Our friend Ken Tanaka has posted a nice small set of pictures called "A Few Days with the Sony RX100" on his website.
Mike
Send this post to a friend
Please help support TOP by patronizing our sponsors B&H Photo and Amazon
Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2012 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.
Holy cow.
Posted by: Robert S. | Monday, 30 July 2012 at 01:28 PM
"Further, in fact, I captured most of these images by letting the camera run its settings via its Advanced (+) Intelligent Auto mode!"
I'm impressed. For a while I've been thinking that the guys who write the software that controls our cameras must know a thing or two. Sometimes it's good to let the camera decide on all the routine bits and get down to seeing a few pictures.
Posted by: Henk Coetzee | Monday, 30 July 2012 at 03:11 PM
We learn at least that Ken is still a decent photographer :-)
I find judging premium compacts hard. On one hand, a lot of people say that the image quality of the RX100 is stunning and it's a highly usable camera and I don't doubt that. On the other, a different crowd marvels at the qualities of the Nikon D800 (and similar). And somewhere between these there is a middle ground too, but for the photographer not spending time reviewing equipment it gets really hard to say what are the real benefits/tradeoffs with cameras such as iPhone, Rx100 or Eos 5d Mark III.
Just saying... I don't need another camera, but the Rx100 is interesting for the gearhead in me, although I know that I really wouldn't use it much. Is this a common sentiment?
Posted by: Oskar Ojala | Monday, 30 July 2012 at 03:42 PM
I really like the canoes.
Posted by: Timprov | Monday, 30 July 2012 at 05:54 PM
Oskar, if I may, it's a common sentiment for those who have the money to spend on replacing cameras of every known sensor size every three years for no other purpose than the very fact that they can- or for those who like to daydream that they can. Those of us with much more modest budgets make sure to get what we actually Need with the little we have. That said, it's often a fine line between daydream and "research."
Posted by: Stan B. | Monday, 30 July 2012 at 06:10 PM
Holy cow, holy s--t! Me want.
Posted by: Christopher Lane | Monday, 30 July 2012 at 06:24 PM
@Oskar ("the Rx100 is interesting for the gearhead in me, although I know that I really wouldn't use it much. Is this a common sentiment?")
Not at all! I love my compact Lx3, and would use the RX100 A LOT if I ever got the chance to get one.
Posted by: Nico Burns | Monday, 30 July 2012 at 07:08 PM
Photos look nice but then again so do most pics that small on a screen. Too small to make any judgements about the camera I'd say.
Posted by: Ed | Monday, 30 July 2012 at 10:28 PM
They are very impressive indeed, as is your photography, Ken. I have made up my mind to get a carry around camera and this is one of two I am considering. Interesting that my second consideration is a Nikon with the exact same Sony sensor. What to do...
Posted by: JMR | Monday, 30 July 2012 at 11:31 PM
Oskar said..
"Just saying... I don't need another camera, but the Rx100 is interesting for the gearhead in me, although I know that I really wouldn't use it much. Is this a common sentiment?"
Spot on - I have all the cameras I could ever need (in fact selling one off). Still, a good camera. Would recommend for someone looking for a lightweight "only" camera.
Posted by: Steve Jacob | Tuesday, 31 July 2012 at 12:53 AM
That was a really nice series. Hard to notice the equipment when the images themselves are so good. Particularly liked the shoes.
Posted by: Joe | Tuesday, 31 July 2012 at 01:49 AM
The concert shots (ISO3200!!) are really impressive, and what noise there is appears quite pleasantly grain-like.
However I find some others, the beach shots for instance, to be a little too saturated and contrasty (heavy on the blacks). Is this due to the camera or simply the style of the photographer?
Posted by: Richard K | Tuesday, 31 July 2012 at 03:17 AM
I am amazed at how people get exited about a camera based on screen-samples. Maybe they see something that I don't?!
Posted by: Andreas | Tuesday, 31 July 2012 at 08:12 AM
Ken,
Did you sharpen the images in PP. Some of them look too sharp.
Jay
Posted by: Jay Goldman | Tuesday, 31 July 2012 at 08:46 AM
Thanks for sharing your images, Ken.
Is it too early to say:
"Hello Sony RX100, Good bye Canon S95"
I recall you used the S95 for a while. How would you compare the two? I'm keen to read a photographer's viewpoint, as I have an S95 as well (and it's my only camera).
Posted by: Sven W | Tuesday, 31 July 2012 at 09:18 AM
@ Richard K: "However I find some others, the beach shots for instance, to be a little too saturated and contrasty (heavy on the blacks). Is this due to the camera or simply the style of the photographer?"
A little of each, plus other factors, Richard. All camera JPGs (that I've seen) have a bit of a default bias toward the punchy direction. It tends to be a crowd-pleaser for the general public (witness Velvia film). (Sony does let you season to taste, to a degree, via its dynamic range adjustment.) But in fact I actually nudged those images a bit towards a visual goal of my own.
For comparison I've added the original, un-touched version of one beach image to the set. I have also added a crop detail from that un-touched image so you can see that the camera's lens and 20mp sensor are, in fact, capturing a tremendous amount of excellent detail. (Remember, this is from a large/fine jpg.)
I have added a few additional (un-touched) images to give readers a further sense of the camera's nature. By popular request I have also added exposure information in the captions of the night images.
And, yes, all images were captured hand-held.
While I am an enthusiastic camera buff I am far more enthusiastic for the broader context of photographic pursuits and results. To that end I vigorously endorse sticking with a camera you like using and that you've mastered. In my own case I might still be using the Canon S90/S95 (my pocket cams for 4 years) if the RX100 didn't have such stellar shot-to-shot single frame times, a trait that propelled it beyond the Canon and further out of my way.
------
p.s. As you review these images do be sure to click them to make them as large as possible. I've uploaded 1200px frames so you should be able to fill a notebook browser window nicely.
Posted by: Kenneth Tanaka | Tuesday, 31 July 2012 at 12:22 PM
For Ed,
I agree it's difficult to judge cameras by small pics on the screen, but you might find these high res shots and 100% crops helpful:
http://sonyalphalab.com/2012/07/sony-rx100-high-res-sample-photos-w-100-crops-now-up/
Jeff
Posted by: Jeff Kott | Tuesday, 31 July 2012 at 02:06 PM
"Did you sharpen the images in PP. Some of them look too sharp."
No.
Posted by: Kenneth Tanaka | Tuesday, 31 July 2012 at 03:23 PM