Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              136      
137
       138              192       193       end
  

Archive 2012 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)
  
 
wayne seltzer
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.137 #1 · p.137 #1 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


Martin, how about a planar wall/building side shot at infinity? That is the best way to judge decentering. The tree on left side is closer than one on the right side. Not sure what you focused on but shots like this are hard for the AF as the trees are so far away and relative height is very small. and there is no close foreground subject that you could focus on. This lens has quicker focus fall off and thus is always sharper at the point of focus, than at distant objects. F8 is better for when you want a large DOF.


May 19, 2013 at 08:05 AM
ricardovaste
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.137 #2 · p.137 #2 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


Makten wrote:
I wonder why anyone that knows anything about technical photography wonders about that.


Wow, so you're just straight up miserable then? It's a simple question. I would be shooting this at f8-f11. As mentioned, one tree is closer than the other.



May 19, 2013 at 08:42 AM
ricardovaste
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.137 #3 · p.137 #3 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


Jochenb wrote:
F5.6 is just fine for this kind of shot (no close foreground) and is a sweet spot of many (Zeiss) lenses.


Maybe it's just me, but I don't peruse "sweet spots". In such photos I'd always be stopping down more.



May 19, 2013 at 08:43 AM
Jochenb
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.137 #4 · p.137 #4 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


Maybe someone dropped it and sent it back? Definately not. It was a totally mint new -but faulty- copy.
Nothing is perfect, but when you buy such a camera you should at least get a lens and sensor that are perfectly fine IMHO.
Expectations about AF are something totally different and quite subjective. Some people compare it to faster cameras (DSLR, OM-D,...) and are disappointed. Others might compare it to other mirrorless cameras and are perfectly happy. That's how it always goes.

Wayne, just ignore the people that never used/owned the camera and want to bash it. It happens all the time, with every camera.
I don't mind at all, because I'm extremely satisfied with this camera. That's all that counts for me.

BTW, here's a reminder:

wayne seltzer wrote:
Ok, thanks! This is bad, especially for f5.6. Hope you get a good copy this time. It is worth getting one. would be interesting to hear Sony's response to both the dust issue and this left side blurriness problem.



May 19, 2013 at 08:54 AM
Jochenb
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.137 #5 · p.137 #5 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


ricardovaste wrote:
Maybe it's just me, but I don't peruse "sweet spots". In such photos I'd always be stopping down more.


That's fine, but F5.6 really is enough here. The 35/2 sonnar has deeper DOF than most 35mm lenses and there's no real foreground subject.




May 19, 2013 at 08:59 AM
sebboh
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.137 #6 · p.137 #6 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


ricardovaste wrote:
Maybe it's just me, but I don't peruse "sweet spots". In such photos I'd always be stopping down more.


independent of the lenses sweet spot there will be a noticeable loss of contrast due to diffraction at f/11. it'll be there at f/8 too, but it'll be almost unnoticeable. on a high performing lens like that of the rx-1 i wouldn't bother stopping down past f/5.6 unless i need the dof. on poorer performing lenses i'd stop down further in order to make the corners sharpen up and live with the slight loss in contrast.



May 19, 2013 at 03:36 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.137 #7 · p.137 #7 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


A few points...

Literally, the entire first half of this thread was about the unique design of the RX1 - FF 35 in a P&S form factor, no built-in vs built-in finder, no articulating LCD, small (for FF) lens positioned close to sensor and so on. ALL of the early discussion revolved around this design and it's suitability for individual users, particularly given the price. Everyone, almost to a person, suspected the lens would be great.

Most early samples did not really show how the camera performed at distance. Those that did, including some from Imaging Resource (which is usually more reliable than say DpReview as far as quality and lack of user error is concerned) did not leave a very encouraging impression that the RX1 was going to excel with infinity/ distance type shots IR:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-rx1/FULLRES/yrx1-00103.HTM
or this series from dcfever:
http://www.dcfever.com/cameras/viewsamples.php?set=796

Skp forward a few months when the RX1 started showing up in the hands of forum members and reviewers. More than one member here posted examples of lens decentering and image softness problems. Lloyd (digilloyd) also experienced lens issues with his sample. So, the infinity question gets a little muddy since there are a number of RX1's showing lens issues to begin with. With regard to infinity performance: Is the lens design itself the culprit OR is it just that a number of posted samples were taken by RX1's with defective lenses? One could argue that for the end user, the reason doesn't even matter if the chances of getting a well performing RX1 lens is not so great. For a $2800+ camera, it's also a bit much to NOT expect a potential user to base a purchase decision on posted samples by other users and review sites.

There simply were not a lot of encouraging infinity type tests out there for the RX1. Ron's test here in this current thread did not leave an overwhelmingly positive impression in this regard. He said "I think the RX1 does pretty well at infinity, but it's not the best. It definitely, from my observations has some mid zone dip in resolution/sharpness". From here:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1147292/115

For myself, it was not until I became aware of Tim Ashley's earlier review and infinity landscape shots that I saw that the lens on the RX1 was decent (perhaps a little better than decent) corner to corner with this type of subject matter.
http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/blog/2012/12/sony-rx1-colour-shift-calibration-aperture-series-ettr-more
There is a caveat though. Tim used a pretty high amount of sharpening to get his results. It does seem like the results from the RX1 are a little soft at distance (not as soft as what has been shown from problem RX1's though).

Anyway, I always do an infinity landscape type test with new equipment/ lenses before really using it for anything serious. There is very little difference - if any- with corner to corner sharpness beyond 5.6 with the RX1 and the DOF is quite great at F 5.6. Here was my test shot at 5.6 showing near and far objects. It was sharpened using the settings which Tim used (which is a much higher amount than I believe I have used on any previous camera/lens), even for distant landscape. I think the detail is there though.
http://www.gibranstudio.com/RX1inf.jpg
100% crops:
Top Left Corner:
http://gibranstudio.com/RX1tlft.jpg
Foreground:
http://www.gibranstudio.com/RX1frg.jpg
Center/ Background:
http://www.gibranstudio.com/RX1Bkgd.jpg

Edit:

Just noticed that I added a little artificial grain to this in ACR. So any noise in the sky is due to that.









Edited on May 19, 2013 at 05:48 PM · View previous versions



May 19, 2013 at 03:47 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.137 #8 · p.137 #8 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


The top left corner doesn't really have the resolution I would expect from a high-performing 35mm lens at f/5.6... It looks a little smeared, rather than soft. Does the camera do in-camera correction of distortion?


May 19, 2013 at 05:11 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.137 #9 · p.137 #9 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


carstenw wrote:
The top left corner doesn't really have the resolution I would expect from a high-performing 35mm lens at f/5.6... It looks a little smeared, rather than soft. Does the camera do in-camera correction of distortion?


There is in-camera correction available for jpegs and the raws can be corrected via the raw converter. In the case of the image I posted, it was corrected in ACR for distortion and vignetting using the lens profile for the RX1. Since that top left corner area does get heavy correction for distortion, it could very well result in a little smearing. I thought that result for such an extreme corner test was pretty good overall.



May 19, 2013 at 05:17 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.137 #10 · p.137 #10 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


By high contrast and foliage I wouldn't think that correction would be necessary at all. With architecture it would be necessary but probably not as critical. Would you post an uncorrected corner crop?


May 19, 2013 at 05:26 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.137 #11 · p.137 #11 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


Carsten, here is side by side with uncorrected distortion on the left and corrected distortion on the right. It certainly does get stretched quite a bit in the top corner here, which affects resolution. Ideally, one would want everything taken care of optically to begin with. BTW, the native distortion of this lens is very high by design so it would need corrected even with most landscape shots I think - any with horizon lines for instance.

http://www.gibranstudio.com/correction.jpg

Edited on May 19, 2013 at 05:32 PM · View previous versions



May 19, 2013 at 05:28 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.137 #12 · p.137 #12 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


Those are quite good results. I wouldn't bother with routine correction, and would only apply it when the distortion is ruining an otherwise good shot.


May 19, 2013 at 05:30 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.137 #13 · p.137 #13 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


Up until now, I have been using the lens profile correction in ACR for all shots but I did not realize until this comparison just how much difference it does make with corner resolution. I probably will use correction less in cases where I don't have to have it. Thanks for pointing that out.


May 19, 2013 at 05:40 PM
geoffreyg
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.137 #14 · p.137 #14 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


Surprisingly, there is a fair amount of distortion with this lens. Less so at distance, but its still there. However, with correction (built in LR4), its workable.


May 19, 2013 at 06:00 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.137 #15 · p.137 #15 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


One more little comparison, which is just processing related really and just for fun. Having owned the DP Merrills recently, it became obvious to me that a lot of the Foveon look was mostly due to the extreme processing which those images undergo by default. Some of that gives the impression of more detail and/ or resolution (they do have really great optics as well though). At native sizes and even smaller, the foveon images really appear to have more detail but once one starts interpolating them up in size, it's clear the look is due to processing tricks.

Anyway, for those who both like or hate that look, here is my "Fovification" of the RX1 image posted above. On the left is the ACR image with sharpening, on the right is the same image processed through Photo Ninja using the detail enhancement filter (sort of like intelligent "structure" but unlike "clarity" alone).

Reduced size full image:
ACR/ bayer look:
http://www.gibranstudio.com/rx1bayer.jpg
Foveon look:
http://www.gibranstudio.com/rx1foveon.jpg

100% crops...bayer look on the left, foveon look on the right:
http://www.gibranstudio.com/rx1ma.jpg
http://www.gibranstudio.com/rx1mb.jpg



May 19, 2013 at 06:43 PM
wayne seltzer
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.137 #16 · p.137 #16 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


Jochenb wrote:
Maybe someone dropped it and sent it back? Definately not. It was a totally mint new -but faulty- copy.
Nothing is perfect, but when you buy such a camera you should at least get a lens and sensor that are perfectly fine IMHO.
Expectations about AF are something totally different and quite subjective. Some people compare it to faster cameras (DSLR, OM-D,...) and are disappointed. Others might compare it to other mirrorless cameras and are perfectly happy. That's how it always goes.

Wayne, just ignore the people that never used/owned the camera and want to bash it. It happens all
...Show more

Here in the states it is very common that returned cameras and gear get resold as new but that is a another topic. Thanks for the reminder. This camera got a lot of negative reaction mainly caused by the high price where people always came up with reasons why the camera was not good enough or if was not perfect they wanted their money back. That is fine and yes after awhile I gave up caring about all this but when recently forum members just got or tried the camera and praise it saying things were better than they expected, then I want to say I told
you so.

With the AF I only use center large square mode and always focus recompose. You have to take into consideration that it is CDAF and has problems in cases where it can detect enough difference in contrast like someone wearing all black or cases where the subject is very small part of the frame. Not sure what Martin was focusing on above but I would have focused on the big tree on the left with center square and then recompose.
The focus does fall off quicker than normal with this lens so I tend to use f8 if I want other objects behind the subject to be sharp. If I take a picture of a bush lupine in front of me and focus on the flowers, then the mountains in the distance at f8 will be not as sharp as if I focused on the mountains If you want same sharpness either focusbracket or use a crop or p&s camera. So when people say this camera is not sharp at infinity, are they basing that on shots where the focus was truly at infinity or a shot where it was focused closer on a foreground object?
This lens can separate foreground subjects from background very well due to its quicker focus transition. I think Samuli would like this lens for his tree portrait style photography. Plenty of 3-d and focus fall off with distance like he likes and bokeh style less strongly rendered like 50 P and contax 35/1.4 rather than the MP bokeh which is more strongly drawn.





May 19, 2013 at 07:20 PM
wayne seltzer
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.137 #17 · p.137 #17 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


Tariq glad you finally realized the Foveon LCE in cam era processing tricks which Alundeb pointed out awhile back. Foveon images always looked harsh and over sharpened/processed for my tastes. Your test shot needs a naked horse in the foreground.


May 19, 2013 at 07:35 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.137 #18 · p.137 #18 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


wayne seltzer wrote:
Tariq glad you finally realized the Foveon LCE in cam era processing tricks which Alundeb pointed out awhile back. Foveon images always looked harsh and over sharpened/processed for my tastes. Your test shot needs a naked horse in the foreground.



Both Alundeb and I noticed this issue/ effect early on, probably independently and Ron picked up on it as well. I pointed the foveon processing effect out back in November last year when I compared the DP1M to my D800E at the time.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1150855/29

It was not something I "finally realized" later. With Sigma RAW files, the effect is not created "in-camera" but in the Sigma raw software. This is clear/ noticeable because, when one first opens a foveon raw file, it initially appears normal in contrast and color and, in fact looks quite neutral like a typical bayer image. The embedded jpeg has not undergone that processing. Once the Sigma software completes it's initial default processing, the image all of a sudden looks "Foveon". The other raw processor which handles Sigma forveon files, Iridient Developer, is also capable of giving a natural look to the image, unlike Sigma Photo Pro.



May 19, 2013 at 08:36 PM
philip_pj
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.137 #19 · p.137 #19 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


Yes, the lens can take quite a bit of sharpening without looking too ridiculous There is a line - probably related to what the eye expects to see - beyond which it's too much, that plus the sparkly highlights. On the RX1, it is a pretty good gradient and quite easy to set for personal taste. Partly this is sensor related, I see the same thing with the a99, and have modified sharpening technique.

I did a very demanding set yesterday on targets varying between 80-300 metres and have settled on yes, f5.6 for best overall quality if DoF is sufficient. f11 is starting to show loss of resolution on my copy. At the other end, yes f2 is wonderful but f2.8 sees a big step up, and f4 is fine.

Focus accuracy. Being a manual focus person, the 'focus by wire' focus technique is not ideal because it is neither linear nor the same in each direction. I would love a good trad style ring on this one. At the limit of what the EVF can resolve, the image dances a little. For closer subjects it is quite easy to get focus as good as AF, and AF suffers from the large box, can miss to a closer or farther subject but you can miss seeing it.

I use AF like Wayne, and intend to (where the subject permits) to check with MF mag - since if you touch the ring it mags right away to give you a decent check. Time will let me get better at this.

I tried (successfully until now) not to comment on Martin's woes, but I do feel the lens may have been OK - you have to very careful with focal distances to extreme L-R image content in identifying such issues with a wider than normal lens. The image shown was inconclusive to me. There may be no true infinity with this system.

You can easily see the effects of distortion correction by clicking the tick box on/off in detail rendering, it is quite a stretch. It is a big shift but I believe for most images still a good thing, can be taken up with marginal increase in sharpening. [The Touits have surely something similar in processing.] CA is very good as determined by 'tree twig torture testing' (TTTT).

I feel Tim A was interested to establish 'final resolution' hence his approach. To an extent, images will always looks too sharp to some tastes. Finally, a link to some RX1 images elsewhere, look for Mark Gowin's images 2/3s down the page:

http://www.getdpi.com/forum/sony/42244-fun-rx-1-a-16.html

He is another guy getting more confidence in its capabilities.



May 20, 2013 at 03:53 AM
Makten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.137 #20 · p.137 #20 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)


philip_pj wrote:
I tried (successfully until now) not to comment on Martin's woes, but I do feel the lens may have been OK - you have to very careful with focal distances to extreme L-R image content in identifying such issues with a wider than normal lens. The image shown was inconclusive to me. There may be no true infinity with this system.


Give me a break. The distance was ~50 meters and there is no chance in hell that DOF would not be enough at f/5.6. Even f/2 would be OK with a centered lens.



May 20, 2013 at 06:25 AM
1       2       3              136      
137
       138              192       193       end




FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              136      
137
       138              192       193       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password