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

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3       4      
5
       6       end
  

Archive 2013 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0
  
 
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #1 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


Maybe you are right, I was thinking of the D800 first, I guess.


Jan 22, 2013 at 11:06 PM
Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #2 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


aleksanderpolo wrote:
hot linking is not cool...


There is link towards that review/impressions just two posts up ffs. Beside that it has quite huge watermark.

zhangyue wrote:
After see the comparison. I agree there are more similarity than difference. But I don't agree RX did anything poorer, or change my view about it.

Color, I slightly prefer RX, for it has more saturation and slightly orange hint. Nikon has yellow/warmer hint, which I find latest G always have. I don't like that personally. But here the censors are also different, so I don't think we can draw any conclusion on color.

Bokeh, I also slightly prefer RX. I don't feel this comparison change my view about this little camera on Bokeh: beautiful. Here is the reason, For
...Show more

I think for what it is, its amazing. Sure it has fixed lens, but I would say its as good as possible. Comparable IQ would be only from D3X or A900 paired with Zeiss or Leica lens. Or future M-240 (that will be probably better, just quite a bit more expensive).

As I wrote before (or I didnt) I would get one if I could without hesitation. It reminds me old R1 a bit, at least that IQ part.

carstenw wrote:
The differences on this shot may be larger than on most of the shots, yet they are still quite small. I would say that the largest difference is a lower contrast/saturation in the Nikon shot, possibly caused by larger dynamic range, and the slight colour differences may be largely counteracted by a slightly different white balance. Overall, there is a difference, but it is so small that it really is of no consequence at all, and may be equalised with only slight PP. In fact, maybe they were even caused by slight differences in PP, in the raw developer or
...Show more

Hm, not really.

DR

D4 - 13.1 eV
RX1 - 14.3 eV

SMI

D4 - 77/74
RX1 - 84/81 (expected better, but its expensive as it is)

Its sorta funny, but RX1 has better DR and better colors than D4 paired with comparable lens (tho truly comparable would be Zeiss not Nikkor).

Colors are given by camera/lens combo and to certain degree its fixable in PP (good color profile can do amazing stuff). But you can do same with RX1 and get even better result. People often dont get that theres certain limited amount of data that you can PP and camera that gives you more data that you need is simply better if you do PP.

Without doing PP its less relevant and manufacturer JPEG engine or quality of RAW converter is more important. Buying D4 and shooting JPEG seems bit like heresy to me, but there are people that actually do that.. to each its own.

Yea and since my monitor is calibrated and does have 100% sRGB coverage I might see bit more than others.. Which is sometimes actually downside for me.




Jan 22, 2013 at 11:10 PM
trale
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #3 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


h00ligan wrote:
I can posta comparison with 35L @2 if it is desired



Please do =)



Jan 23, 2013 at 08:58 AM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #4 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


Mescalamba wrote:
Hm, not really.

DR

D4 - 13.1 eV
RX1 - 14.3 eV


Congratulations, you have refuted 1 of N points in my post



Jan 23, 2013 at 09:49 AM
Makten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #5 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


I think I prefer the RX1 allover look and color, but the difference in background blur is really strange. I know it can differ depending on correction for spherical aberration, but not that much. Either the focal lenght is shorter, and/or it isn't really f/2.


Jan 23, 2013 at 10:38 AM
Jochenb
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #6 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


Isn't it possible that also the field curvature of the distagon has something to do with it?


Jan 23, 2013 at 11:00 AM
sebboh
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #7 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


Makten wrote:
I think I prefer the RX1 allover look and color, but the difference in background blur is really strange. I know it can differ depending on correction for spherical aberration, but not that much. Either the focal lenght is shorter, and/or it isn't really f/2.


i suspect that there are a ton of other things that dof and amount of blur (two separate things) depend on as well when you are talking about a lens with more than one element.

but didn't your test show that it was obviously a shorter focal length?



Jan 23, 2013 at 05:06 PM
Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #8 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


Looks more like 28/2 DOF, but it would need someone who can actually test it.

carstenw wrote:
Congratulations, you have refuted 1 of N points in my post



Two, higher SMI and more bit depth = more accurate colors (which doesnt mean nicer colors, but with good color profile/PP it easily can). Tho most impact does that Zeiss glass probably..



Jan 23, 2013 at 05:26 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #9 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


I didn't discuss SMI, and anyway, the best colours don't necessarily come from the most accurate cameras/sensors, viz Fuji. Back to 1

Yes, I would like to see a Zeiss lens on a Nikon. That could equalise some of the difference, as small as it is.

Ultimately, I doubt there will be much difference left, most of it differences in rendering. The RX1 35/2 is special, not always better looking, but always very well behaved and with very nice boke.



Jan 23, 2013 at 07:15 PM
Makten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #10 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


Jochenb wrote:
Isn't it possible that also the field curvature of the distagon has something to do with it?


In the corners, yes indeed, but not in the middle which we can see in both the above examples and in my own little test against the Distagon 35/1.4.

sebboh wrote:
i suspect that there are a ton of other things that dof and amount of blur (two separate things) depend on as well when you are talking about a lens with more than one element.


Yeah, I remember Björn Rörslett showing the obvious difference in background blur between the Nikkor 50/1.4 AF-D and AF-S a couple of years ago. And those lenses are very much the same if you look at the design. But I have never seen a difference as large as in this case with the RX1 vs. Nikkor 35/1.4.

but didn't your test show that it was obviously a shorter focal length?

It is, but the difference in my shots wasn't that large either.

Edit: Perhaps it could have with the focus distance to do. My experience with the Sonnar is that it is very good at isolating subjects at far distances, but I'll have to A/B test it against the Distagon before any real conclusions. Unfortunately it's still -15-20°C here, so...



Jan 23, 2013 at 08:08 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Makten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #11 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


This is what I mean with larger distances. I estimate the distance to the branches in focus to at least 7 meters, maybe more.








And a 100% crop. Mind you, this was shot at 1/20 handheld at ISO 6400 and pushed a bit in PP, so sharpness is of course what it is. But look at the background blur.








Yes, there is a fair amount of LCA and/or fringing, but the bokeh is still smoooooooth! I don't think I've ever seen that from a fast 35 mm lens unless focus is quite close.

Edit: And there are no "sharp corners" due to curvature of field and/or mechanical vignetting like with the C/Y 35/1.4. Top right:







Edited on Jan 23, 2013 at 08:38 PM · View previous versions



Jan 23, 2013 at 08:29 PM
carstenw
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #12 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


Yes, at middle distances the RX1 35/2 seems to excel!


Jan 23, 2013 at 08:34 PM
zhangyue
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #13 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


Makten wrote:
This is what I mean with larger distances.

That is what I mean beautiful bokeh.

Let's face it, this lens has comparable performance with most 35cron M out there with better OFC rendering than any of them. So if this is your focal length, you can think of 24M sensor is cherry on the top. If they bring RX2 with EVF and tilt LCD build in I will get it.





Jan 23, 2013 at 08:54 PM
douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #14 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


carstenw wrote:
In fact, flipping back and forth between the two, I find myself preferring the skin colour (not the shading though) of the Nikon shot. I find the colour slightly more relaxed and believable, whereas the Sony colour is a little cooler/greener and more tense-looking somehow. The shading looks better in the Sony colour, but this may be caused by lower contrast due to the Nikkor lens design, or higher dynamic range or different tone curves of the D4 sensor, or any number of other small factors.

In general I prefer Zeiss lenses and rendering over Nikkors, but in this series, I
...Show more

Yeah, I'm surprised that I feel the same way, too. I like the Nikon color better, in this shot. Also immediately noticeable to me is how much shallower the DOF is with the Nikon, as others mentioned. Either way, the RX1 is a pretty incredible little image machine, it seems.

Edited on Jan 23, 2013 at 09:01 PM · View previous versions



Jan 23, 2013 at 09:00 PM
philip_pj
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #15 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


Well, that is a step up from ' the camera is only good at close distances', I guess. There are plenty of images accumulated now on the RX1 image thread to dispel the 'poor at distance' meme as well, I believe.

Sony FF cameras have been recognised as producing excellent colour from the day the first a900 rolled off the line, though some discussion here a year or two back downplayed the metric of SMI as not particularly reflective of colour 'quality', let's call it.

I doubt the D4 sensor is at the same level in this comparison. DR is so very important for the better high contrast lenses, and esp. low light work. PP is extremely easy with the Sony 24Mp sensor with Adobe's latest RC engine.




Jan 23, 2013 at 09:01 PM
Makten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #16 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


zhangyue wrote:
If they bring RX2 with EVF and tilt LCD build in I will get it.


Tilting LCD would be awesome, but I also prefer the tilting EVF. So if price isn't an issue (which it of course is), the existing solution is very nice. Also, the fixed LCD has a very good viewing at steep angles, so you can use the camera lowered a bit and still see what you shoot.

douglasf13 wrote:
Also immediately noticeable to me is how much shallower the DOF is with the Nikon, as others mentioned.


I don't want to mark your words, but shallow DOF is not necessarily the same as blurred background. Anyone that have tried medium format (or larger of course) knows that these properties does not coincide all that well.



Jan 23, 2013 at 09:13 PM
douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #17 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


Makten wrote:
I don't want to mark your words, but shallow DOF is not necessarily the same as blurred background. Anyone that have tried medium format (or larger of course) knows that these properties does not coincide all that well.


Yeah, I own medium format cameras, too. I was just lazy with my wording.



Jan 23, 2013 at 09:58 PM
HelenaN
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #18 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


This reminds me that I happen to have a shot that I took just to test the "isolation" capabilities (click here to view it larger):







Unprocessed besides Lightroom's default settings. Quite a nice result, I think.



Jan 23, 2013 at 09:58 PM
lovinglife
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.5 #19 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


Sorry I wish i had the needed equipment to do this. OTOH - the only other 35mm setup that, in my opinion, that had better bokeh was the M9 + 35mm Summilux ASPH (both FLE and non-FLE).

The only lens I have not used, which I would imagine to have better bokeh would be the Zeiss 35mm f/1.4.



May 01, 2013 at 10:34 PM
philip_pj
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.5 #20 · RX1 bokeh vs other cams/lens at F/2.0


I am not sure bokeh is quantifiable as a metric, in the same way as SNR or DR, on a scale of 1-10 say, too many variables.

Bad bokeh is a bit like the famous expression about pornography - you know it when you see it. I try to be fair about the ZM lenses but they are a challenge. Most experienced users of the now six months old RX1 are close to over the moon about its bokeh qualities. I am especially happy with foreground bokeh and detail retention in focus fade.

To get similar sensor inputs you need a Nikon D800, it has a Sony sensor with near-identical characteristics to the 24Mp Sony unit. A D800/ZF 35/1.4 is 1.83 kgs, almost four times heavier than the RX1.

lovinglife, Tim Ashley has an interesting article on the 35mm Summilux FLE with some RX1 image comparisons, including bokeh:

http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/blog/2013/4/leica-m-240-with-35mm-f1-4-fle---some-observations



May 02, 2013 at 12:24 AM
1       2       3       4      
5
       6       end




FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3       4      
5
       6       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password