First experience with RX100, am I missing something?

Let me first state that I am an amateur and I use photography to preserve memories, so I do not invest much time and effort into achieving the best possible results from hardware available and my expectations are not terribly high.

I enjoy nature, mountaineering specifically, and I need something that will produce decent photos most of the time in relatively good lighting and without too much hassle and time needed to take decent photo, so I rely on fully automated mode most of the time.

There are 3 cameras I have. Nikon D90 performs superbly for me, but as you can imagine it is too bulky and heavy to be taken to the mountains all the time. Second one is Panasonic GH1, it was an attempt at similar performance in more manageable camera size, in the end it was neither more manageable nor it was performing nearly as well as D90.

Finally there is one very old Nikon Coolpix P&S camera (8MP) that worked quite well when size and weight were to be considered. But it is quite old and has started acting up, so after a lot of investigation and reading I thought I might invest into the “best” compact camera on the market, and my conclusion was that RX100 is the one based on what I read.

My first photos with RX100 that has just arrived were extremely disappointing.

My main grief with it is that photos are very grainy when compared to any of the mentioned cameras. And when I start to zoom in I do not see any detail, it is just as grainy and blurry.

I expected much more. How 20MP can produce such low detail is beyond me. I understand the issues with sensor size and pixel count, but it is really that bad that I prefer the results with my old Nikon Coolpix, in good lighting those 8MP are just as worthy as these 20MP. Not to mention comparison to D90, two different worlds. So I am wondering if RX100 is just an overhyped product and if Sony was simply playing the marketing game with high pixel count in somewhat larger sensor than what you find in typical P&S? Or you really have to work this camera to get some decent results? Or maybe I got a defective product (are there any reports on bad cameras being shipped)?

Then there is also a video issue. I have an old Sanyo camcorder capable of full HD, it is the cheapest device with such capability, and I am very pleased with it. Another reason for RX100 was that I would have photo and video capabilities in a single very manageable device. But video on RX100 is also big disappointment, it is smooth most of the time but every once in a while it becomes very jerky what essentially destroys quality of the entire recording.

Any thoughts on what I should do? Return RX100? Get new incarnation of Nikon Coolpix as it would be as good (or as bad) as RX100 for much less $? Or try to work with RX100 a bit more?

The Sony RX100 has been acclaimed as one of the better compact cameras.

Please include some of the sample photos you have taken that you are not happy about.

You got to ask yourself one question: "Do I feel lucky?" Lol..maybe you got a defective camera?!

I'm sorry but I find it a bit funny that you are actually willing to believe that a camera that as you're saying is supposed to be the best compact on the market, "produces photos that are very grainy...and when I start to zoom in I do not see any detail, it is just as grainy and blurry."

Do you think it's possible all the reviewers around the world have bought "Sony's over-hyping marketing game" and praise such a lousy camera like fools? Don't they have eyes to see? I mean, indirectly you are being a little disrespectful to all those people whose job is to review cameras, don't you think?

Instead of just posting some examples of what worries you, so that people here can tell you if they think it's defective or not, you're already talking about high pixels counts and overhyping. Why be so negative?

Here is an example

Actually, from reviews I read, it was acclaimed as THE best compact camera one can buy. I would say the OP got a lemon, but I've just seen the one example and a whole host of variables could account for a less than optimal image. As far as I'm concerned, I think it's an incredible camera. I'm starting to carry it more than my NEX7.

OK, I can not tell only from this photo I'm afraid. Could you post some more of different subject and conditions? It looks like only the first duck is in focus (and not a very sharp one maybe) and the rest are just out of focus. This happens because the sensor is not as small as the one in your Coolpix and because you used full zoom and you were very close. When you do that with a camera which doesn't have a tiny sensor, you will get a few things in focus (and sharp) and others which are not close will be out of focus. It seems to me that the camera just didn't focus properly here, as if you locked focus somewhere further in front of the first duck and then recomposed the picture. Was that the case?

Can you show some more examples where everything's in focus? Just take a pic of the street outside your door for example.

Here are my first impressions:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50865359

And less than a week later:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50885920

Worth the read.  There is info on settings that may help.

I'd say give it some time and you will find ​it is​ as good as everyone says.  When my friends ask what it is I'm holding, I tell them it's the best pocket camera ever made.

If you are coming from the D90 the RX100 images will look different to you. As good (+) as it is the RX100 is still a pocket camera/point and shoot. I would keep shooting and get to know it better.

Good luck.

What were you focusing on? Did you get a focus lock before you fully depressed the shutter button? Most of us here will tell you we are amazed at the detail and noise control we get from this little camera. And I come from using a full-frame...

You don't need an ISO that high in such a situation. Try ISO 200 at the highest or even lower. You could back off on the zoom a little and re-frame at a wider angle and the depth-of-focus would improve. Or zoom in on just one duck, that's separate in the frame. The F-stop setting is about right. By the faint shadows, it looks as though you were shooting towards an overcast Sun, which is not the best for focus or lighting the subject properly. But, you probably had no choice with these ducks. Don't expect good results when you're shooting with a disadvantage like this. Find some ducks with the light behind you.

--
Steve McDonald
My Flickr Album
My Vimeo Video Album
My Places on Google Earth Click on My Places on Skydrive

Coincidentally, I took a swan pic yesterday that follows some of your suggestions, and shows that the RX100 can be pretty sharp:

100% crop, processed from RAW by DxO

Well, your comment on the used ISO is not correct. When you look at the EXIF data of the shot you'll see that it was taken at f/4,9 and 1/100s at ISO800. Going down to ISO200 would have been with 1/25s definitly an exposure time with handshake visible (at max. zoom). Actually the 1/100s could be part of the lack of sharpness since it can have been too long already (handshake and/or subject movement).

To OP: for detecting a possible noise problem in a shot certainly photographing sand isn't the best idea.

--
Cheers, Michael Fritzen

Hey Nigel,

That's maybe the first DxO conversion I see that doesn't have that harsh, over-sharpened look at 100%. Did you fiddle with your sharpening settings, or is this with the same default settings you were using before?

Yes, all of the photos I have taken so far look like this one, out of focus and grainy. I certainly had focus lock before depressing shutter button. And camera focused on multiple objects as per indicators on LCD.

That is why I am so disappointed, if this is good camera then I must be doing something wrong, or maybe I got a bad sample. And that is why these questions, to see if anyone has any ideas what I am doing wrong or if there were any reports about batch of bad samples.

I will make more photos today in better light and more favorable angles.

Thank you for suggestions, will try to limit ISO.

Photo was taken at ~ 5PM on cloudy day, the sun was not strong and shooting was not made towards the sun, I do not think that could have contributed, I got similar results regardless of angle and zoom.

Yes, as you've guessed, I changed its lens softness correction settings. I reduced the overall sharpness correction and increased the bokeh to get a smoother look. Also, as the swan was near the centre of the image, I think it was doing less sharpening than in the edges.

Here's another image I took a few minutes later which has a lot more edges to sharpen (it's off a gold painted gate at Hampton Court Palace):

100% crop, processed from RAW by DxO

Here's a Mallard photo taken in fading light, with F.5, ISO 100 and 1/15-sec. It was handheld, with a steadying-rod. It's important to develop steadiness or to use some device, so higher ISO isn't necessary. Regardless of the camera or how high its ISO can go, its better to keep it as low as possible.The slower shutter allowed the aperture to be tighter as well, giving enough DOF for both birds at about 20X zoom. I had the advantage of the setting Sun being behind me.

--
Steve McDonald
My Flickr Album
My Vimeo Video Album
My Places on Google Earth Click on My Places on Skydrive

Thank you for sharing your experience.

I noticed you said: “Don't expect to get too much zoom with cropping. The pixels don't hold up at 100% or close to it.”, I was hoping that cropping would kind of substitute for the lack of optical zoom. In your experience is it true for any camera of this size? And in your opinion, how would cropped RX100 photos compare to photos made on some compact cameras that feature stronger optical zoom but not such a good sensor, let’s say Canon PowerShot SX200 or some of Nikon Coolpix models?

And now that you spent some time with RX100, would you still say that Nikon V1 wins in color and sharpness?

I have to make a quick decision, keep RX100 or return it while I can and get something else that is relatively portable. I do not have a luxury of spending much time with it, cannot put too many miles on it otherwise I would not be able to return it.

The RX100's 20MPs give you just 30mm extra optical zoom (around 130mm longest) when you compare it with a 12MP camera. Trust me on this one.

So no, it cannot even compete tele-wise with my Canon SX220 which reaches 392mm at the long end. If you want such a camera and spend a lot less money then why not buy the Canon SX220 or SX260?

Here you can see how they compare in real life, I have both and here's the same scene with both:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50820058

As you can see, the SX220 produces great photos as well under good light and it's easier to use and not think about where the camera is focused. Moreover you don't need to think about RAW, with the RX100 you might as the same pic looks even more detailed when converted from RAW.

It may be that your RX100 has a problem if as you're saying all your photos turn out out of focus. You don't seem to be thinking about exchanging it though, in the case we conclude it's defective. You just want to return it and get something else because you are convinced it's an over-hyped camera. It's not. It really is what people say it is, an amazing camera. And no, it doesn't have too many MPs, because I know this is what you're thinking. It actually has less MPs per sensor area than all the other compact zoom cameras (excluding the much bigger G1X). Just thinking that if it has a lot of MPs, it must be just marketing, is wrong. It depends how big those MPs are. And each of the RX100 MPs are much bigger than your Coolpix's ones. By your thinking, the Nikon D800 must be just marketing and no quality with its 36MPs!!

I think the RX100 images hold up very well at 100% allowing lots of room to crop. Here are some examples of cropped images that would make a great 8X10 print at 300 DPI. The crop factor would be about equivalent to a 150mm lens.

Be sure and click through to the original images.