makes this camera shine.

I wouldn't write it off based on the Nikon 1 series, if that's what you're thinking, since the RX-100 has a completely different Sony engineered Exmor CMOS sensor (not the Aptina sensors on the 1 series).

Take it from a former screener, this camera's a winner.   



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineviv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 29
Reply 3, posted (1 year 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 9383 times:

I do not write it off, not at all. In good light, it is probably capable of excellent results.

I have the feeling that, for general photography, the DSLR has peaked in both sales and capability and will gradually be replaced by smaller, lighter cameras. The Nikon D800 is undoubtedly wonderful, but weighs a ton. 36mp images necessitate a lot of computer power to process.

I have recently bought a Fuji X Pro 1 (1.5 crop factor) and am amazed by the image quality.



Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 730 posts, RR: 16
Reply 4, posted (1 year 11 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 9365 times:

Quoting viv (Reply 3):
I have the feeling that, for general photography, the DSLR has peaked in both sales and capability and will gradually be replaced by smaller, lighter cameras.

I'm pretty sure that's what Nikon and Canon are counting on - but they come to the party too late and with too little to offer at the moment. Its very hard to see what the new Canon M thing has to offer over current offerings by Fuji or the 4/3 brigade. But this is just a start - for certain Canon & Nikon would not be introducing new lens mounts without some significant long term plans.

I have no doubt that DSLR sales will fall in the near future. Capability - no, I think this will increase. The Nikon 800 offers incredible value for money in terms of sheer potential image quality (this is medium format territory at 1/10th the price). The Canon 1Dx seems to have hit unheard of levels of AF performance. BUT I do think the DSLR will become a specialist's tool. I would not be surprised to see the demise of the entry-level DSLR in the not too distant future. But I do think we will see a very large sensor Canon fairly soon; as well as a Nikon D4 -like camera with the 800 sensor.


Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlinejettiff From United States of America, joined Aug 2012, 1 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 8959 times:

Nikon will not be able to compete here because Sony will not give them their best sensors anymore. They will still manufacture sensors for Nikon DSLR line but not for mirrorless cams, because Sony really cares for that market. Impressive camera really for its size. Saw some great samples at Sony RX100 Review

[Edited 2012-08-03 10:06:26]

User currently offlinebre16 From United Kingdom, joined May 2012, 22 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 8934 times:

Quoting viv (Reply 3):
I have recently bought a Fuji X Pro 1 (1.5 crop factor) and am amazed by the image quality.

Isn't that the one reviewers are raving about, and is billed as the new Leica?


User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 730 posts, RR: 16
Reply 7, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 8651 times:

Quoting bre16 (Reply 6):

Isn't that the one reviewers are raving about, and is billed as the new Leica?

Yes, but for me, for all its pros, it has a killer con - no viewfinder, and as far as I can make out, no add on available.

Real shame - I really like this camera, but having spent a long time with the GF1, I've learned (for me at least) a viewfinder is just something I can't live without.

(I don't think a Leica has ever been produced without one  )

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineviv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 29
Reply 8, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 8587 times:

Quoting ckw (Reply 7):
no viewfinder

It has an optical viewfinder AND an electronic vioewfinder.



Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 730 posts, RR: 16
Reply 9, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 8547 times:

Sorry Viv - my mistake ... I thought we were still talking about the RX100!

Yes the Fuji is quite 'Leica like' (including the price  ). I do know someone who has been using one for a while, and he seems to have a bit of a love/hate relationship with it. Biggest issue seems to be AF speed - how are you finding it?

Despite the cost, it is very tempting - but I'm not sure tempting enough to woo me away from my micro 4/3 lenses.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlinedvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1741 posts, RR: 11
Reply 10, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 8535 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

If you're considering a mirrorless camera, the Olympus OM-D or the Sony NEX-7 are the best choices right now, though they don't come cheap. The Fuji is half-baked, unfortunately, and I really liked some of their ideas.

I did use the RX100 for some walkaround shots at the Westover air show this weekend, and the quality at ISO 125 is superb. I will hopefully have some in the queue soon.



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlinecelestar From Singapore, joined Jul 2001, 392 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 8485 times:

Quoting dvincent (Thread starter):


I am quite curious about this little Sony. From the link on luminous landscape, the photos seem not very vivid. Sometime, which is quite ironic in digital camera, specification does not always tell the whole story. I owned X10 before and guess what, I am always know away from the photo taken by this camera, despite its image sensor size not on the attractive side.


User currently offlineviv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 29
Reply 12, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 8461 times:

Quoting ckw (Reply 9):
Yes the Fuji is quite 'Leica like' (including the price &nbsp . I do know someone who has been using one for a while, and he seems to have a bit of a love/hate relationship with it. Biggest issue seems to be AF speed - how are you finding it?

You could buy four Fujis for the price of the Leica.

The AF speed is quite acceptable, although not fast. Manual focus is so slow it's a real pain in the arse.

Image quality is amazing, on a par with the Leica M9. The 35/1.4 lens is as good as the equivalent lenses from Zeiss and Leica.

Since I got the Fuji, I have sold my Leica M9 because it was gathering dust on the shelf.

My D700 gets taken out for sports and aviation photography, nothing else.

[Edited 2012-08-07 03:32:10]

[Edited 2012-08-07 03:32:56]


Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlinedvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1741 posts, RR: 11
Reply 13, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 8425 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting celestar (Reply 11):
I am quite curious about this little Sony. From the link on luminous landscape, the photos seem not very vivid. Sometime, which is quite ironic in digital camera, specification does not always tell the whole story. I owned X10 before and guess what, I am always know away from the photo taken by this camera, despite its image sensor size not on the attractive side.

It highly depends on one's taste and processing. My optimal workflow is not in place yet (RAW in Lightroom) so I am working using Sony's IDC Raw converter to make TIFFs and Lightroom to do the rest. Sony tends to be a bit conservative in their defaults; they do not push saturation too much and their color filter arrays tend to be a bit less dense. I find the color separation is very good and that skin tones come through very well, even at high ISOs. It does not have that Velvia-esque punch that the Fuji cameras usually have by default; that is Fuji's trademark and I expect them to push that. But that may not be appropriate for all users, and even then you can do quite a lot in post-processing (which is what Fuji is doing in camera). Are you shooting JPEGs or RAWs? The JPEG engine is good, but the real potential of this camera is unlocked with a good RAW converter, hence the LuLa review which shows the difference.

The camera does have an interesting "look," mostly due to the lens. There are a lot of people on the DPReview Sony forum posting a lot of interesting images; I'd browse through them. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1009

I do have a shot in the queue that will go through today; if it gets accepted I'll post it in here. I've been busy at work so I haven't had an opportunity to do much post work without full Lightroom support. The real test for this camera will be when I'm on vacation in Washington state next week.



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlinedvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1741 posts, RR: 11
Reply 14, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 8408 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

As mentioned earlier...


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dan Vincent - New England Airports




From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineclickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9602 posts, RR: 69
Reply 15, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 8374 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

The biggest knock on the Fuji X100 and the full frame Sigma before it are the wide, fixed lens. They suck for airplanes, And people, unless you want your nose to look like Jamie Farr.

Cameras like the GX 1 and the RX-100 are much more suited to aviation photography.

Dan, make sure you pack that thing next week, I'm looking forward to checking it out.


User currently offlinedvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1741 posts, RR: 11
Reply 16, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 8360 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting clickhappy (Reply 15):
Dan, make sure you pack that thing next week, I'm looking forward to checking it out.

I plan on using it as my primary wide angle, so don't worry. Bring an SD card, you can take some samples.



From the Mind of Minolta
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
My Sukhoi Superjet 100 On The Database! posted Sun Sep 12 2010 23:31:44 by Dreamliner84
For Canon, Is 100-400L Still The Standard? posted Fri Jul 23 2010 15:03:20 by JohnJ
Noise In The Shadows At 100 ISO posted Tue Jul 14 2009 21:39:28 by RonS
Does Anybody Uses The Sony A300/A350? posted Wed Aug 20 2008 11:43:21 by Aviationbr
Contrail Shots With The 100-400 + 1.4x? posted Wed Dec 5 2007 10:00:35 by Deaphen
Sony Or Canon; There´s The Dilema posted Sat May 5 2007 20:07:26 by N405MX
Who's The Best SXM Spotter/photographer posted Sat Dec 23 2006 23:35:42 by BoeingForEver
Sony Alpha, Nikon D80, Or The Canon 30D? posted Sun Dec 3 2006 07:52:33 by Kaitak744
I Bought The 100-400mm! posted Fri Sep 29 2006 22:06:51 by FighterPilot
Sony A-100 Or Canon EOS 400D posted Thu Sep 14 2006 06:07:10 by Bill142