Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (fixed lens)
/forum/topic/1147292/182

1       2       3              182      
183
       184              192       193       end

elkabong62
Registered: Nov 16, 2013
Total Posts: 7
Country: United States

Thanks for the reply on pre-focusing guys, that's not good news. The old film camera had no problem doing it. New technology sometimes ain't that great.



Tariq Gibran
Registered: Oct 01, 2006
Total Posts: 10438
Country: United States

It's one of those issues that Sony could address via a firmware update if one ever comes. I have never used MF myself with the RX1 since I find the AF is more accurate but I certainly can see situations like the one mentioned where MF would be preferable.



elkabong62
Registered: Nov 16, 2013
Total Posts: 7
Country: United States

Does Sony's pricey lens hood interfere with Sony's optical viewfinder's view. Is that why their lens hood is vented to let it see through it?
Thanks



Tariq Gibran
Registered: Oct 01, 2006
Total Posts: 10438
Country: United States

elkabong62 wrote:
Does Sony's pricey lens hood interfere with Sony's optical viewfinder's view. Is that why their lens hood is vented to let it see through it?
Thanks


I never owned the uber expensive Sony hood but do own a cheaper vented hood.

The vent for both are just for looks and have nothing to do with an optical finders view. Neither hood will be an issue with an optical finder as the finder sits pretty high and the lens is fairly short.



davewolfs
Registered: Jun 15, 2006
Total Posts: 1131
Country: United States

What is the consensus on optical view finders for this body? Does the voigtlander work as well as the native Zeiss?



douglasf13
Registered: Apr 09, 2008
Total Posts: 5975
Country: United States

Tariq Gibran wrote:
elkabong62 wrote:
Does Sony's pricey lens hood interfere with Sony's optical viewfinder's view. Is that why their lens hood is vented to let it see through it?
Thanks


I never owned the uber expensive Sony hood but do own a cheaper vented hood.

The vent for both are just for looks and have nothing to do with an optical finders view. Neither hood will be an issue with an optical finder as the finder sits pretty high and the lens is fairly short.


The Voigtlander OVF doesn't sit high enough to avoid the hood completely. In fact, even with no hood, the lens sits right underneath the bottom frame line.

Either way, elkabong62, you should just use a 49mm --> 37mm step down ring as a hood and ditch that native hood. It is much smaller in profile and won't get in the way of an OVF.



douglasf13
Registered: Apr 09, 2008
Total Posts: 5975
Country: United States

Tariq Gibran wrote:
elkabong62 wrote:
Does Sony's pricey lens hood interfere with Sony's optical viewfinder's view. Is that why their lens hood is vented to let it see through it?
Thanks


I never owned the uber expensive Sony hood but do own a cheaper vented hood.

The vent for both are just for looks and have nothing to do with an optical finders view. Neither hood will be an issue with an optical finder as the finder sits pretty high and the lens is fairly short.


I haven't used the Zeiss OVF, but I thought the Voigtlander OVF looked like a better trade off in terms of size and cost, so I went that direction.



Tariq Gibran
Registered: Oct 01, 2006
Total Posts: 10438
Country: United States

douglasf13 wrote:
Tariq Gibran wrote:
elkabong62 wrote:
Does Sony's pricey lens hood interfere with Sony's optical viewfinder's view. Is that why their lens hood is vented to let it see through it?
Thanks


I never owned the uber expensive Sony hood but do own a cheaper vented hood.

The vent for both are just for looks and have nothing to do with an optical finders view. Neither hood will be an issue with an optical finder as the finder sits pretty high and the lens is fairly short.


I haven't used the Zeiss OVF, but I thought the Voigtlander OVF looked like a better trade off in terms of size and cost, so I went that direction.


I have not used the Zeiss yet either. I did just sell my Sony EVF so, at the moment, I will use an older Leica finder I have while I casually look for a great deal on the Zeiss.

I also use the step-downs as a hood as you and others have previously posted. When I used the cheaper, vented hood, I don't recall it being an issue with an optical finder, though I did not use it that way very much at all( so perhaps it was worse than I remember).



elkabong62
Registered: Nov 16, 2013
Total Posts: 7
Country: United States

Mr. Tariq Gibran could you please tell me why did you sell your Sony EVF when reviews on the Internet rant & rave about it and you want to switch to Sony's Zeiss OVF? Please be specific if you can. Also a general question for you and douglasf13, does the 49mm --> 37mm step down ring cause any vignetting on the RX1's Zeiss 35mm f2.0 lens? B&H and Adorama both only sell one model of it and they are both are different makes. Does the model style make a difference?



sebboh
Registered: Nov 02, 2009
Total Posts: 10235
Country: United States

elkabong62 wrote:
Also a general question for you and douglasf13, does the 49mm --> 37mm step down ring cause any vignetting on the RX1's Zeiss 35mm f2.0 lens? B&H and Adorama both only sell one model of it and they are both are different makes. Does the model style make a difference?


there is a very small amount of vignetting with the sensei 49-37mm step down ring on top of a B+W f-pro filter when focused to infinity.



Tariq Gibran
Registered: Oct 01, 2006
Total Posts: 10438
Country: United States

elkabong62 wrote:
Mr. Tariq Gibran could you please tell me why did you sell your Sony EVF when reviews on the Internet rant & rave about it and you want to switch to Sony's Zeiss OVF? Please be specific if you can.


It's just me. Nothing more to it. I think I have previously expressed a noted disdain for EVF's in general around here so it should come as no surprise to most. Someone else had PM'd me about it and here was my reply:

"I found the EVF very useful/ practical, particularly being able to tilt it up and having all the info right there. I just don't enjoy the downsides, particularly the experience of composing using the video feed with it's low dynamic range/ off color in bright daylight. Sometimes I just feel it creates a sort of disconnect with my subject. Truth be told, I'm sort of hoping Sony releases a better evf in the spring/ next year for the RX1 so I also wanted to get my money out of the evf just in case that happens."



helimat
Registered: Apr 06, 2008
Total Posts: 3727
Country: Canada

douglasf13 wrote:
I haven't used the Zeiss OVF, but I thought the Voigtlander OVF looked like a better trade off in terms of size and cost, so I went that direction.


Stupid question, but out of curiosity how are you focusing? Are you relying on AF, or switching between the VF & screen?



davewolfs
Registered: Jun 15, 2006
Total Posts: 1131
Country: United States



helimat wrote:
douglasf13 wrote:
I haven't used the Zeiss OVF, but I thought the Voigtlander OVF looked like a better trade off in terms of size and cost, so I went that direction.


Stupid question, but out of curiosity how are you focusing? Are you relying on AF, or switching between the VF & screen?


Center point and assume center of ovf would be my guess. Then just let the chips roll and hope its right. My guess unless it is close most times it will.



davewolfs
Registered: Jun 15, 2006
Total Posts: 1131
Country: United States



helimat wrote:
douglasf13 wrote:
I haven't used the Zeiss OVF, but I thought the Voigtlander OVF looked like a better trade off in terms of size and cost, so I went that direction.


Stupid question, but out of curiosity how are you focusing? Are you relying on AF, or switching between the VF & screen?


Center point and assume center of ovf would be my guess. Then just let the chips roll and hope its right. My guess unless it is close most times it will.



davewolfs
Registered: Jun 15, 2006
Total Posts: 1131
Country: United States



helimat wrote:
douglasf13 wrote:
I haven't used the Zeiss OVF, but I thought the Voigtlander OVF looked like a better trade off in terms of size and cost, so I went that direction.


Stupid question, but out of curiosity how are you focusing? Are you relying on AF, or switching between the VF & screen?


Center point and assume center of ovf would be my guess. Then just let the chips roll and hope its right. My guess unless it is close most times it will.



fredmirandafan
Registered: Aug 07, 2013
Total Posts: 92
Country: Canada

As days get darker and darker, I have had to shoot at lower and lower shutter speeds, just wondering what the lowest handheld shutter speeds people have been able to get pixel-level sharpness on the street? With the EVF on my RX1R, I find 1/80 is mostly safe, 1/60 is iffy, and 1/30 is just hit and miss. Thats of course assuming subjects are not moving.



sebboh
Registered: Nov 02, 2009
Total Posts: 10235
Country: United States

fredmirandafan wrote:
As days get darker and darker, I have had to shoot at lower and lower shutter speeds, just wondering what the lowest handheld shutter speeds people have been able to get pixel-level sharpness on the street? With the EVF on my RX1R, I find 1/80 is mostly safe, 1/60 is iffy, and 1/30 is just hit and miss. Thats of course assuming subjects are not moving.


if i use the 2s timer to avoid shake due to finger movement 1/15 is no problem. i'm usually stuck at 1/160 though to reduce subject motion blur.



fredmirandafan
Registered: Aug 07, 2013
Total Posts: 92
Country: Canada

Yea if subjects move, I find 1/125 is iffy, 1/160 is a compromise, but 1/250 would be safe. But the FF sensor is so amazing, unless it's hit ISO6400, I try to go 1/200-1/250 just to be on the safe side.

The only issue I have is that I'm missing the 50mm and 85mm brothers of RX1R, forcing me to consider the evil twins of A7/A7R mousetraps



philip_pj
Registered: Apr 03, 2009
Total Posts: 3103
Country: Australia

I feel a warm inner glow at 1/125 or shorter for 'regular' handheld, 1/60 with effort (brace with strap, elbows into body sides, careful breathing). With leaning support - column, rock etc. down to 1/10 sec. These are 'know it will work' settings, not 'bragging rights' settings.

Most important is the correct soft release that suits your hand...I tried three before settling on one.

If you need the shot, ISO 10000 is not terrible. 6400 is very acceptable for most users.



Tariq Gibran
Registered: Oct 01, 2006
Total Posts: 10438
Country: United States

I guess this is a great place to also note how really wonderful the shutter release is on the RX1. I use a soft release also but I'm always reminded anytime I shoot with a different camera just how refined that RX1 shutter button feel is. Seems like some thought really went into that feel.

Oh yeah...I already miss my EVF a bit!



1       2       3              182      
183
       184              192       193       end