Site Sponsors
Page 12 of 18 FirstFirst ... 2 10 11 12 13 14 ... LastLast
Results 551 to 600 of 853

Thread: Rx1r2

  1. #551
    Senior Member eleanorbrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Houston and Keystone, Colorado
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    40

    Re: Rx1r2

    I have been doing more testing much of today, this time the RX1r2 against my RX1r. As I mentioned before the RX1r files at f2 are razor sharp....not so with the Mark 2 version. I think what I'm finding since this is the same lens is that the sensor with more pixels gives a depth of field wide open that is less for sure and it seems to me that even the slightest difference in lens to subject distance can soften the focus area ever so slightly (among other things). Also the sensor on the RX1r just gives a very "crisp" file so needs very little sharpening. I have been experimenting with a good amount of sharpening...up to 300 .6 .6 with my RX1r2 and this makes a significant difference. This file at f2 on the RX1r2 has been sharpened and a tiny bit clarity added in places. The out of focus areas are dreamy I think. These files, as Guy mentioned, have to be processed differently than the original RX1r. eleanor

    [IMG][URL="http://www.getdpi.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=29774"][/IMG]
    Eleanor Brown
    http://www.eleanorbrown.com
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #552
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Rx1r2

    Perfect Eleanor you hit the sweet spot. Awesome setting and great clarity. Try not to get past like 10plus on clarity. It can start to break down. Also structure is very interesting but again if any very small amount.

    Bottom line the default is just different with this sensor. I'm almost the Same sharpening setting on the A7rII and right out of the gate I went hmmm this looks very very smooth and it is but if you want crisp you have to make that adjustment .

    Great work. This looks so much better now
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  3. #553
    Senior Member eleanorbrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Houston and Keystone, Colorado
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    40

    Re: Rx1r2

    Here's a screen shot that indicates what I was trying to say regarding less depth of field at f2 gives impression of more softness in the lens. Top at f2 and bottom at 2.8 in RX1r2. In both files where there is max. focus both are very sharp *300 .6 .6......But in the f2 file where there is less depth of field it appears softer. Thus the lens itself appears to be fine. ...this shown at 100 percent by the way... Hoping I'm making sense. eleanor

    [IMG]
    Eleanor Brown
    http://www.eleanorbrown.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  4. #554
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Rx1r2

    My initial thought given the big jump in MPX is focus is very critical on the RX2 given we have to bump the sharpness up it makes sense as the RX1 maybe a little looser on focus. It just sounds a lot like Mdium format to me with the high powered MPX sensors we just need to be much more critical with our technique . Bad choice of words but you can be more sloppy on technique on the lower MPX sensor. One other thing too the RX1 Raws could be cooked too but not sure. Im not going to open that can of worms. I think the bottom line like the A7rII with high MPX sensor we just have to more diligent in our technique.

    I would still like to see you run a better test now against the FE 35 1.4 just to make sure your not having a issue. You have a little time to return but I like to see you be exactly sure before that time runs out. It's hard since I don't have them in front of me so I want to make sure your running good.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  5. #555
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Rx1r2

    Looks like the micro contrast jumps up when you hit 2.8 quite a lot. Somewhat normal.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  6. #556
    Senior Member eleanorbrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Houston and Keystone, Colorado
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    40

    Re: Rx1r2

    Last test image....another from my kitchen....rainy and cold out today so working inside...RX1r2 at f2 sharping 300 .6 .6 and little clarity on parts of bottle. As before the out of focus background is superb...iso 100. eleanor

    [URL="http://www.getdpi.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=29776"][/IMG]

  7. #557
    Senior Member eleanorbrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Houston and Keystone, Colorado
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    40

    Re: Rx1r2

    Thanks Guy...will do another test against the A7r2 with 35 lens (but that 1.4 lens at f2 is already stopped down one stop). Just posted another image at f2 and I'm getting a feel a bit like medium format as far as the smoothness of the files. eleanor

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    My initial thought given the big jump in MPX is focus is very critical on the RX2 given we have to bump the sharpness up it makes sense as the RX1 maybe a little looser on focus. It just sounds a lot like Mdium format to me with the high powered MPX sensors we just need to be much more critical with our technique . Bad choice of words but you can be more sloppy on technique on the lower MPX sensor. One other thing too the RX1 Raws could be cooked too but not sure. Im not going to open that can of worms. I think the bottom line like the A7rII with high MPX sensor we just have to more diligent in our technique.

    I would still like to see you run a better test now against the FE 35 1.4 just to make sure your not having a issue. You have a little time to return but I like to see you be exactly sure before that time runs out. It's hard since I don't have them in front of me so I want to make sure your running good.

  8. #558
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Rx1r2

    Quote Originally Posted by eleanorbrown View Post
    Thanks Guy...will do another test against the A7r2 with 35 lens (but that 1.4 lens at f2 is already stopped down one stop). Just posted another image at f2 and I'm getting a feel a bit like medium format as far as the smoothness of the files. eleanor
    Why im so excited about this sensor, it feels very much like my Phase backs. First time ever in 35mm would I ever say that.

    Really just want to see if it's close than you should be good. Your first test made I think all of us a little nervous for you.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  9. #559
    Senior Member eleanorbrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Houston and Keystone, Colorado
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    40

    Re: Rx1r2

    Yes those initial files were sharpened to 120 .8 1 and with that I could easily get by with those numbers on my RX1r files....that why I was so shocked. Need good bit more sharpening with these new files or they look quite soft at f2. 2.8 is very very good and f4 is excellent. Eleanor

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Why im so excited about this sensor, it feels very much like my Phase backs. First time ever in 35mm would I ever say that.

    Really just want to see if it's close than you should be good. Your first test made I think all of us a little nervous for you.

  10. #560
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    No CA
    Posts
    796
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Rx1r2

    Eleanor, would you mind posting the shot of that nice chardonnay bottle both with and without sharpening? Pretty please?

    –––––

    My reason for asking is that my thinking runs sort of counter to Guy's. I'm not interested in the apparent sharpness of web material, but only in the appearance of medium or medium-large print output. From this perspective, little initial 'capture sharpening' should be necessary on a file made without an AA filter. Default and 'capture' sharpening were initially intended simply to counteract the blur of AA filters. A 42MP Sony file will already print as 14x21 at 360 ppi; 22x33 @ 240, 30x45 @ 180. In many instances one may be resing down, rather than up, to print. So even in fairly large prints, one should need only a little 'output sharpening.'

    What I'm really hoping for from the RX2: From this expensive, small, light, constant-companion, carry-around camera I'd like to see something like what I get from the A7rII using the better and sometimes older Zeiss and Leica lenses. I mean a detailed file with enhanced tonal gradation, and a bit of the old Zeiss '3D' look – that is, good resolution at the point of focus (even wide open), an appearance of roundness of objects and faces, separation of subject from background, and good bokeh.

    If one is old-fashioned enough to fear an overtly digital look, then the unsharpened performance or rendering of the lens-and-sensor combination should be quite good initially and all by itself, without needing much sharpening – barring a bad lens copy or poor adjustment of lens to sensor.

    Maybe there are two different goals here – one is achieving maximum apparent micro-contrtast and/or resolution; the other, displaying the native rendering of really nice lenses. I'm more interested in the latter.

    Kirk

    (A further note, less relevant to Eleanor's helpful testing: I'm now printing mostly BW from converted A7rII files. I've compared these to my 18MB Monochrom files made with no Bayer array, and at 100% the converted 42MB Sony files do look a bit less sharp, as folks have mentioned above. But the Sony file is larger; so the MM files have to be res'd up, or the Sony files downsized, to make the same size of print. After this step the 'softer' 42MB Sony files yield equal-or-better image quality in printed output. I'd be expecting the same result from the RX2's sensor as from the A7rII's. If I didn't see that, I'd suspect problems of quality control.)
    Last edited by thompsonkirk; 28th November 2015 at 23:20. Reason: a further note

  11. #561
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    39
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Rx1r2

    Question regarding the various comments on sharpening. Is the 300/ .6/ .6 setting in ACR or Capture One?

    If in Capture One, I'm surprised that the RX1Rii raw files are supported so quickly.

  12. #562
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Rx1r2

    My theory on this sensor compared to some other sensors is the raw file with the high DR flattens the tonal range to a point it losses the micro detail in the file. Why they look soft coming in without the sharpening. The bigger pixel sensors like these 24mpx the DR is not as high and the micro detail is still maintaining to a certain degree why we use lower sharpening . Case here , now what She has set up is high sharpening but a very low radius and threshold so it's punching back up the micro detail before it gets to a point that it becomes destructive to the file. This brings me back to MF take a P25 9 micron sensor I hardly did any sharpening on those file. The DR was low as it did not drown out the micro detail in the tonal range but when I went to a IQ 160 at 5.4 micron with higher DR things changed you need higher sharpening and clarity to get that punch to the micro detail. I feel it's the same here low micron sensor and huge DR. Be this is right or wrong I believe just from working these different type of sensors this is the effect of high DR and low microns is we have to apply more sharpening back in at the capture level to get to a point where we like our sharpness levels. Of course not every image needs this and depends on subject. Portraits I go completely the other way and soften more. At least this is what I have noticed the last few years. I'm not sure I'm exactly correct but that's what my gut tells me. Again I'm not the engineer or the scientist by any stretch. Lol
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  13. #563
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Rx1r2

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Kott View Post
    Question regarding the various comments on sharpening. Is the 300/ .6/ .6 setting in ACR or Capture One?

    If in Capture One, I'm surprised that the RX1Rii raw files are supported so quickly.
    C1, it was supported before it even came out on the last update. Sony is now a partner with C1 so imagine they are working close together on getting the support for there cameras.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  14. #564
    Senior Member eleanorbrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Houston and Keystone, Colorado
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    40

    Re: Rx1r2

    Will do but I guarantee you will be disappointed with NO sharpening at f2 especially. I don't even look at digital files in C1 unless they have default sharpening of 120 .8 1 for the Sony. Very soft (except for the rx1r.). I am using my Leica 50 summilux asph on my a7r2 and it is stunning but beginning at f2. I'm super particular about lenses. The reason I'm obsessive about f2 on this new rx1r2 is that I rarely shoot above ISO 100 as I'm always trying to get as close to my phase one files as possible. I'm not really into shooting at high ISO s.

    Quote Originally Posted by thompsonkirk View Post
    Eleanor, would you mind posting the shot of that nice chardonnay bottle both with and without sharpening? Pretty please?

    –––––

    My reason for asking is that my thinking runs sort of counter to Guy's. I'm not interested in the apparent sharpness of web material, but only in the appearance of medium or medium-large print output. From this perspective, little initial 'capture sharpening' should be necessary on a file made without an AA filter. Default and 'capture' sharpening were initially intended simply to counteract the blur of AA filters. A 42MP Sony file will already print as 14x21 at 360 ppi; 22x33 @ 240, 30x45 @ 180. In many instances one may be resing down, rather than up, to print. So even in fairly large prints, one should need only a little 'output sharpening.'

    What I'm really hoping for from the RX2: From this expensive, small, light, constant-companion, carry-around camera I'd like to see something like what I get from the A7rII using the better and sometimes older Zeiss and Leica lenses. I mean a detailed file with enhanced tonal gradation, and a bit of the old Zeiss '3D' look – that is, good resolution at the point of focus (even wide open), an appearance of roundness of objects and faces, separation of subject from background, and good bokeh.

    If one is old-fashioned enough to fear an overtly digital look, then the unsharpened performance or rendering of the lens-and-sensor combination should be quite good initially and all by itself, without needing much sharpening – barring a bad lens copy or poor adjustment of lens to sensor.

    Maybe there are two different goals here – one is achieving maximum apparent micro-contrtast and/or resolution; the other, displaying the native rendering of really nice lenses. I'm more interested in the latter.

    Kirk

    (A further note, less relevant to Eleanor's helpful testing: I'm now printing mostly BW from converted A7rII files. I've compared these to my 18MB Monochrom files made with no Bayer array, and at 100% the converted 42MB Sony files do look a bit less sharp, as folks have mentioned above. But the Sony file is larger; so the MM files have to be res'd up, or the Sony files downsized, to make the same size of print. After this step the 'softer' 42MB Sony files yield equal-or-better image quality in printed output. I'd be expecting the same result from the RX2's sensor as from the A7rII's. If I didn't see that, I'd suspect problems of quality control.)
    Eleanor Brown
    http://www.eleanorbrown.com
    Thanks 2 Member(s) thanked for this post
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  15. #565
    Senior Member eleanorbrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Houston and Keystone, Colorado
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    40

    Re: Rx1r2

    First after I got these of the Chardonnay bottle uploaded I realized they were the other file (exactly like the one I already posted but looks like the camera was moved slightly. Anyway this one may actually be better focused that the one I posted with sharpening. Here first one at 100 percent screen shot with NO processing of any kind and NO sharpening. F2 shot on tripod. Second one just showing more of the file and not at 100 percent. eleanor

    [IMG][/IMG]

    [IMG][/IMG]
    Eleanor Brown
    http://www.eleanorbrown.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  16. #566
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    No CA
    Posts
    796
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Rx1r2

    "My theory on this sensor compared to some other sensors is the raw file with the high DR flattens the tonal range to a point it losses the micro detail in the file." ––Guy

    I suppose we should each buy into the other's theory and say that both make sense. We're in the outer space where the designers have to make some trade-offs, and I'm in no position to weigh the balance. And neither of us can weigh what's attributable to the new back-illuminated sensor design, another part pf the picture.

    For sure I buy your point that larger photosites allow fewer of them to read their exposure to light as misinformation / noise. This is how the Canon D30 (hope I got that right) made its breakthrough, and how medium format retains its advantage. But I suspect this – photo site size or pixel pitch – is more important than the idea that broader dynamic range is reducing micro-detail.

    But at the same time, eliminating the AA filter (or making it adjustable on RX2) does noticeably increase micro-detail and make less sharpening necessary.

    So IMO it's a both/and trade-off – with the new sensor design also making a difference.

    It's interesting – but less interesting than Eleanor's actual tests – to try to think these things through.

    Kirk

  17. #567
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    No CA
    Posts
    796
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Rx1r2

    Thank you, Eleanor, and I think the new unsharpened version looks just great, with lots of clarity in the lettering. It seems (on a monitor) to have the level of detail the I'd like to see in a print.

    It's maybe a question of whether the label in that light really had all the texture we can see in the sharpened version, or whether the version above is a better 'representation.' Only your eyes know that!

    Thank you so much for your help. And my tentative conclusion (spell-checker had changed it to 'confusion'!) is that the lens is fine, and the sensor can reveal the very slightest focus error or camera movement.

    Kirk
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  18. #568
    Senior Member eleanorbrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Houston and Keystone, Colorado
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    40

    Re: Rx1r2

    Realize this is not real world shooting but at this point I'm just interested to know if my 35 lens on my new rx1r2 is as it should be wide open with this new sensor. These compared to my Zeiss 35mm f 1.4 stopped down to f2. rx1r2 always on top and in the image of 4 of the statue the ONLY one from A7r2 is on bottom right. All sharpened at 300 .6 .6. Any ideas? I'll do more tests later today. Don't know why the flowers results are not closer. will try those again. Once I get to f 2.8 on the RX1r2 results are incredible both in sharpness and micro contrast. I'm wondering if these comparisons are really fair as the 35 lens on the A7r2 is stopped down one stop. (EVERYTHING AT 100 percent in samples here) eleanor

    [IMG][/IMG]

    [IMG][/IMG]

    [IMG][/IMG]

    [IMG][/IMG]

  19. #569
    Senior Member eleanorbrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Houston and Keystone, Colorado
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    40

    Re: Rx1r2

    Yes Kirk, soon many issues come into play in these tests...lighting, ever ever so slight focus differences, position of objects, and on and on. I actually was not as disappointed in the 100 percent samples with zero processing that I though I'd be. The files do show more micro contrast in the label and lettering than I expected. And the file is oh so smooth! I am using C1. eleanor

    Quote Originally Posted by thompsonkirk View Post
    Thank you, Eleanor, and I think the new unsharpened version looks just great, with lots of clarity in the lettering. It seems (on a monitor) to have the level of detail the I'd like to see in a print.

    It's maybe a question of whether the label in that light really had all the texture we can see in the sharpened version, or whether the version above is a better 'representation.' Only your eyes know that!

    Thank you so much for your help. And my tentative conclusion (spell-checker had changed it to 'confusion'!) is that the lens is fine, and the sensor can reveal the very slightest focus error or camera movement.

    Kirk

  20. #570
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    128
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    24

    Re: Rx1r2

    Does anyone who has the RX1R ii know if the RRS L bracket from the RX1 fits it ?

  21. #571
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Marin County, CA
    Posts
    593
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Rx1r2

    Quote Originally Posted by MILESF View Post
    Does anyone who has the RX1R ii know if the RRS L bracket from the RX1 fits it ?
    A user on DPR says it does, but not very snug. The same goes for the Fotodiox I have (and will be returning). I think they are usable, but not ideal.

  22. #572
    Senior Member eleanorbrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Houston and Keystone, Colorado
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    40

    Re: Rx1r2

    I have been using the RRS base place with handle attached that I took off my RX1r and it fits perfectly! used it from the minute I got the camera yesterday. Don't know if this is what you care calling the L bracket or not?? What I'm using is very snug. On second thought what I'm using is probably not the "L" bracket you're referring to. I can only attach my tripod to base of camera....not the side. sorry for the confusion. eleanor


    Quote Originally Posted by MILESF View Post
    Does anyone who has the RX1R ii know if the RRS L bracket from the RX1 fits it ?

  23. #573
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Ithaca, NY
    Posts
    3,541
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Rx1r2

    I used an old RRS L plate made for the Panasonic G1 on my RX1R. Worked well, but I don't know yet if it will fit the RX1RII or if RRS even still has this model.

    Carl
    Gallery
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  24. #574
    Subscriber and Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,803
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Rx1r2

    Quote Originally Posted by eleanorbrown View Post
    I'm wondering if these comparisons are really fair as the 35 lens on the A7r2 is stopped down one stop.
    It is obvious that the limited DOF on the RX1R II at 2.0 is killing the 100 percent views ... and that the 35 1.4 is one of the best lenses ever.

    But if real world bokeh and feel of the RX1R II at full image is acceptable and as it is stopped down it improves you have acceptable choices
    when you shoot with it. As long as you nail your focus point of interest and have the option of wide open or somewhat stopped down it should
    allow any sense of capture that you desire.

    Personally ... I preferred the 35 1.4 100 percent views but imagine that the convenience and imaging of the RX1R II will be stellar. I would
    probably bracket aperture in the field to ensure that I captured the best image possible.

    Glad to know that the lens is acceptable and that you do not have to play chase the QC lens acquisition game.

    Lovely choice of wines BTW ...

    Regards,

    Bob
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  25. #575
    Senior Member eleanorbrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Houston and Keystone, Colorado
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    40

    Re: Rx1r2

    Last of testing....I know it's getting redundant but if someone is coming from the RX1r they might be shocked at files wide open at f2 on the RX1r2. New sensor...needs different processing, not to mention shooting...more attention to exact focus, etc. The camera image and single palm leaf both sharpened at 300 .6 .6 (samples at 100 percent.) No clarity on either. Image of the broader view of palm also same but not 100 percent. Good color, bokeh, etc. Almost think the camera image could have used slightly less sharpening...maybe as Guy mentioned...280 .5 .5 or so. ISO 100 ...eleanor

    [IMG][/IMG]


    [IMG][/IMG]

    [IMG][/IMG]
    Eleanor Brown
    http://www.eleanorbrown.com
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  26. #576
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Rx1r2

    Yea you can bring the sharpness down to even 250 but keep your radius and threshold at .5 or .6. 300 is a touch agressive and good for landscape type images. No rules whatever looks best per image.

    I think everything is looking as it should. Now go have fun. Lol
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  27. #577
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    39
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Rx1r2

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    C1, it was supported before it even came out on the last update. Sony is now a partner with C1 so imagine they are working close together on getting the support for there cameras.
    If Sony and C1 are working so closely together, why do you think the default C1 sharpening settings are so far from the mark?

  28. #578
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    128
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    24

    Re: Rx1r2

    Quote Originally Posted by eleanorbrown View Post

    I have been using the RRS base place with handle attached that I took off my RX1r and it fits perfectly! used it from the minute I got the camera yesterday. Don't know if this is what you care calling the L bracket or not?? What I'm using is very snug. On second thought what I'm using is probably not the "L" bracket you're referring to. I can only attach my tripod to base of camera....not the side. sorry for the confusion. eleanor

    Thanks, that really helps even though I probably have something different from yours. On my RX1 I have the RRS BRX1 base plate and the BRX1-L which makes it into an L bracket and allows both Landscape and Portrait orientation on the ball head. I'm waiting for the RX1R ii inthe UK and want to take it on a trip in the near future. So it's good to know that that base plate works fine in case RRS don't bring out a new model in time and I can always turn the ball head 90 degrees if I need to without the extra piece.

    Good news and thanks.
    Miles Flint
    http://www.milesflint.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  29. #579
    Senior Member eleanorbrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Houston and Keystone, Colorado
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    40

    Re: Rx1r2

    Thanks for all your help Guy. Another thing I've noticed is that I need a faster shutter speed to get hand help sharp with rx2.... With rx1r I was getting consistently super sharp images with MUCH lower shutter speeds. More pixels makes a difference I think. Eleanor

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    Yea you can bring the sharpness down to even 250 but keep your radius and threshold at .5 or .6. 300 is a touch agressive and good for landscape type images. No rules whatever looks best per image.

    I think everything is looking as it should. Now go have fun. Lol

  30. #580
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Rx1r2

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Kott View Post
    If Sony and C1 are working so closely together, why do you think the default C1 sharpening settings are so far from the mark?
    Because they don't want to give it at that level they just give you a nice base . They do this even with there own backs. There more involved in the color profiles than output settings. That's up to us
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  31. #581
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Rx1r2

    Quote Originally Posted by eleanorbrown View Post
    Thanks for all your help Guy. Another thing I've noticed is that I need a faster shutter speed to get hand help sharp with rx2.... With rx1r I was getting consistently super sharp images with MUCH lower shutter speeds. More pixels makes a difference I think. Eleanor
    No question better technique when you start getting at these high mpx. Every flaw shows up.

    We may hear more complaints or questions when more folks start getting these . It's a different camera now even though the same.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Thanks 1 Member(s) thanked for this post

  32. #582
    Senior Member eleanorbrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Houston and Keystone, Colorado
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    40

    Re: Rx1r2

    Thanks Bob...I'm really trying to move away form all large heavy cameras....Nikon, phase one, etc. but want to make sure I'm getting equivalent or near so quality with sonys. Yes I love my a7r2 with the incredible zeiss 35 lens at f 1.4... I will mostly use the rx1r2 when I do shooting in public...markets, street, and also when hiking as it will fit in my rain jacket pocket. I took my rx1r with no EVF and no baseplate and handle to Russia last year, and I looked like a tourist, even a local.....and not shooting for artistic reasons, etc. I blended n With the crowds! Eleanor

    Quote Originally Posted by docmoore View Post
    It is obvious that the limited DOF on the RX1R II at 2.0 is killing the 100 percent views ... and that the 35 1.4 is one of the best lenses ever.

    But if real world bokeh and feel of the RX1R II at full image is acceptable and as it is stopped down it improves you have acceptable choices
    when you shoot with it. As long as you nail your focus point of interest and have the option of wide open or somewhat stopped down it should
    allow any sense of capture that you desire.

    Personally ... I preferred the 35 1.4 100 percent views but imagine that the convenience and imaging of the RX1R II will be stellar. I would
    probably bracket aperture in the field to ensure that I captured the best image possible.

    Glad to know that the lens is acceptable and that you do not have to play chase the QC lens acquisition game.

    Lovely choice of wines BTW ...

    Regards,

    Bob

  33. #583
    Senior Member eleanorbrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Houston and Keystone, Colorado
    Posts
    706
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    40

    Re: Rx1r2

    Yes...very different handling and processing is a must....all this has been an eye opener to me. Eleanor

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso View Post
    No question better technique when you start getting at these high mpx. Every flaw shows up.

    We may hear more complaints or questions when more folks start getting these . It's a different camera now even though the same.
    Eleanor Brown
    http://www.eleanorbrown.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  34. #584
    Subscriber and Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,803
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Rx1r2

    Quote Originally Posted by eleanorbrown View Post
    Thanks Bob...I'm really trying to move away form all large heavy cameras....Nikon, phase one, etc. but want to make sure I'm getting equivalent or near so quality with sonys. Yes I love my a7r2 with the incredible zeiss 35 lens at f 1.4... I will mostly use the rx1r2 when I do shooting in public...markets, street, and also when hiking as it will fit in my rain jacket pocket. I took my rx1r with no EVF and no baseplate and handle to Russia last year, and I looked like a tourist, even a local.....and not shooting for artistic reasons, etc. I blended n With the crowds! Eleanor
    The ability to shoot as a local without attracting attention to oneself is of major importance.

    After some 20 years doing medical relief missions in South America Central America and West Africa I have been sensitized to the priorities of the local
    community ... I rarely take a candid of anyone without their acceptance not their acquiscence and so I tend to avoid "people" shots. Lots of trees, buildings and
    flora and fauna.

    Still it is a wonder to have a small camera that is as complex and comprehensive as the RX1R II

    Bob
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  35. #585
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    804
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Rx1r2

    Will pick mine up today and am quite curious to see whether it will show the perceived softness @f2.
    Last edited by retow; 30th November 2015 at 03:22.

  36. #586
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,610
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Rx1r2

    Quote Originally Posted by retow View Post
    Will pick mine up today and am quite curious to see whether I will show the perceived softness @f2.
    You will not as it does not exist.

    Enjoy!

  37. #587
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    564
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Rx1r2

    Quote Originally Posted by docmoore View Post
    The ability to shoot as a local without attracting attention to oneself is of major importance.

    After some 20 years doing medical relief missions in South America Central America and West Africa I have been sensitized to the priorities of the local
    community ... I rarely take a candid of anyone without their acceptance not their acquiscence and so I tend to avoid "people" shots. Lots of trees, buildings and
    flora and fauna.

    Bob
    Bob, thank you for saying that. I have a major problem with the invasion of the homes and privacy of indigenous peoples for the sake of a 'Steve McCurry' photo. I groan every time I meet someone at a workshop who is eager to show me their images of India. It is true, ordinary Indians, particularly the men with the turbans and women with their colorful ghagras and saris look exotic and 'different' enough to become a curiosity to a Westerner. One just has to reverse the situation a bit to understand how it would look from the other side.

    I have no problems if it is well understood in advance and there is a compensation of sorts involved, like when you go visit a Maasai village in Tanzania you pay an admission price that allows you to take photos. Even then, I've seen photographers being overly aggressive, with golden reflectors being shoved in their face and people being asked to strike special poses for them.

    Anyway, this little camera would be perfect for travel photography, can't wait to get mine.
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  38. #588
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Rx1r2

    Im +1 to that as well. Maybe a thread on this in sunset bar would be interesting. Bottom line I get paid to shoot, what i shoot should get paid as well. but I also have a moral issue as well.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  39. #589
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,610
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Rx1r2

    I have absolutely no clue about this discussion.

    Not a tourist but an Amsterdam local.

    Untitled by Vivek Iyer, on Flickr

    RX1R II, Amsterdam, 28Nov2015
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  40. #590
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    39
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Rx1r2

    Here's a boring question.

    What are those of you who just bought this camera or who have it on order doing for LCD screen protectors?

  41. #591
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Rx1r2

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Kott View Post
    Here's a boring question.

    What are those of you who just bought this camera or who have it on order doing for LCD screen protectors?
    I'd get the Sony

  42. #592
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,610
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Rx1r2

    +1.

    Unboxed it at the camera shop and slapped the protector on immediately. Anything else would have been utterly moronic.

  43. #593
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Marin County, CA
    Posts
    593
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Rx1r2

    I posted this in DPR, posting here because some have wondered about comparing the FE35/f2.8 with the RX1rII. I'll leave the comparisons with the FE35/f1.4 to someone who owns that lens.

    I have this setup, so I thought a comparison between the two Zeiss Sonnars might be interesting. I realize it's a different lens on a different camera, but they use the same sensor and wanted to see them side by side.

    These are tripod shots from my back yard balcony, on a bright, overcast day. It's a zip file with five RAW photos, so be patient with the (>200 mb) download. Two were shot with the A7rII @ f2.8 and f8.0. Three were shot with the RX1rII @ f2.0,f2.8 and f8.0. LPF setting on the latter set to "standard".

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/7wvqntlp14...sTest.zip?dl=0

    Naturally, there are lots of differences. Pixel peep, but pay particular attention to differences in tonal contrast, dynamic range and saturation.
    Thanks 4 Member(s) thanked for this post

  44. #594
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    No CA
    Posts
    796
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Rx1r2

    Thanks so much for posting/linking these. More difference than I anticipated at f2.8, and now I can understand a little better why the RX2 and especially its lens reach $3300.

    As I see it, for resolution the FE is usable at f8 but is really no match; and at the wider apertures the RX2 is so much better. Nevertheless there's a difference in the RX2 f2 and f2.8 shots that agrees with Eleanor's observations. This doesn't, though, suggest to me that the RX2 files need capture sharpening (such as Guy and Eleanor have decided on), except at f2.

    With LR/ACR I could also see differences between cameras/lenses in dynamic range, 'flatness,' and tone. I tried both the Adobe Standard and Camera Standard profiles. The RX2 shadows (dark trees, lower left) and highlights (shingles) both look subtler to me. The RX2 file had to be a little darker for them to match, and needed a bit of vibrance. The FE file was warmer (driveway pavement, lower left). This made me wonder if the LR profiles for the FE lens have been diddled to suit average consumer preference for more contrast, saturation, and warmth?

    Anyhow, thx again, this is all the pixel-peeping I needed to climb on board! I'll start harassing my dealer.

    Kirk
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  45. #595
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Rx1r2

    Well they only need capture sharpening if you want to get to that pixel peeping level. It really depends on taste . Also Eleanor was trying to match her RX1 levels and to do that with the 42mpx sensor you need to use capture sharpening. It really comes down to what level you like. Now I just loaded C1 version 9 last night and I'm going have to see if any of this has changed. But I agree some folks like little sharpening coming off there cam. The thing I like about this 42 sensor it just has a big range in the sharpening area. Getting a very smooth file from some of the bigger pixel sensors it's just sharp. Here you get to pick your poison better.

    I have not read Dans test and I'm driving to LA in a few hours but be nice if he could give us his bottom line on it.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  46. #596
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    38
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Rx1r2

    Sorry maybe I missed it, but how is it possible that the sensor is responsible for both soft images at f2 and clinically sharp images at f8? That doesn't make much sense to me. All fingers point to a soft or defective lens to me.....

  47. #597
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Rx1r2

    There is no such lens on the planet at its widest aperture that would ever match the same lens at F8. If you know of one I'll buy 2 of them . Usually with the very best there is it starts about a stop down and that is center. The corners take longer to start getting real good typically about 2 stops. My Batis 25 as good as it is and it's really good F2 and F2.8 at 2.8 it's almost at its best but F4 is really the sweet spot both center and corners. This is how optics work. Even the famed Otis lenses

    Sensor is a different element altogether. This 42 MPX sensor images are softer wide open than say a 24 MPX as I explained earlier. It has more to do with sensor pitch and DR, tonal range and such, what is happening is we are losing some micro contrast and detail. Gotta run out the door catch up later
    Last edited by Guy Mancuso; 1st December 2015 at 05:58.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  48. #598
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    10
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Rx1r2

    Anybody have a recommendation for a lens hood?

    Thanks,

    Paul

  49. #599
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    933
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Rx1r2

    The results from this camera look great to me on this thread.... Looks like there will be a lot of happy owners! Often wanted the RX1 even bid on a few used ones but never owned one. Looks like this new model got rid of many of the weaknesses the old model had. Still wish it had the ability to turn the LCD inward to shield it from abrasion but I wish my a7r2 had this feature as well.

    Congrat's to all those who decided to get this new one and I am sure I will continue to lust for a RX looking at your images
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  50. #600
    Senior Member Quentin_Bargate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Saffron Walden, UK
    Posts
    1,983
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    58

    Re: Rx1r2

    I have shot a few tests shots with my just arrived RX1R2 (For goodness sake Sony give these cameras better names!)

    Here is a link to a full rezz image shot at 400ISO wide open at F/2, raw, ACR using the ACR profile, no additional sharpening (ACR defaults, whatever they were)

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...5/_DSC0017.jpg

    Things are looking good so far, but it is of course very early days.

    My only complaint is that, in common with most Zeiss prime lenses I have owned regardless of platform, there is a fair bit of longitudinal CA at wide apertures. It's almost gone by F/4. This seems to be a trade off made by Zeiss probably to keep size and possibly costs down.
    Quentin Bargate
    Director of Bargate Murray, Law Firm of the Year 2012 - 2017, ”leading individual”, Chambers HNW guide, 2017, Photographer
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •