RX1: To AA or not to AA. Need some advice!

[peterb]

What an amazing year for camera fans!

At one point or another, with review after review and page after page of stunning images I have waxed one way or the other toward Fuji's X100s and X-E2, Olympus' M-E1, Panasonic's GX7, Nikon's Df (I looked at D4 shots for samples) and D610, Sony's A7 an A7r, A10, RX100 II and a AA-less RX1! (Whew!)

I've finally decided what I really want to get is Sony's RX1 series. For a number of reasons:

1. It is FF which I've wanted for some time.
2. From what I've seen the Zeiss Sonnar lens is magical. (I've been a Zeiss fan since Contax 139 days.)
3. The lens is fixed which nearly eliminates the chance of dust getting on the sensor.
4. The lens is PERFECTLY matched to the sensor-something I've come to appreciate after having used the DP2M.
5. The shutter is about as noisy as a pencil tip breaking. Perfect for reportage.
6. The camera can handle nearly all light conditions with great color apparently up to ISO 6400 and BW well up to the limits since whatever noise there is would have that 'romantic' TX400 quality I loved in film days.
7. With an aftermarket grip from RRS or Milich the handling would be superb.
8. You can get a fabulous EVF that flips 90°.
9. 35mm has my favorite FOV perfect for catching what I saw. Perfect for portraits that show a bit of the environment. Perfect for 90% of the shots I've loved over the years by myself and so many others.
10. 24mp allows for a lot of print size possibilities even with cropping.
11. Finally, of course, there is the compactness of it all. A totally refreshing break from the behemoth's available until the last few years (I leaped at Panasonic's G1 when it came out.)


Anyway, I'm torn between the RX1 and the RX1r and am concerned about issues one may have using a sensor with no AA filter. Not the moire potential so much but technique and how careful you have to be with a camera with no AA filter vs one that has one.

I'd read that with the Nikon D800's (and now the A7r) while the detail is truly phenomenal one has to be extra careful (particularly with the D800e and A7r which don't have an AA) because there is no 'forgiveness' with camera shake. They are not 'street' cameras but really small studio cameras that really need care, a tripod and high enough shutter speeds if you really want to wring out all the resolution these amazing sensors are capable of. (Something I've noticed big time with the Sigma DP2 Merrill where often at slow shutter speeds if you're not totally steady or the shutter isn't fast enough the results can be REALLY disappointing!)

So I'm wondering if the RX1r without an AA filter which many have said produces images nearly as crisp as cameras with 36MP sensors, similarly requires similar care (tripods, higher shutter speeds, etc.) and that using it handheld for 'reportage' or getting shots on the fly be a disappointment.

I would prefer the RX1r and would love to hear experiences from anyone who's used the RX1r to see if this is a issue.

Thanks!

P

 

[Vivek]

.. (and now the A7r) while the detail is truly phenomenal one has to be extra careful (particularly with the D800e and A7r which don't have an AA) because there is no 'forgiveness' with camera shake. They are not 'street' cameras but really small studio cameras that really need care, a tripod and high enough shutter speeds if you really want to wring out all the resolution these amazing sensors are capable of.
P

I read that portion and find it very amusing.

Those who have used a NEX (any NEX) handheld will find the A7R "very forgiving".

I am going to add the vertical grip when it is available to add to the heft and handling.

 

[mazor]

hmm, I have never heard of not having an AA filter being more susceptible to camera shake. I would have thought the only disadvantage of no AA is when the subject has fine weave or textures where the bayer interpolation has issues trying to discern what to render, which causes issues like Moire.

 

[mazor]

I read that portion and find it very amusing.

Those who have used a NEX (any NEX) handheld will find the A7R "very forgiving".

I am going to add the vertical grip when it is available to add to the heft and handling.

I find the Nex 5 grip is really a bit too small, and for this reason it is more susceptible to camera shake compared to the likes of an A7 or A7r which has a much more substantial hand grip.

 

[Shashin]

Well, I shoot with a Pentax 645D and RX-1. They both have the same pixel pitch, but the Pentax has no AA filter. I have yet to see moire in my 645D. And I don't really see much of a difference in my 645D and RX-1 images at 100%. I would say if you want the RX-1r, buy the RX-1r.

BTW, I have used my Pentax 645D, D800E, and RX-1 all handheld. There is no mystery here and I get the full resolution of the sensor. A higher resolution sensor will alway do better than a lower resolution one. Camera shake does not change that. Handholding these camera to get sharp images does not requires super-human powers.

 

[peterb]

Thanks for your quick responses!

I have really enjoyed the initial images some of you have posted for the A7 and A7r (two cameras that I had been considering) but have decided to go for a fixed lens RX1r.

Again many thanks!

 

[docmoore]

Thanks for your quick responses!

I have really enjoyed the initial images some of you have posted for the A7 and A7r (two cameras that I had been considering) but have decided to go for a fixed lens RX1r.

Again many thanks!

Peter,

I just sold my RX1R....and will not be getting an A7r.

It was a definite step up from the RX1 in terms of sharpness and one of the easiest cameras to handhold with great results. If all you need is 35 then go for it in a heartbeat...fabulous results.

Imagine a 4x5 Sinar Handy with immediate results.

Great color and very strong files for post process.

I am sure you will be very pleased if you go with the RX1R.

Bob

 

[mazor]

BTW, I have used my Pentax 645D, D800E, and RX-1 all handheld. There is no mystery here and I get the full resolution of the sensor. A higher resolution sensor will alway do better than a lower resolution one. Camera shake does not change that. Handholding these camera to get sharp images does not requires super-human powers.

Camera shake is more evident when you are using higher resolution sensors though, as you can zoom in and pixel peep closer.

The RX1r and RX1 have the same resolution, so there should be no camera shake correlation. The A7 and A7r is a different story, since the A7r is a completely different resolution.

 

[Shashin]

Camera shake is more evident when you are using higher resolution sensors though, as you can zoom in and pixel peep closer.

But since you either view on a down-rezed image on the net or print to a specific print size, then there is really no practical difference as magnification is basically normalized with displayed image. Pixel peeping is never a real-world viewing condition.

 

[jsparks]

I have a rx-1 that I bought recently. I chose the rx-1 over the rx-1r because part of what I like about the rx-1 images I've seen is the smooth sharpness (if that makes any sense) that I see. Since most of the images I've seen are from the rx-1 rather than the rx-1r (since it has been out so much longer), I worried that the "r" would affect this somehow. I read a few accounts people traded an rx-1 for an rx-1r then either wanted to go back or actually did. I thought the rx-1 seemed like a safer choice for me.

On the other hand, in on-line comparisons, the JPEGs seem much sharper from the "r" (probably more due to change in the sharpness setting in the JPEG engine than the lack of AA), but the RAWs seem only very subtly different. As a RAW only photographer, I don't think I would see much difference anyway. I don't regret getting the rx-1.

My other camera is a Sony A99 after a series of earlier Sony and Minolta camera with built in image stabilization. I have become very used to the stabilization and many of my early rx-1 shots were blurry from camera shake. Using the LCD, I find I need at least 1/160 sec to have consistent sharp photos. After I got the EVF, I find I can go slower with the camera against my face. 1/80 works fine and I haven't really explored how much slower I can go without shake, but wouldn't be surprised if I can use 1/40 with a bit more practice. This is in contrast with a large number of stable shots with the A99 and 35mm lens at 1/8 sec or so.

The difference between the rx-1 and rx-1r seems much too small to make a real difference in hand hold-ability. If you are really worried about this, get something with stabilization, that will make a real difference.