p.52 #1 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Looks like my 3 year old RX1's sensor is holding up pretty well against newer siblings in DXO tests.
Hard to believe it's been 3 years already. Nice to see all the interest in the mk2 version.
p.52 #2 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
The Thumbs Up for the Q gives a pretty secure grip if one doesn't find the thumb indent fits their hand size. I don't really find the Q handles too bad on its own though as it's pretty light weight.
handles about as well as an original A7 series, ie; not perfect on its own but usable. It is a bit form over function I agree though.
The Leica grip with the finger loops handles pretty great though. Just a bit pricey so I'm waiting for some $25 knock off myself.
Overall I'd say I find it no better or worse than the RX1 in terms of handling, as neither are perfect, but both are quite usable. Not like either is designed for shooting 2000 images per day like a pro dslr.
Basically though, if you like how an M handles, you'll like the Q, as it's a slightly thinner M shape, aka a m3
p.52 #3 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Fred Miranda wrote:
sebooh,
I have both set-ups: original hood and step-down ring (49-37mm). I use the step-down ring when carrying the camera on my coat. However, I have not tested how efficient the step down ring idea is. Have you seeing any tests on this?
i did my own tests, which were not terribly rigorous. i actually saw no difference with either hood versus without any hood. all the situations where i got the lens to flare adding the hoods provided zero reduction in flare. the bigger hood is less rigid than the step down ring + filter ring which could possibly soften any impact.
Zony_user,
What is the motive to continue the size/weight discussion? We already know these differences from numerous images online.
In fact you were the one writing how "the Q is significantly larger than the RX1" last month... https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1400161/0#13307845
They are both great cameras and if you got the Q and it allows you to produce great images, you've made the right choice.
p.52 #5 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
sebboh wrote:
i did my own tests, which were not terribly rigorous. i actually saw no difference with either hood versus without any hood. all the situations where i got the lens to flare adding the hoods provided zero reduction in flare. the bigger hood is less rigid than the step down ring + filter ring which could possibly soften any impact.
Neither approach may prevent flare but did you see any difference in contrast? I will test this as well as I'm also interested in the results.
I have the step-down ring and also an empty 49 ring to add some height.
p.52 #6 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Fred Miranda wrote:
Zone_user,
What is the motive to continue the size/weight discussion? We already know these differences from numerous images online.
In fact you were the one writing how "the Q is significantly larger than the RX1" last month... https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1400161/0#13307845
They are both great cameras and if you got the Q and it allows you to produce great images, you've made the right choice.
Let's move on please.
I love both my RX1R and Q as I feel both fill a purpose. And yes, the Q is a class above the RX1R in terms of size. I am not trying to debate that. I just wanted to correct that previous statement because I felt it was an unfair description of the Q. I would do the same for my beloved RX1R btw
p.52 #7 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Fred Miranda wrote:
Neither approach may prevent flare but did you see any difference in contrast? I will test this as well as I'm also interested in the results.
I have the step-down ring and also an empty 49 ring to add some height.
no differences in contrast, but i was only doing tests where the sun was in the frame or just outside the frame. it's possible there may be contrast differences with vs without the hood at more oblique angles (never checked), but the two different "hoods" should perform the same in those situations since they both fully occlude the front element from direct sunlight in those situations.
p.52 #8 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Fred Miranda wrote:
sebooh,
I have both set-ups: original hood and step-down ring (49-37mm). I use the step-down ring when carrying the camera on my coat. However, I have not tested how efficient the step down ring idea is. Have you seeing any tests on this?
There is one huge difference between the setups: The hood is a LOT easier and quicker to add/remove when needed.
I keep mine attached because: 1. It gives good protection, so much so that I am forgoing using a UV filter, and 2. I like the way it looks on the camera - very distinctive.
p.52 #9 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
dandrewk wrote:
There is one huge difference between the setups: The hood is a LOT easier and quicker to add/remove when needed.
but the step down ring is so compact it never needs to be removed it's smaller than the sony provided lens cap. i really like it for having the camera always ready. just pull it out of my coat pocket and start shooting, no fussing with lens caps. the only times i've ever used a lens cap is when i have my wife carry the camera in her purse.
p.52 #10 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
For those looking for a very small but sturdy quick release plate to the RX1RII while L-brackets are being custom-made for it, I've found a good choice:
It's the Desmond DS-1 plate. It's small enough to allow full access to the battery/SD card without having to remove it. It's also well-made and it costs $14 at B&H.
p.52 #11 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Anyone tried the official Sony case for the R2? As far as the photos show, not you have long requested flush screw dial at the bottom, as well as easy card/battery door access and, to top other cases out there, access to the ports without having to remove the case.
p.52 #12 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Fred Miranda wrote:
Neither approach may prevent flare but did you see any difference in contrast? I will test this as well as I'm also interested in the results.
I have the step-down ring and also an empty 49 ring to add some height.
Fred, any update on whether using the cam with hood impacts image contrast?
p.52 #13 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Jeff Kott wrote:
Fred, any update on whether using the cam with hood impacts image contrast?
I was not able to test this yet but will do when the sun comes back.
I discover something useful though.
You can set the camera to MF (using the front dial) and still use the (AEL) back button to engage AF.
Here is how:
Set the camera to MF
Menu tab2: Custom Key (Shoot.) >> Set AEL Button to "AF/MF Control Hold".
Now you will be able to MF (using focus peaking) and when needed, use the AEL button to AF.
The only issue is that the AEL is perfect for EyeAF, so I won't be using this as much as I would like.
Fred
p.52 #14 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Fred Miranda wrote:
The only issue is that the AEL is perfect for EyeAF, so I won't be using this as much as I would like.
Fred
This is how the original RX1 worked as well, and how I had mine set up. Sadly as you point out, the introduction of eye detect AF, but with no new buttons on the interface presents a real issue.
What I would of loved to have seen Sony do is add the toggle style switch with center button, for AEL/AF, like on the A7 series.
Then, much as many of us do on the A7 series, you can assign one spot AF to the up position, and when you want eye detect, you flip the switch to the down position, giving on the fly access to two different AF modes, and all the while keeping AF off the shutter button so you can also MF, zone focus etc.
It was such a well thought out feature on the A7, would of been most welcomed, and quite easy to add to the RX2
p.52 #15 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Something I've noticed with the RX1RII when shooting video:
AF works but does not lock on a subject when pressing the shutter button half way, so no 'green' lock light. (Could someone confirm that?).
The way that it works is that you must place your subject on the AF focusing point for the system to slowly lock on it (The light never turns to 'green' though). It actually works great for video as the lock is slow and not jerky.
When shooting people in movie mode, changing AF focus area to "Wide" and turning face detection "On" does a good job tracking faces. When tracking non-faces, it works best in "Wide" as well but in this case you must use "Center lock-on AF" to choose what subject you want to track. (Lock-On AF flexible spot is not supported)
p.52 #17 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
I returned my RX1R II i bought from amazon after 2 weeks of ownership. All the sudden the it'd stop autofocusing and the menu buttons stopped working. I've tried everything...I'm going to wait probally until Feb or March before re-picking one up. I'll stick to my RX1 for the time being.
p.52 #18 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Fred Miranda wrote:
Something I've noticed with the RX1RII when shooting video:
AF works but does not lock on a subject when pressing the shutter button half way, so no 'green' lock light. (Could someone confirm that?).
The way that it works is that you must place your subject on the AF focusing point for the system to slowly lock on it (The light never turns to 'green' though). It actually works great for video as the lock is slow and not jerky.
When shooting people in movie mode, changing AF focus area to "Wide" and turning face detection "On" does a good job tracking faces. When tracking non-faces, it works best in "Wide" as well but in this case you must use "Center lock-on AF" to choose what subject you want to track. (Lock-On AF flexible spot is not supported)
p.52 #19 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
Has anyone compared the results from Capture one 9 vs Lightrom 6 ragarding "standard development" of raw-files from Rx1r2? In my taste the results from C1 has much richer colour and "punch", better handling of highlights and shadows for example. And strangely for me, the two softwares seems to interpret the "cameras own" recorded white balance very different.
I havenīt found a way to mimic the results from C1 in LR
p.52 #20 · Announced: RX1R II with 42MP sensor and EVF
patrik_f wrote:
Has anyone compared the results from Capture one 9 vs Lightrom 6 ragarding "standard development" of raw-files from Rx1r2? In my taste the results from C1 has much richer colour and "punch", better handling of highlights and shadows for example. And strangely for me, the two softwares seems to interpret the "cameras own" recorded white balance very different.
I havenīt found a way to mimic the results from C1 in LR
It won't be a matter just of white balance; it's a matter of the camera profiles that Adobe and Phase give you as default.
Jim Kasson (google his blog site) has done some comparison testing of them.
The C1 colour profiles are a little less accurate than the Adobe ones, but a lot of people prefer them. Both deviate from strict accuracy in similarish ways...
So basically the colour mappings are close but a little different, and while both Adobe and Phase increase chroma (think of it as saturation in LAB mode, though that's not exactly right) more than strictly accurate, Phase increases it more. Which maybe why some people prefer it: it looks more "colourful" out of the tin,
To simulate the C1 colour rendering exactly you'd need to make your own profile (or possibly you could do it by adjusting the hue and saturation sliders for particular colours, and saving that as a preset).
the bigger hood is less rigid than the step down ring + filter ring which could possibly soften any impact.
