August 3rd, 2012, 08:36 AM
Yeah, Ricoh or Panasonic or Fuji could do it in a body maybe X10 or X100 size with a lens that's pretty fast throughout a 24-90 zoom range and I'd honestly probably use it 90+ percent of the time. The lens isn't perfect and it sounds like there are some de-centered ones out there, but the problems are nothing that would ever bother me. But just go with a bit bigger body and I think most of those problems could be solved in addition to making for a much better interface. I suspect I'll hang onto this for a year or two, but once someone uses this sensor in a somewhat larger camera with fewer handling compromises, I'll be all over it...
Originally Posted by retow
August 3rd, 2012, 10:02 AM
I love what my APC sensor cameras will do, but this little baby is now with me all the time, something I cannot say for the others.
August 3rd, 2012, 11:23 AM
I like what my APS and m43 cameras will do too, but the difference in IQ is getting sooo small. I'd rate the RX100 IQ as probably better than the previous generation of 12mp m43 bodies (although the lens obviously doesn't compare to the best m43 lenses). Its at least as good at base ISO and I couldn't comfortably shoot above ISO 1600 with my EP2 or EPL3, even for my B&W street shooting. The RX100 easily handles 3200 for applications where the best IQ isn't critical. Since I'm not all that hung up on the finer points of IQ and since I rarely shoot in a way that requires really narrow DOF, a small standalone like this with the right lens and controls could easily become my main rig and all I'd carry most of the time, including for a lot of travel. Which I wouldn't have previously thought possible. Exciting times in camera tech continue...
Originally Posted by Country Parson
August 3rd, 2012, 12:31 PM
I shot one RX100 RAW file last night and to my surprise RAW Developer opened it. The shot was at the wide end and there is significant distortion. However, the RAW file was much better than the in-camera JPG. I adjusted the file in RAW Developer and then opened the exported JPG in Lightroom to adjust the distortion. It took quite a bit of work to get it just right. And that's just for one focal length.
I plan to return the RX100. Except for vacation I don't think I'd use it that much, and I still would rather use the GRD4 instead.
Last edited by Andrewteee; August 3rd, 2012 at 12:37 PM.
August 3rd, 2012, 01:21 PM
I'd bet that once Lightroom and Aperture support the RX100 raw files they'll have the distortion correction built into their raw processors. That's the way they work with pretty much every other camera that requires digital correction, which is nearly every camera I've ever owned. I agree that the GRD3/4 interface blows dirt in the face of the RX100, but their sensors don't begin to compare. Which matters sometimes and not other times. My GRD3 isn't going anywhere, but I don't use it all that much anymore.
August 4th, 2012, 03:47 PM
Good stuff, Ray. Enjoyed both your comments and photos.
If someone could take everything good about the RX100, X10, and GRD4 in one camera, it would pretty much dominate the scene.
Originally Posted by Ray
August 5th, 2012, 03:32 PM
I like how this camera handles natural colors in many circumstances. Here is a picture taken at one of our friends house, and on the table some very nice apetizers.
August 5th, 2012, 09:29 PM
I understand a lot of you folks need smaller cameras like this, but I struggle with handling and controls on cameras this small. I hope they never stop making "normal" size cameras. And I hope they can open the performance gap back up.
addicted to NIK control points
August 6th, 2012, 12:10 AM
I think thats part if why I like the X100, it feels solid, and a decent handful :)
Originally Posted by Luke
August 6th, 2012, 02:53 AM
I think I will wait and see if anybody else does something similar, like Ricoh
This site uses affiliate programs and referral links for monetization.