RX100: Any Lensmate Filter System Reviews?

Started Sep 18, 2012 | Discussions
travel_bug
Junior MemberPosts: 43
Like?
RX100: Any Lensmate Filter System Reviews?
Sep 18, 2012

Has anyone used this system yet?

Sony RX100
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
FocalPoint_L
Regular MemberPosts: 230
Like?
Re: RX100: Any Lensmate Filter System Reviews? Yes + IR worked
In reply to travel_bug, Sep 18, 2012

Yes. I received the 49mm set today. The installation video and instructions were very good.

It works as advertised -- so far -- I haven't traveled with the camera over time to see if the ring that uses adhesive stays on the camera. But it seems fine.

I like the short-turn, bayonet mount. I don't see any advantage to a magnet-style version.

It comes with a small carry case and lens cap, which you only need to protect the filter if you leave it on the camera.

Now I have to get a 49mm CPL and maybe ND filters, or just use step-up rings with the ones I have. My tests today were with a 49mm linear (old fashion) polarizer I had around from the film/manual focus days, and the camera focused and metered fine. But supposedly AF cameras should be used only with CPLs.

One more thing, I tried a #87 IR filter and the RX100 worked for infrared photography with no hot spots in the limited tests I did. The image was deep magenta, but a quick grayscale and autocontrast in Photoshop produced a decent IR photo.

LR

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
millsart
Senior MemberPosts: 2,771
Like?
Thickness of mount and price are the main differences
In reply to FocalPoint_L, Sep 18, 2012

The only really big advantage to the magnetic mount is that its an ultra low profile metal ring which you can hardly notice is even there.

The Lensmate ring is about 1/8" thick and while pretty low profile, its obviously there.

Also the magnetic system is $26 (plus $3 for a step up ring if you hack it) so saves you a bit of money over what Lensmate charges

I've had the Lensmate system for my S95 and it worked as described. Nothing wrong with it per say, but for the RX100 it wasn't an option I wanted to buy into again as I think the magnetic system makes more sense.

Quicker, cheaper, lower profile.

FocalPoint_L wrote:

Yes. I received the 49mm set today. The installation video and instructions were very good.

It works as advertised -- so far -- I haven't traveled with the camera over time to see if the ring that uses adhesive stays on the camera. But it seems fine.

I like the short-turn, bayonet mount. I don't see any advantage to a magnet-style version.

It comes with a small carry case and lens cap, which you only need to protect the filter if you leave it on the camera.

Now I have to get a 49mm CPL and maybe ND filters, or just use step-up rings with the ones I have. My tests today were with a 49mm linear (old fashion) polarizer I had around from the film/manual focus days, and the camera focused and metered fine. But supposedly AF cameras should be used only with CPLs.

One more thing, I tried a #87 IR filter and the RX100 worked for infrared photography with no hot spots in the limited tests I did. The image was deep magenta, but a quick grayscale and autocontrast in Photoshop produced a decent IR photo.

LR

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
FocalPoint_L
Regular MemberPosts: 230
Like?
Re: Thickness of mount and price are the main differences
In reply to millsart, Sep 18, 2012

Good points.

But after the hack you save only $11 and you still have to DO the hack. Not worth it to me.

To my eyes, the 3mm thickness of the Lensmate is hardly noticeable, but if you look for it, you'll see it.

Both of these systems allow the RX100 to be easily used with filters and that fixes a problem that some owners will find useful.

LR

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RX100
Junior MemberPosts: 43
Like?
Re: Thickness of mount and price are the main differences
In reply to FocalPoint_L, Sep 18, 2012

Carry speed have magnetic filter holders in 52mm, 55mm and 58mm sizes:

http://www.carryspeed.com/products/magfilter-threaded-adapter-ring

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Liz Z.
Senior MemberPosts: 1,259Gear list
Like?
Re: Thickness of mount and price are the main differences
In reply to RX100, Sep 18, 2012

I have a Lensmate on order, having had a mishap (probably due to my carelessness) with the Magfilter. (I had successfully done Millsart's hack; it actually took about ten minutes at most, since he had done all the problem solving already!) But my mishap made me want to try an alternative this time.

Following some concern expressed here, I wrote to Lensmate asking if their bayonet mounts had any reports of negative impact on the lens barrel, and got this reply: "The bayonet mount is very easy to use and secure for the added filter.....Unlike a threaded filter, our bayonet is a very gentle 1/3 turning, so would not effect the built in lens in anyway.... We have sold a similar system for the S95 for the past 4 years with almost 10,000 users, all very happy customers. We sell to regular photographers, dentists, remote airplane photographers, medical people, eye doctors, scientist, hobbyists and Ebay sellers."
--
Liz

 Liz Z.'s gear list:Liz Z.'s gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F31fd Sony RX100 Adobe Photoshop CS6 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
millsart
Senior MemberPosts: 2,771
Like?
Yes, Lensmate is rather gentle, but could come off
In reply to Liz Z., Sep 18, 2012

As I mentioned in what I think was one of the other threads, the Lensmate system only takes about a quarter turn, which is good, but its also bad as something like a purse swinging against it could easily spin it far enough forward it could also dislodge.

When I had one for my S95 I never really carried it with filters attached, always added when I was shooting and needed one so I can't say for certain how well they'd stay on during typical transport.

The system that could tax the barrel is Jens system since it physically twist on/off with the screw threads.

Now tons of cameras/lenses have filter threads, so its a typical method that seems to work fine, HOWEVER, on a camera that doesn't have those threads you've got wonder if they might not have anticipated any rotational forces on the barrel.

Could you twist a filter thats a bit stubborn to come off and damage something internal ? Who knows, but I would probably play it safe and make sure I'm holding the barrel steady before twisting to reduce the risk.

On the plus side, once you tighten a filter down, it is very unlikely you'd have any issues coming off.

Basically pro's and con's to each system

Liz Z. wrote:

I have a Lensmate on order, having had a mishap (probably due to my carelessness) with the Magfilter. (I had successfully done Millsart's hack; it actually took about ten minutes at most, since he had done all the problem solving already!) But my mishap made me want to try an alternative this time.

Following some concern expressed here, I wrote to Lensmate asking if their bayonet mounts had any reports of negative impact on the lens barrel, and got this reply: "The bayonet mount is very easy to use and secure for the added filter.....Unlike a threaded filter, our bayonet is a very gentle 1/3 turning, so would not effect the built in lens in anyway.... We have sold a similar system for the S95 for the past 4 years with almost 10,000 users, all very happy customers. We sell to regular photographers, dentists, remote airplane photographers, medical people, eye doctors, scientist, hobbyists and Ebay sellers."
--
Liz

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
millsart
Senior MemberPosts: 2,771
Like?
Only Phase Detect systems, such as a DSLR need a CPL, Linear is fine for RX100
In reply to FocalPoint_L, Sep 18, 2012

Phase Detect AF systems, such as the typical DSLR need a circular polarizer, but mirrorless cameras, such as point and shoots will work fine with linear polarizers.

There really is no difference between them either in terms of effect.

Linear is a few bucks cheaper but usually tougher to find. Most places seem to just carry CPL's as they work with any camera.

Really the only good thing about a linear polarizer these days is that if you take two of them and then reverse one, you will have made yourself a Vari-ND filter.

FocalPoint_L wrote:

Yes. I received the 49mm set today. The installation video and instructions were very good.

It works as advertised -- so far -- I haven't traveled with the camera over time to see if the ring that uses adhesive stays on the camera. But it seems fine.

I like the short-turn, bayonet mount. I don't see any advantage to a magnet-style version.

It comes with a small carry case and lens cap, which you only need to protect the filter if you leave it on the camera.

Now I have to get a 49mm CPL and maybe ND filters, or just use step-up rings with the ones I have. My tests today were with a 49mm linear (old fashion) polarizer I had around from the film/manual focus days, and the camera focused and metered fine. But supposedly AF cameras should be used only with CPLs.

One more thing, I tried a #87 IR filter and the RX100 worked for infrared photography with no hot spots in the limited tests I did. The image was deep magenta, but a quick grayscale and autocontrast in Photoshop produced a decent IR photo.

LR

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Len_Gee
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,339Gear list
Like?
Re: RX100: Any Lensmate Filter System Reviews? Yes + IR worked
In reply to FocalPoint_L, Sep 18, 2012

Would be interested in the infrared capabilties of the RX100.
Can you post a few IR pics taken with the camera?
Here or web gallery, or your DPR gallery.

Thanks.

FocalPoint_L wrote:

Yes. I received the 49mm set today. The installation video and instructions were very good.

It works as advertised -- so far -- I haven't traveled with the camera over time to see if the ring that uses adhesive stays on the camera. But it seems fine.

I like the short-turn, bayonet mount. I don't see any advantage to a magnet-style version.

It comes with a small carry case and lens cap, which you only need to protect the filter if you leave it on the camera.

Now I have to get a 49mm CPL and maybe ND filters, or just use step-up rings with the ones I have. My tests today were with a 49mm linear (old fashion) polarizer I had around from the film/manual focus days, and the camera focused and metered fine. But supposedly AF cameras should be used only with CPLs.

One more thing, I tried a #87 IR filter and the RX100 worked for infrared photography with no hot spots in the limited tests I did. The image was deep magenta, but a quick grayscale and autocontrast in Photoshop produced a decent IR photo.

LR

 Len_Gee's gear list:Len_Gee's gear list
Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
millsart
Senior MemberPosts: 2,771
Like?
Re: RX100: Any Lensmate Filter System Reviews? Yes + IR worked
In reply to Len_Gee, Sep 18, 2012

Its marginal for handheld shooting as the IR blocking filter is pretty strong, so your pretty much as ISO3200 and maybe 1/30th f1.8 with the filter on even on a bright sunny day, which while not bad, certainly isn't the camera at its best.

Luckily though, the lens doesn't have any hot spots and if you can use a tripod, gives quite nice IR results if you shoot at low ISO.

Its no substitute for an ir modded camera, but can add some fun to the camera, especially during otherwise poor for photography midday sun all for the cost of a filter

Len_Gee wrote:
Would be interested in the infrared capabilties of the RX100.
Can you post a few IR pics taken with the camera?
Here or web gallery, or your DPR gallery.

Thanks.

FocalPoint_L wrote:

Yes. I received the 49mm set today. The installation video and instructions were very good.

It works as advertised -- so far -- I haven't traveled with the camera over time to see if the ring that uses adhesive stays on the camera. But it seems fine.

I like the short-turn, bayonet mount. I don't see any advantage to a magnet-style version.

It comes with a small carry case and lens cap, which you only need to protect the filter if you leave it on the camera.

Now I have to get a 49mm CPL and maybe ND filters, or just use step-up rings with the ones I have. My tests today were with a 49mm linear (old fashion) polarizer I had around from the film/manual focus days, and the camera focused and metered fine. But supposedly AF cameras should be used only with CPLs.

One more thing, I tried a #87 IR filter and the RX100 worked for infrared photography with no hot spots in the limited tests I did. The image was deep magenta, but a quick grayscale and autocontrast in Photoshop produced a decent IR photo.

LR

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
FocalPoint_L
Regular MemberPosts: 230
Like?
Re: RX100: Any Lensmate Filter System Reviews? Yes + IR worked
In reply to millsart, Sep 18, 2012

My IR test with a #87 filter was on a tripod. The exposure in bright sunlight (with foliage as the principal subject) was:

0.8 sec

F3.2

125 ISO

So I could have taken it handheld at 1/30th, F1.8 and 1000 ISO. (The image was a little underexposed.)

Millsart: Thanks for your comments on linear vs circular polarizers. While my old 49mm Hoya polarizer worked, I don't think the multicoating is as good as some on of the new ones, so I probably use a step-up ring.

LR

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
millsart
Senior MemberPosts: 2,771
Like?
I find you need about an extra stop of EC and try a R72
In reply to FocalPoint_L, Sep 18, 2012

I tried both a 87c and a R72 and found that the very dark pure IR 87c needed quite a bit more exposure time than the r72, which does pass a little visible red, yet when converted to b/w they really gave the exact same look.

The r72 also focused far easier, while the 87c sometimes would hunt unless it was really, really bright out.

Makes sense of course as the 87c is totally black when you hold it up to your eye while the r72 shows a little bit of a red translucent color.

Regarding the Rx100 in particular, I've found that usually about an extra stop is needed as well, othrwise the shot is a bit underexposed and when you bump it up in post you really increase the noise levels quite a bit.

Likewise, the camera seems far sharper stopped down a bit with IR light. I can take a sharp shot w/o filter at f1.8 but its just a bit soft with the filter, stop down to f2.8 or so and its back to good levels of sharpness.

It can work handheld in really good light, but when you add in the EC and stopping down, it requires a pretty high ISO and I think the results suffer a bit for things such as a landscape shot.

On a tripod at base ISO though its pretty impressive IR performance, and frankly far exceeds the ouput of my old IR modded cameras, such as a Nikon D70, with the exception of being able to shoot those dedicated IR cameras handheld at normal shutter speeds.

FocalPoint_L wrote:

My IR test with a #87 filter was on a tripod. The exposure in bright sunlight (with foliage as the principal subject) was:

0.8 sec

F3.2

125 ISO

So I could have taken it handheld at 1/30th, F1.8 and 1000 ISO. (The image was a little underexposed.)

Millsart: Thanks for your comments on linear vs circular polarizers. While my old 49mm Hoya polarizer worked, I don't think the multicoating is as good as some on of the new ones, so I probably use a step-up ring.

LR

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
cllcanada
Regular MemberPosts: 347Gear list
Like?
Re: I find you need about an extra stop of EC and try a R72
In reply to millsart, Sep 18, 2012

I'm curious about the magnet mount...is the red part magnetic and stuck on the lens...I have tested the lens with a rare-earth magnet and the only magnetic force I get is from the shutter blades and that isn't very much...the turret is aluminum... just wondering

 cllcanada's gear list:cllcanada's gear list
Sony RX100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
millsart
Senior MemberPosts: 2,771
Like?
Re: I find you need about an extra stop of EC and try a R72
In reply to cllcanada, Sep 18, 2012

There is a magnet inside the red ring. You stick a very thin metal ring to the lens barrel which is what the magnetic ring then attaches to

CarrySpeed has a video clip that shows how it works in pretty good detail

cllcanada wrote:

I'm curious about the magnet mount...is the red part magnetic and stuck on the lens...I have tested the lens with a rare-earth magnet and the only magnetic force I get is from the shutter blades and that isn't very much...the turret is aluminum... just wondering

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
cllcanada
Regular MemberPosts: 347Gear list
Like?
Re: I find you need about an extra stop of EC and try a R72
In reply to millsart, Sep 18, 2012

Thanks I wonder if they had discovered a new magnet force for aluminum, I understand now...so the actual bond is adhesive

The magnet force is weaker than the adhesive so there is little chance of failure of the adhesive...very cleaver idea!

 cllcanada's gear list:cllcanada's gear list
Sony RX100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Len_Gee
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,339Gear list
Like?
Re: is it Super Glue?
In reply to cllcanada, Sep 18, 2012

I think Super Glue.

cllcanada wrote:

Thanks I wonder if they had discovered a new magnet force for aluminum, I understand now...so the actual bond is adhesive

The magnet force is weaker than the adhesive so there is little chance of failure of the adhesive...very cleaver idea!

 Len_Gee's gear list:Len_Gee's gear list
Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
travel_bug
Junior MemberPosts: 43
Like?
Re: RX100: Any Lensmate Filter System Reviews? Yes + IR worked
In reply to FocalPoint_L, Sep 21, 2012

FocalPoint_L wrote:

Yes. I received the 49mm set today. The installation video and instructions were very good.

Thanks! I ordered mine and am excited to get it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
guyv
Contributing MemberPosts: 847
Like?
Re: Only Phase Detect systems, such as a DSLR need a CPL, Linear is fine for RX100
In reply to millsart, Sep 21, 2012

Actually the limitation is not Phase Detect AF: any setup that use a Mirror, translucent or not, will require a Circular polarizer, because a mirror polarizes the image and you can't have two linear polarizers in the image path unless they are aligned.

So words written at a time where all AF cameras were using a mirror are now obsolete.

Similarly there are now Phase Detect AF systems that use special pixels on the sensor and don't require a mirror so the advice about Phase Detect AF is also obsolete. Any advice is only useful if the reason for the advice is also given, otherwise it becomes a magical belief, that people apply when it does not make sense.

I have seen advice that said linear polarizers are more effective but it did not say why so I don't know if it was true and if it is still true.

millsart wrote:

Phase Detect AF systems, such as the typical DSLR need a circular polarizer, but mirrorless cameras, such as point and shoots will work fine with linear polarizers.

There really is no difference between them either in terms of effect.

...

FocalPoint_L wrote:

...

My tests today were with a 49mm linear (old fashion) polarizer I had around from the film/manual focus days, and the camera focused and metered fine. But supposedly AF cameras should be used only with CPLs.

-- hide signature --

In theory, theory and practice are the same but in practice they are not - Yogi Berra
Buddha was not a buddhist, Jesus was not a christian, Mohammed was not a muslim

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mike Dobbs
Senior MemberPosts: 1,049
Like?
Re: Only Phase Detect systems, such as a DSLR need a CPL, Linear is fine for RX100
In reply to guyv, Nov 14, 2012

guyv wrote:

Actually the limitation is not Phase Detect AF: any setup that use a Mirror, translucent or not, will require a Circular polarizer, because a mirror polarizes the image and you can't have two linear polarizers in the image path unless they are aligned.

So words written at a time where all AF cameras were using a mirror are now obsolete.

Similarly there are now Phase Detect AF systems that use special pixels on the sensor and don't require a mirror so the advice about Phase Detect AF is also obsolete. Any advice is only useful if the reason for the advice is also given, otherwise it becomes a magical belief, that people apply when it does not make sense.

I have seen advice that said linear polarizers are more effective but it did not say why so I don't know if it was true and if it is still true.

millsart wrote:

Phase Detect AF systems, such as the typical DSLR need a circular polarizer, but mirrorless cameras, such as point and shoots will work fine with linear polarizers.

There really is no difference between them either in terms of effect.

...

FocalPoint_L wrote:

...

My tests today were with a 49mm linear (old fashion) polarizer I had around from the film/manual focus days, and the camera focused and metered fine. But supposedly AF cameras should be used only with CPLs.

-- hide signature --

In theory, theory and practice are the same but in practice they are not - Yogi Berra
Buddha was not a buddhist, Jesus was not a christian, Mohammed was not a muslim

Regarding the underlined text, if that is so, then why did older film SLR's with prisms & mirror use Linear pol's? Wouldn't the effect you describe affect the viewfinder badly?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
greywind
New MemberPosts: 1
Like?
Re: RX100: Any Lensmate Filter System Reviews?
In reply to travel_bug, May 13, 2013

If you still interest in infrared photo with RX100, check my tests here - http://www.flickr.com/photos/greywind/8733634189 and here - http://www.flickr.com/photos/greywind/8734751824

Summary - RX100 can make pretty decent IR shots. But built-in lens has annoying hot-spot with R72 and R68 filters.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads