I'm NOT knocked out with RX100M2

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
Lindsay D
Regular MemberPosts: 353
Like?
Re: I'm NOT knocked out with RX100M2
In reply to knox, 5 months ago

knox wrote:

I bought a RX100M2 last week and so far I am completely underwhelmed. As a photographer I shoot analog Hasselblads, Nikon F100, Nikon D3 etc etc . . and have been carrying around a Rollei 35SE or the F100 in a messenger bag. I decided to get something smaller to carrying around in a coat pocket on my motorcycle rather than the Rollei or F100 in the bag . . . After some research I bought the Sony. I'm actually thinking about getting rid of it after using it for a few days. Yea I don't expect it to take shots as good as my main cameras but I just find the images rather bland and with the cliche sterile, 'pocket camera' digital 'look'. I bought it for a good deal at $548 otherwise I would have waited for the M3 to see what the upgrades are. I hate looking at an LCD to take photos and the add-on electronic viewfinder is too expensive to add to a camera when the images are just mediocre. I could deal with the regular viewfinder 'somewhat' if the images knocked me out. Maybe I expected too much. I admit I have not 'woodshedded' with it and got deep inside all the settings yet as I have been really busy . . . Is that where I will find the so called 'magic' everyone is talking about or did I just expect too much?

-- hide signature --

Knox

When I hear rants like this I wonder what on earth motivated the user to purchase the camera in the first place. I'm not sure you fully understand what a tiny compact camera is, what it is for, or the inherent limitations. The camera you mention, the RX100ii, is nothing short of phenomenal for what it is. If you want pocketability and versatility, it is a marvel. Comparing it to the machines you mention is a little bizarre if I'm honest. I will also add that you appear to fall into the group of people who places too much weight on the equipment used rather than the abilities of the photographer. If you don't like looking at an LCD then once again, why buy a camera like this? I'm not big on LCDs, but it is part of the compromise if you want a tiny body, and the Sony LCD is one of the best I have ever seen. If you feel the images are flat and featureless then you will need to adjust your lighting and postproduction skills. You say you've been too busy to get to know it thoroughly, yet you are very quick to criticise it.

I'm a full-time pro with a lot of very good equipment in my office, yet I remain unremittingly grateful that I have my RX100ii in my pocket when I leave the house. I can continue to win industry awards with some of the photographs I've taken with this camera on my personal excursions, mostly because I happen to have a camera on me, and I do not suffer from any particular insecurities about gaining good results from a small sensor compact. Upgrading to the next version isn't going to help you.

If you're looking for something reasonably small, and if you're happy with a fixed focal length, then I wonder if something like the original Fuji X100 MkI might suit you better - the image quality is phenomenal, but of course you will give up the speed and feature set which makes more modern compact cameras that much more useful.

-- hide signature --

www.lindsaydobsonphotography.com

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