Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Sony RX100...  (Read 48892 times)
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8208



WWW
« on: June 06, 2012, 04:49:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Fascinating move from Sony. Although it is of course pricier, it will probably attract the eye of many potential Canon S100 buyers.

It also casts an interesting light on the potential of CX sized sensors and on how small those cameras could become.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
RobSaecker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272


WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 06, 2012, 10:21:22 AM »
ReplyReply

So there's already a 20mp version of the V1/J1 sensor? What do you suppose Nikon might do with that?  Smiley
Logged

Rob
photo blog - http://robsaecker.com
AFairley
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1175



« Reply #2 on: June 06, 2012, 03:23:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Yes, I agree, very interesting move.  I bought into the micro 4/3 system because the image quality wasn't there with the Canon S90 if I wanted to try to make a serious print, but m4/3 is not really a "carry everywhere on the belt" system even with just one of the pancakes, so the Sony is definitely interesting.  It will be interesting to see how the Sony raw files hold up.  I do wish they had stuck with a 12MP or 16MP sensor, though, just how big does Sony think people want to print from a compact camera anyway?  I'd rather have even marginally better DR and noise.
Logged

MatthewCromer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 411


« Reply #3 on: June 06, 2012, 05:32:24 PM »
ReplyReply

The DPR low-ISO images looked pretty damn good to me.  You aren't really going to pay any IQ penalty for 20MP over 16MP.
Logged
Tom Montgomery
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 78


WWW
« Reply #4 on: June 06, 2012, 07:11:35 PM »
ReplyReply

And since the lens doesn't go much beyond 100mm equivalent, having the extra pixels for cropping will be useful.
« Last Edit: June 06, 2012, 07:13:59 PM by Tom Montgomery » Logged
AFairley
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1175



« Reply #5 on: June 07, 2012, 11:35:02 AM »
ReplyReply

The DPR low-ISO images looked pretty damn good to me.  You aren't really going to pay any IQ penalty for 20MP over 16MP.

On reflection, I think the real IQ issue will be the corner performance of the little lens.
Logged

Peter_DL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 421


« Reply #6 on: June 28, 2012, 01:47:45 PM »
ReplyReply

  
The form factor in relation to sensor size looks compelling to me.
But then it seems that the additional sensor size (e.g. compared to a Powershot G12) was largely invested to double the pixel count to 20 mp rather than increasing pixel size - and what we commonly attribute with it: dynamic range, less noise, low light high iso performace... unless the sensor itself would simply be better (such as with Nikon's D7000/5100, or Pentax's whatsoever generation - at the risk that I'm not really up to date anymore).

Another camera and 'fascinating move' which misses the sweet spot of camera size vs sensor size vs pixel count vs pixel quality ?
E.g. like the Powershot G1X - for my purposes.

Peter

--
http://www.dpreview.com/products/sony/compacts/sony_dscrx100

« Last Edit: June 29, 2012, 10:37:44 AM by Peter_DL » Logged
Pingang
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 117


« Reply #7 on: June 29, 2012, 02:36:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Of typical Nikon, they are likely to avoid to cannibalize the sales of the V1/J1 which I think is a limited system. Technology will eventually allow FF sensor to pack into small camera body as before with the Contax T3 or Minolta TC-1, there is a logical size for camera or simply it can be a iPhone, The RX-100 will eventually start a new trend of camera, which is good for users, not good for some camera makers.

Pingang


So there's already a 20mp version of the V1/J1 sensor? What do you suppose Nikon might do with that?  Smiley
Logged
Peter_DL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 421


« Reply #8 on: June 29, 2012, 10:34:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Technology will eventually allow FF sensor to pack into small camera body as before with the Contax T3 or Minolta TC-1, there is a logical size for camera or simply it can be a iPhone, The RX-100 will eventually start a new trend of camera, which is good for users, not good for some camera makers.

... agreed,
so we'll continue to wait.

--
Logged
franta
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #9 on: June 29, 2012, 01:29:35 PM »
ReplyReply

... it seems that the additional sensor size (e.g. compared to a Powershot G12) was largely invested to double the pixel count to 20 mp rather than increasing pixel size ...

As I understand it, the sensor area is 4x that of the G12 while the pixel count  is 2x. So the pixel size on the Sony should be twice that of the Canon.
(I am not so sure pixel area is indeed so important but what do I know ?)

Cheers
Logged
Peter_DL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 421


« Reply #10 on: June 30, 2012, 08:12:09 AM »
ReplyReply

... the sensor area is 4x that of the G12 ...

?? looks more like something around 2.75x

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sony-dsc-rx100/
http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key=sensor%20sizes

--



Logged
franta
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 16


« Reply #11 on: June 30, 2012, 12:14:55 PM »
ReplyReply


I stand corrected. I remember reading somewhere that it was 4 times bigger but never looked at the actual sizes (or maybe I just dreamt it).
Sorry about the confusion.
Logged
DaveL
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 131


WWW
« Reply #12 on: July 06, 2012, 06:19:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for posting Bernard.
I have a Sony NEX5, and frankly I don't use it much. Kit zoom; 55-210 as well. Sony has too much of my money.

I visited the local Sony Store (Toronto) and asked when the NEX5N would be replaced. they showed me their computer screen. The silver 5N is discontinued. Surely a replacement for that cams is imminent too.

This camera looks very interesting. Truly appreciate the thoughts here.

DaveL
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4896



« Reply #13 on: July 06, 2012, 06:25:16 PM »
ReplyReply

I've started working with the RX100 and will have a review within the next week or so. It's a pretty amazing little camera.

Michael
Logged
DaveL
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 131


WWW
« Reply #14 on: July 06, 2012, 06:32:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Good!  My recent cameras include
G9 with Franiec grip (after the Japanese trip story here)
2-G11's
LX5
NEX5

My M3 was stolen years ago; my M4P and I didn't get along.

DaveL
Logged
David Sutton
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 898


WWW
« Reply #15 on: July 06, 2012, 06:41:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Double good!
Logged

BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8208



WWW
« Reply #16 on: July 06, 2012, 09:02:46 PM »
ReplyReply

I've started working with the RX100 and will have a review within the next week or so. It's a pretty amazing little camera.

Same here.  Smiley

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8208



WWW
« Reply #17 on: July 08, 2012, 06:44:44 AM »
ReplyReply

By the way, is there already a decent raw converter supporting the RX100?

Thanks.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4896



« Reply #18 on: July 08, 2012, 08:12:41 AM »
ReplyReply

There are a couple, (Rawthereppe) but I don't think that they yet handle the optical correction codes. This camera / lens combo really needs it.

We're stuck with Sony's dreadful Image Data Converter for the moment.

Michael
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8208



WWW
« Reply #19 on: July 08, 2012, 08:09:50 PM »
ReplyReply

There are a couple, (Rawthereppe) but I don't think that they yet handle the optical correction codes. This camera / lens combo really needs it.

We're stuck with Sony's dreadful Image Data Converter for the moment.

Michael,

Answering my own question, Raw Developper 1.95 does already support the RX100.

Nice conversions as usual.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad