Last week I spent a few days in Croatia. It was mainly a family vacation with some photo opportunities in between. I took my M9 with 21, 28, 50 and 90 lenses and in addition my newly acquired Sony RX100.
In some situations I used both the M9 and the RX100 for the same subject, although not at exactly the same time. Therefore the light has often changed significantly between the shots.
And since LR doesn't support the RX100 at the moment I used only JPEGs for the Sony and RAW for the M9. Therefore not a fair comparison. Nevertheless I think showing similar images shot with the two cameras could be interesting for some people here on FM.
We spent 1 day in Rovinj, 2 days on Cres and 3 days at the Plitvice Lakes. I will start with the images from Rovinj and Cres and will post the images of Plitvice in the next days when I've finished processing them.
Afterwards I will post some comments about my experience with the RX100.
RX100 does impressively well for a compact with the obvious limitations of a small sensor and a zoom lens.
Really its a case of being the Indian a not the arrow though as I'm quite sure you'd be able to produce some wonderful photos from any given camera you had with you.
Great light, beautiful location and a skilled photog should always lead up to great images.
Interesting comparison at this size.The RX100 shows very good color and plenty sharp.Lens star bursts are missing in the last f8 shot.Whereas the Leica shot has beautiful star bursts.
-Jim
Thanks for all the comparison shots - very enlightening. As I said with my one shot comparison between my RX100 and my A900/Zeiss 24-70 .. "Disturbingly Close!"
From what I see at Alt forum, RX100 makes so good impression that one almost gets scared that they (S0ny) will deliberately screw up something with the following model because of the 'marketing'.
Boris, amazing shots and what a wonderful place to visit!!! The RX100 really makes an excellent companion for the M9, when you want a really small package to grab and go The IQ with the RX100 is surprisingly excellent for a smaller sensor!!! It will be interesting to see when there is RAW support for the RX100, and see how the files then compare For web presentation, and I am sure prints even at 13x19", the RX100 files will be very good.
Great stuff, Boris! Fascinating triplet No7-8-9, with No8 my favorite. No3 is my favorite RX100 pic. How far and fast compact camera are progressing is delightfully threatening to their larger breathren!
And you make a powerful case for Summicron 28. Again, great stuff!
Great series Boris! The spot you chose for #26 looks somewhat familiar to me I think #25 and my P6 were also taken at the same locations. It looks though like you had a lot more water (there was a drought last year when I visited Plitvice).
On the technical front, yep, the RX100 shots are surprisingly good although I think it does overcook the colors somewhat.
Pros:
+ small size
+ very fast (in nearly every aspect: AF, startup, shutter time lag, ...)
+ very good DR (for JPEGs, at the moment I can't say anything about DR of the RAWs)
+ very good colors
+ good WB
+ complete silent shooting possible (good for wedding, theater, concert etc.)
+ good flash (for a P&S)
+ very good center sharpness even wide open at f/1.8
+ good edge sharpness at 28mm setting
+ low high ISO noise (compared to other P&S and the M9)
+ very good battery life (400-500 images per charge)
Cons
- haptics / mechanical construction good, but not great (Panasonic LX and Olympus µ 795SW have a slightly better feeling)
- difficult to use filters (no filter threads and available third party adapters not really convincing)
- noise at low ISO (125) quite high (compared to Canon 5D or M9) but probably not visible in prints
- pixel sharpness (at 100%) is clearly not as good as with cameras without AA-filter like M9 or Sigma DP series (but this was expected)
- large time lag, when using the custom function ring at the lens (I've assigned the exposure compensation function, but the time lag is probably independent of the function)
- sharpness at longer focal length not as good as on 28mm
- above 50mm really bad edge sharpness on the right side => lens is clearly decentered
Here are some 100% crops (based on above images #17/#18):
I've sent my RX100 to Sony to check/correct the decentering of the lens. If the edge sharpness is not significantly improved afterwards I will return/sell the RX100.
In addition I will probably also test the Sigma DP1M, when available, and then decide which of these two cameras I prefer. I could live with the 28mm fixed focal length and really bad high ISO performance of the DP1M, but I really like the fast AF and short time lag of the RX100, escpecially for family snapshots and street photography. Therefore I'm not sure which way to go.
denoir wrote:
On the technical front, yep, the RX100 shots are surprisingly good although I think it does overcook the colors somewhat.
Not sure, it might be Boris. Some commenters on his Patagonia series were critical of his preference for vibrant colors.
Boris, very nice additional series! Curious if you're contemplating the new 50 Cron? I found a few full rez samples on Flickr of it on the MM compared informally against the 50 Lux ASPH and was amazed at the difference in stopped down performance in favor of the 50AA. It would appear to be a pretty remarkable landscape lens.
??
