RX100 vs RX100M2 RAW samples from ISO100 to 6400

Started Jul 19, 2013 | Discussions thread
Robert Deutsch
Forum ProPosts: 10,045Gear list
Like?
Re: Same resolution, but less sensitivity here...
In reply to Roland Schulz, Jul 20, 2013

Roland Schulz wrote:

Arn wrote:

eivissa1 wrote:

It has been said before: il looks as if the new Sony produces softer pictures, but the details are still there.

Imaging Resource said that the first Sony did more aggressive sharpening....

From what I tried, I actually couldn't produce the details that are in the mkI image by increasing sharpening in the mkII image. I don't think it's a matter of sharpening (and Imaging-resource was talking about JPGs). Anyway, the difference is quite small, but the fact that the mkII doesn't seem to improve RAW image quality. And there is still the fact that mkI's sensor seems to be 1/3 to 1/2 a stop more sensitive.

I really don't find a decrease in detail from my M2 vs the M1. I see the opposite in some outdoor shoots, where my M2 shows more resolution sometimes. Maybe even my second M1 has a non perfect lens.

What is more significant is that the M2 seems to be 1/3 stop less sensitive. Both cameras were shoot with the same settings, M1 is always brigther, M2 also showed -0.3EV in the display. To have a good comparison I decided to stay with the same settings. Sony told us the M2 should be more sensitive.

Color is another point. M2 RAW color looks somewhat flatter, BUT we have no real M2 profile in ACR/LR yet. When I turn the sliders a bit you get both very similar.

What I found with the M1 is that the colors shift to the edge of the frame (wall). This may be a reason of the profile, but the M2 does not suffer from that.

The M2 also "blocks" shadow noise from 3200 on better.

Still no decision here if I don't think about the money...

I'm doing a comparison of the RX100Mk2 and the Mk1 myself, and my tentative findings are not dissimilar to yours.

What I can definitely confirm is that at the same settings of ISO, shutter speed, and aperture, shooting RAW converted with ACR 7.4/CS6, pictures taken with the Mk2 come out appreciably darker, by 1/3 to 1/2 stop.  In ACR, if I use the "Auto" button on a Mk1 image, it increases the exposure by .65.  If I do the same thing (same subject and framing, and the same settings) with the Mk2, the "Auto" button increases the exposure by 1.25.  This seems to indicate that the Mk2 has lower sensitivity than the Mk1--by an amount that corresponds to what Sony claims to be an improvement.  I wonder if we're missing something here.   I find it hard to believe that Sony would make such a mistake or deliberately claim something that can be shown to be wrong.  The DxO comparison of measured and manufacturer claimed ISO shows that the Mk2 measured ISOs are somewhat below what Sony claims, but it's pretty much the same for the Mk1.

Doing some not-very-well-controlled test shots, in bright light/low ISO (125) and dim light/high ISO (3200), RAW converted by ACR 7.4/CS6, I can see some improvement at high ISO (less noise, and no obvious loss of detail).  I'm not sure about the bright light/low ISO images.  Some show the MK1 to be superior (sharper, better contrast), and in others it's too close to call.

This is a work in progress...    I do hope that DPR publishes their detailed review soon.

Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow