The GetDPI Photography Forum

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!

Fun with the RX-1

Jay Emm

Member
Playing around with higher ISO's (for me), these around the 5000 mark while running auto ISO - which I cap at 6400.
 

Shashin

Well-known member
I just poured off this year's batch of hard cider. Six and a half gallons. This is using a traditional New England barrel cider recipe, which uses just sugar and raisins for fermentation, although using honey instead of sugar is much nicer. No preservatives. I am still having trouble getting the alcohol content below 10%. Still, this should last the year.

 

biglouis

Well-known member
"Les Francais sont trés mechant" (the French people are very wicked)

POZIERS, PAS DE CALAIS, JULY 2013: This lovely old French lady talked to us about the collection of war materiel she and her husband had collected from the fields surrounding Poziers on the Somme. In her hand is a particularly lethal French rifle round from the first world war, which is manufactured to a fine point. She joked with us that only the French could create such a 'wicked' item.

 

ashwinrao1

Active member
Great images, Louis, Will, Jay, MJR, etc...I moved from the RX1 to the RX1R for the extra resolving capacity. I am enjoying the results so far....



 
Ashwin, congratulations on the upgrade to the RX-1R. I would like to do the upgrade myself, but haven't been able to talk my self into it - yet. I would like to hear more about your thoughts on the upgrade with regards to IQ.
 

JCT

Member
Ashwin, congratulations on the upgrade to the RX-1R. I would like to do the upgrade myself, but haven't been able to talk my self into it - yet. I would like to hear more about your thoughts on the upgrade with regards to IQ.
Ditto -- was this close to finally taking the plunge on the RX1 and Sony releases the RX1r .
 

ashwinrao1

Active member
Thanks, Mark and JCT. I have really enjoyed the upgrade of the RX1 to the RX1R. I had a few comments:

1. The camera performance is improved, moreso at low ISO, where razor sharp detail is retained, than at higher ISO. I'd say for the pixel peepers (me included), about a 10% to 15% improvement in pixel level detail. This won't likely be noticeable in prints, other than at full size, or if you like to do a bunch of cropping.

2. I lost a fair bit of money in the trade. RX1's go for around $2100 used, so you can do the math. That may be a strong deterrant, especially when there's not a huge difference macroscopically.

3. I am in IQ nut, and I love sharp, detailed images without any mushiness. The RX1 delivers this in spades, and images have even more 3D pop. IQ is basically the same, just seems to jump off the page more

4. The camera seems otherwise the same....

5. Raw files are not recognized by LR4 (same ARW files, but something's different), so I had to upgrade to LR5 (and also had to upgrade my OS on my Mac to handle LR5)....so a bit of work there

6. For you detail freaks, this is the camera to have. I believe that the RX1R produces some of the best, sharpest, most resilient files out there. I haven't come accross moire yet, and now the files have 24 MP of great color, detail, and dynamic range. I have shot the Leica M a few times, and I prefer the RX1R files to the M files for better color and more DR....noise character seems a bit different and uniform on the M, a bit more chaotic at high ISO on the RX1R, but the files don't break apart like they do on the M with a bunch of raising shadows....

It's a winner...so if you can afford it and pixel peep, it's probably worth the upgrade. Otherwise, I'd take the pass and maybe wait for the full from RX interchangeable system, which I am guessing will arrive soon....with the same sensor (hopefully the RX1R's version)...could be awesome if Sony does it right....
 

Dale Pritchett

New member
Hi everyone. I am new to this thread. I have had an RX1 for about three days but I have been looking and debating for months. I have seen a lot of shallow depth of field but I was interested to look at a file with a wide depth of field. I am pretty pleased with the results.

 

Shashin

Well-known member
Ashwin, since you are a pixel peeper, the pixel pitch of the RX1/RX1R is exactly the same as the Pentax 645D. It looks like an interesting comparison if you have a Pentax 35mm lens...

I have never notice moire with my 645D and that does not have an AA filter either. I would imagine the RX1R will not be anymore sensitive to moire, unless the lens is really too sharp, but I don't think so. Personally, I am not worried about the difference. I don't find the AA on the RX1 not to be very strong and if the difference is like the D800/D800E, then I imagine the RX1 image will sharpen to be very close to the RX1R.

If I were buying today, then I would find the choice easy. Damn the torpedoes, and have Dinner with Moire.
 
Last edited:

JCT

Member
Thanks a million, Ashwin -- was leaning towards the Rx1r and your report gave me the final "push". Now to collect the rest of the scratch...

Also wanted to comment on how your fine portraiture with the Rx1 helped me finally decide to get one, was originally concerned about "too much" sharpness.

jct
 

biglouis

Well-known member
Since owning the RX-1 I have had to use the less than desirable Sony RAW processing software but this week I upgrade my PC to Win7 and upgraded to LR5, so I can process within LR.

The difference is worth it, imho - the fidelity of my images has improved. On top of that I also installed a trial of the NIK software suite - which is at a good price, also imho.

This is processed in LR5 and the Nik b&W plug-in.

 
Last edited:

douglasf13

New member
Ashwin, since you are a pixel peeper, the pixel pitch of the RX1/RX1R is exactly the same as the Pentax 645D. It looks like an interesting comparison if you have a Pentax 35mm lens...

I have never notice moire with my 645D and that does not have an AA filter either. I would imagine the RX1R will not be anymore sensitive to moire, unless the lens is really too sharp, but I don't think so. Personally, I am not worried about the difference. I don't find the AA on the RX1 not to be very strong and if the difference is like the D800/D800E, then I imagine the RX1 image will sharpen to be very close to the RX1R.

If I were buying today, then I would find the choice easy. Damn the torpedoes, and have Dinner with Moire.
I'd be the opposite. I've spent probably too much time looking at comparisons between the two cameras, and it seems that the AA filter on the RX1 was already so good and light (they brag about it a bit on the Sony Japan site) that the difference between the RX1 and RX1R is even less than between the D800 and D800E. When you adjust the sharpening of the RX1 a bit, it is really, really close, and I have seen more moire in some RX1R images. I honestly think that, if maximizing your settings for each camera, it would be tough to tell them apart at any size or in print.

Of course, the real advantage of removing the AA filter with this pixel size would be to improve the corner resolution in relation to the center, which is partly why Leica's and MFDB have always been AA-less, but that doesn't seem to apply to the RX1/RX1R either, from the mtf tests I've seen, so there's really not a whole lot of reason for it.

If buying new today, I'd still choose the RX1.
 

Shashin

Well-known member
Douglas, I really don't think it matters--I am in no way disappoint with the RX1 and I am keeping my camera for a very long time. Naturally, I have simply been basing this on my use of the Pentax 645D which has the same pixel pitch and no AA filter. I have not had and problems with moire, but I have not had the RX1 lens on it either. Actually, I think the lens is the real story with the RX1.
 

JCT

Member
Actually, I think the lens is the real story with the RX1.
I would agree with this wholeheartedly.

In the end, I ordered mine (yippee) solely based on price - got the Rx1R for $280 cheaper ($2519) thanks to an EDU discount at Sony. Interestingly, the 10% discount was not offered for the Rx1.

Looking forward to it.

JT
 

douglasf13

New member
Douglas, I really don't think it matters--I am in no way disappoint with the RX1 and I am keeping my camera for a very long time. Naturally, I have simply been basing this on my use of the Pentax 645D which has the same pixel pitch and no AA filter. I have not had and problems with moire, but I have not had the RX1 lens on it either. Actually, I think the lens is the real story with the RX1.
Agreed. The lens is really something, especially for a wide.
 

douglasf13

New member
I would agree with this wholeheartedly.

In the end, I ordered mine (yippee) solely based on price - got the Rx1R for $280 cheaper ($2519) thanks to an EDU discount at Sony. Interestingly, the 10% discount was not offered for the Rx1.

Looking forward to it.

JT
Ah, that's a different story altogether. If it were cheaper, I'd certainly go RX1R. Considering that AA filters are a bit pricey, especially good ones, it should be cheaper, anyways.

I got my RX1 at Amazon Warehouse for $2165, so I don't have the price motivation.
 
Top