p.92 #1 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
mortyb wrote:
IMO the issue with going the repair way, is that it 1) may take long time, and 2) you are not guaranteed that it will be fixed and 3) maybe they even say it is within spec. During that time your time window for a refund is closed. I NEVER go that route. If it doesn't work right from the start, it goes back for a refund and I just take a big step back and wait.
Morty,
You wouldn't want to send it back indicating the problem and asking for an exchange when one becomes available?
p.92 #4 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
mortyb wrote:
IMO the issue with going the repair way, is that it 1) may take long time, and 2) you are not guaranteed that it will be fixed and 3) maybe they even say it is within spec. During that time your time window for a refund is closed. I NEVER go that route. If it doesn't work right from the start, it goes back for a refund and I just take a big step back and wait.
I agree and I won't accept a repair. Don't know about the laws in Norway, but here it states that you've got the right to send it back for a refund the first 6 months. But, as I said before, what is "proper" function? Could you expect color casts in certain situations? Is lens misalignment OK if it's "not that much"?
briantho wrote:
Makten would you mind post a "proof" pic showing the problem?
I will do, but I must find a better object than my very dirty cutting mat.
p.92 #5 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Jochenb wrote:
I wouldn't be happy if I had to use cornerfix. This is an expensive camera and you'd expect they've perfectly matched the lens to the sensor.
It could just be a quality control issue though...
+1. I mean, you expect to be able to use the best jpgs this camera can make without the use of anything else. The color cast from my copy is too much.
p.92 #6 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
I realized that I do indeed have some photos with white edges. If they have the color cast problem it's so "mild" I can't see it (nothing near what mortyb showed us), so I have decided not to worry about that.
Right now I'm leaning towards keeping it, since I haven't had any issues with it, find its AF and handling to be sufficiently good, and love the size of the camera and its files. But I'll think it over some more.
p.92 #7 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Makten wrote:
I agree and I won't accept a repair. Don't know about the laws in Norway, but here it states that you've got the right to send it back for a refund the first 6 months. But, as I said before, what is "proper" function? Could you expect color casts in certain situations? Is lens misalignment OK if it's "not that much"?
My experience is that small alignment issues etc. is a long and hard fight. Often they say it's within spec. To me, it's simply not worth the time and energy spent.
In Norway, for online purchases, you have a 14 day return window for a refund, no questions asked. BUT - the product has to be as good as new. You are allowed to shoot some frames etc., but it has to be as good as new when you return it. But the camera stores for instance are kind of flexible, they are interested in your business etc. They usually offer good service. I've never had a problem with a 14 day refund.
I have not had one single good experience with anyting repaired. Nikon Norway has been a total PITA. They drag and drag and drag the issue. In the end you just don't bother. They are arrogant as hell. This is a fact, there are many reports of this. That's why I normally buy new products online, and check that they are good, if not they go back for a refund.
p.92 #8 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
mortyb wrote:
In Norway, for online purchases, you have a 14 day return window for a refund, no questions asked.
I would be surprised if you don't also have something similar to our "konsumentköplagen" that gives you the right to return the product after much longer time, if you can prove that it is not functioning as expected.
p.92 #9 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Makten wrote:
I would be surprised if you don't also have something similar to our "konsumentköplagen" that gives you the right to return the product after much longer time, if you can prove that it is not functioning as expected.
Yes, we have Forbrukerkjøpsloven, which is the same law. As a consumer, I am protected by that law for 5 years. So if the product doesn't work as intended during those years, the store or manufacturer are obliged to fix it free of cost.
p.92 #10 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Martin, I would first talk to the store, and simply ask them to take it back, after explaining the problem. If they refuse, then you can try the proof avenue, but it would be good to know in any case what kind of service your store is willing to offer you.
p.92 #11 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
carstenw wrote:
Martin, I would first talk to the store, and simply ask them to take it back, after explaining the problem. If they refuse, then you can try the proof avenue, but it would be good to know in any case what kind of service your store is willing to offer you.
I will! But I want a new one, and that could be a serious problem since they are sold out everywhere.
p.92 #12 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Right, but the chance of this one coming back fixed before a new one appears somewhere is very, very small, IMO. Just get your money back and go on the hunt. Let the store know that if they get another, you will buy it right away.
p.92 #13 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
I see that the store I got mine from still have them in stock. But I don't think I'll take the chance on getting another one in a few months. I'll think about it. The camera is great, no doubt.
p.92 #14 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
mortyb wrote:
I see that the store I got mine from still have them in stock. But I don't think I'll take the chance on getting another one in a few months. I'll think about it. The camera is great, no doubt.
I see that my store also have them (at least one) in stock, so I think I'm gonna offer them to prove to me that the next one is OK. I'll bring a test chart, my tripod and use the battery and card from the faulty camera. If they agree, that would be a great way for me to know that I get a decent copy.
If not, I'll just return it and try somewhere else.
--------------
But Morten, I actually believe this color cast thing is the same for all RX1. I can't figure out how it could differ from copy to copy and now when I know about it, I've seen it in my own images. And HelenaN:s and several other peoples. Still it won't be a problem for me and maybe you should think about using raw and Cornerfix at high ISO speeds. I mean, a batch conversion to DNG and then Cornerfix is really not much trouble and I did it all the time when I had the M8 and NEX-5N (but not both conversions with the same camera).
p.92 #15 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Makten wrote:
But Morten, I actually believe this color cast thing is the same for all RX1. I can't figure out how it could differ from copy to copy and now when I know about it, I've seen it in my own images. And HelenaN:s and several other peoples. Still it won't be a problem for me and maybe you should think about using raw and Cornerfix at high ISO speeds. I mean, a batch conversion to DNG and then Cornerfix is really not much trouble and I did it all the time when I had the M8 and NEX-5N (but not both conversions with the same camera)....Show more →
I guess all RX1 has this color cast more or less. It's just that it is so apparent on mine. Note it is actually more apparent with ISO 200 than ISO 6400. And even worse is that something in the top and bottom right corners. Look at the last two photos I posted. That's clearly something not good.
p.92 #16 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Makten wrote:
But Morten, I actually believe this color cast thing is the same for all RX1. I can't figure out how it could differ from copy to copy and now when I know about it, I've seen it in my own images. And HelenaN:s and several other peoples. Still it won't be a problem for me and maybe you should think about using raw and Cornerfix at high ISO speeds. I mean, a batch conversion to DNG and then Cornerfix is really not much trouble and I did it all the time when I had the M8 and NEX-5N (but not both conversions with the same camera)....Show more →
Morten's sample images are quite underexposed for that particular scene where the colour shift is the worst. From my experience with the M9, these colour shifts are most evident in underexposed neutral scenes. If you think that snow would normally appear much brighter (I realize it's a night scene...), the colour cast wouldn't be as (or even) noticeable, as evidenced in the daylight scenes. I'm curious about the circumstances of the night scene - the kind of lighting (mercury vapor, sodium vapor, fluorescent?) and how was it white balanced? It could be that with certain types of artificial light, with limited spectrum, once white balanced the colour shift effect might be more exaggerated? In any case, I can definitely see it and in the other sample images.
The question naturally is how tolerable this is for each of us? Personally, using the M9 and having dealt with this kind of issue for a couple years, it's something I had to accept as a tradeoff for other benefits offered by the system, regardless of how much the equipment cost. And as Leica has shown with the M9, the edge colour shift can be addressed in firmware releases. Therefore, Sony may as well. Naturally, there is no guarantee they will and one may be stuck with extra PP work to correct it if they don't.
Anyway, it would be interesting to see test shots of white walls, sky, etc. from other RX1 users.
p.92 #17 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
The night scenes have some kind of artificial lightning, no idea what. Normal street lights type. No doubt kind of torture for any digital camera. So I'm not super worried about those results themselves. But what I saw there, made me look closer at the daylight shots I made earlier today. And not only did I see the same color cast (much less of course) but also the stuff in the right upper and lower corners. I also agree the daylight shots are somewhat underexposed, but not that much. The first daylight shot has +1.3 EC.
If this had been a $500 P'n'S, I couldn't care less. I also understand no camera or lens is is 100 % perfect. But for this kind of camera with a $4000 price tag, it is not acceptable to me. I expect better results.
p.92 #18 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
mortyb wrote:
I expect better results.
So do I, but unfortunately you then have to buy a brick-sized SLR camera with huge lenses. Is that really worth it compared to some tweaking of the files?
p.92 #19 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
The corner/edges color cast is kind of unavoidable with the Leica M9 and short wide angle lenses due to the acute angles of incidence.
This is a different scenario: 35mm. is a very moderate wide angle focal. Besides, the RX1 sensor, microlenses, firmware etc, should be optimized specifically only for that Sonnar 35/2 lens design which is, apparently, quite telecentric.
So, I find difficult to understand how Sony didn't got things right BEFORE releasing the camera for sale and instead they let the early buyers to find out at their expenses, if not in money, in lost time and inconveniences. Much more so in a $4000 product.
p.92 #20 · Sony RX1 FF Mirrorless (Original 2012 thread)
Makten wrote:
So do I, but unfortunately you then have to buy a brick-sized SLR camera with huge lenses. Is that really worth it compared to some tweaking of the files?
My point is that other RX1 seem to fare better. How would you correct the stuff in the right corners? That's a defect.
