Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
I have shot inages like that on film. I would think exposure as well as WB are the reasons. Easy to play around with both. As you allude to, the RX1 will not turn out to be a magical tool on its own(despite all the tech advantages it has over a NEX5).Coming from a humble Nex 5, I'm obviously impressed with the quality of the RX1 shots posted here, and I bow in awe before the skill of the photographers. What touches me particularly is the color rendition (e.g., the death valley shots by Joe, the Net Fence by Helena, and many others). On my Nex, I often just can't get it right despite shooting RAW and tweaking in Lightroom 5. Sunsets seem especially difficult, and the last sunset I truly liked dates back to my film days.
As an example, consider the following shot (RAW). It was taken in gorgeous golden hour light, but no matter what I do (WB, contrast, etc.) it looks either too dull or too yellow, and never golden. There's also a difference in tones between face, sand, and bridge that doesn't look natural to me.
Are there ways I can improve color rendition with my Nex (such as WB adjustment on site), or can I use this as an excuse to justify the purchase of an RX1?
It is a matter of learning how to see and controlling your process. One of the hardest things in color photography is to be able to judge color and judge color as "natural." (And what you imagined you saw may not actually be what you saw, and the camera will "see" in its own way.) While I would like to say all you have to do is X, Y, and Z, it is just not that simple. It is going to come from experience and learning. All of this is independent of the camera. (Naturally, you color manage your working environment.)Coming from a humble Nex 5, I'm obviously impressed with the quality of the RX1 shots posted here, and I bow in awe before the skill of the photographers. What touches me particularly is the color rendition (e.g., the death valley shots by Joe, the Net Fence by Helena, and many others). On my Nex, I often just can't get it right despite shooting RAW and tweaking in Lightroom 5. Sunsets seem especially difficult, and the last sunset I truly liked dates back to my film days.
As an example, consider the following shot (RAW). It was taken in gorgeous golden hour light, but no matter what I do (WB, contrast, etc.) it looks either too dull or too yellow, and never golden. There's also a difference in tones between face, sand, and bridge that doesn't look natural to me.
Are there ways I can improve color rendition with my Nex (such as WB adjustment on site), or can I use this as an excuse to justify the purchase of an RX1?
Louis, One big advantage of a compact or P&S being a standalone unit is that you can choose any brand and any system. Why restrict yourself to a Sony or a NEX?I am quite attracted to a second body, either the Nex-5 or 7 since the announcement of the 16-70 Carl Zeiss f4 zoom.
LouisB
No, each sensor is unique and comparing my RX1 images to my NEX shots illustrates that plainly.However, my assumption has always been that I would get the same look with a Nex camera as I do with my RX1.
Is this the case?
LouisB
Vivek,Louis, One big advantage of a compact or P&S being a standalone unit is that you can choose any brand and any system. Why restrict yourself to a Sony or a NEX?
:thumbs:Neo Soul singer, Natasha Lee. Shot for Red Bull at the Red Bull Sound Select show in Austin, TX, last Saturday...
[
I agree. I have both Sigma DPx and the Sony RX1 cameras and they are horses for courses.Louis, One big advantage of a compact or P&S being a standalone unit is that you can choose any brand and any system. Why restrict yourself to a Sony or a NEX?
I really like the RX1 sensor - I think it is the best sensor in any digital camera I have owned.No, each sensor is unique and comparing my RX1 images to my NEX shots illustrates that plainly.
That said, the signatures are much closer than a comparison between Fuji X cameras and NEX or the RX1 and my Ricoh GR...
I am definitely looking at a system camera. The compacts are nice but I now have the problem that I am lugging three compacts! Not much different to a single camera and three lenses.Vivek,
It looks like Louis is looking at a system camera for his second body and is wondering if the NEX sensor would behave similar to the RX1.
I can understand wanting to "keep it in the family" for workflow management, especially if you have a distinct style you wish to replicate across cameras.
Who are we kidding? :shocked:Finally, I am actually thinking of going back to m43rds(!) despite my negativity towards the system, the lenses are good and (perhaps?) the improvements in the dynamic range of the sensors in the GX-7 and the new Olympus model are real?
Decisions, decisions.
LouisB
I'm not a fan of the A99 but not due to the lack of lenses. So much excellent and cheap Minolta legacy glass out there. I just picked up a Minolta AF 50mm f/1.7 for $29 and it is better than anything I shot on Canon in that range, including their f/1.4.I was thinking about a Sony A99 because I like the sensor in the RX1 so much but I'm not convinced about the range of lenses available.
Decisions, decisions.
LouisB