What's my RX1 worth ?

Started Aug 23, 2013 | Questions
Robgo2
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,504
Like?
Re: Agree mcshan. RAW+photo Ninja = win.
In reply to Chris Crevasse, Aug 25, 2013

Chris Crevasse wrote:

Question to those of you who use Photo Ninja: if you've already processed your raws (after converting them to DNG) in Camera Raw or Lightroom, will PN still read the DNG as though it has not been touched by a different raw converter? And what happens to the DNG after you tinker with it in PN -- will ACR/Lightroom ignore the changes PN made to the DNG?

Photo Ninja will ignore the raw adjustments made in other programs and vice versa.  If you are on a Mac, simply drag the thumbnail from LR onto the PN icon, and the base raw image will open.  There are other ways to pass files between programs.  This tutorial may be helpful.

Photo Ninja & LR

Rob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JohnK
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,427Gear list
Like?
Hunh?
In reply to ncsakany, Aug 25, 2013

ncsakany wrote:

DOF is also reduced with the RX1

But both cameras have the same lens, please explain how DOF is reduced with the RX1?

-- hide signature --

JohnK
Take a picture, it'll last longer.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
DFPanno
Senior MemberPosts: 2,655Gear list
Like?
How I interpreted ncsakany......
In reply to JohnK, Aug 25, 2013

The area in focus on the RX1R will be very sharp and very detailed.

If you are off it will be somewhat more apparent on the RX1R than on the RX1.

That was my guess but maybe there is more to it..........

-- hide signature --
 DFPanno's gear list:DFPanno's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX1 Canon EOS 5D Mark III Sony Alpha 7R Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM +13 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
viztyger
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,257Gear list
Like?
Loss Selling RX1 Could Better be Spent Elsewhere
In reply to earful, Aug 25, 2013

I would hope that I could get at least €2000,- for my RX1 if I had to sell it. But I have no intention of doing that as I'm still amazed by the excellent results this camera is able to produce. Sure, the RX1R resolves a little more fine detail but perhaps at the price of extra moire. In any case, the difference between the two cameras' image quality seems minimal - nowhere near enough to be worth losing €1000,- exchanging the RX1 for the RX1R. I'd rather invest that money in getting a camera to complement and backup my RX1. But that's just me.

-- hide signature --
 viztyger's gear list:viztyger's gear list
Sony RX1 Sony Alpha 7R Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Panasonic Lumix G Fisheye 8mm F3.5 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
DFPanno
Senior MemberPosts: 2,655Gear list
Like?
Re: Loss Selling RX1 Could Better be Spent Elsewhere
In reply to viztyger, Aug 25, 2013

That is certainly on my mind...........

-- hide signature --
 DFPanno's gear list:DFPanno's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX1 Canon EOS 5D Mark III Sony Alpha 7R Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM +13 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
teseg
Senior MemberPosts: 2,037Gear list
Like?
Re: Agree mcshan. RAW+photo Ninja = win.
In reply to Robgo2, Aug 25, 2013

Robgo2 wrote:

Chris Crevasse wrote:

Question to those of you who use Photo Ninja: if you've already processed your raws (after converting them to DNG) in Camera Raw or Lightroom, will PN still read the DNG as though it has not been touched by a different raw converter? And what happens to the DNG after you tinker with it in PN -- will ACR/Lightroom ignore the changes PN made to the DNG?

Photo Ninja will ignore the raw adjustments made in other programs and vice versa. If you are on a Mac, simply drag the thumbnail from LR onto the PN icon, and the base raw image will open. There are other ways to pass files between programs. This tutorial may be helpful.

Photo Ninja & LR

Rob

I actually used these directions above to have my workflow set up like this and it works well (been using this flow for over a month).  LR5 manages my image library, I right click a RAW image in LR5 "to edit" in PN, LR generates a TIFF and  PN open with the TIFF file sitting next to the RAW file but PN opens and works on the RAW file.  When done doing my thing with PN, I click the Quick Render button at which point PN replaces the TIFF that LR created with a TIF of the RAW file that PN now just created.  I then hop back to LR5 and the TIF it created is there, only now it is the one replaced by the one PN created.  From there, if I desire I can convert the TIFF to jpeg, do further edits to the TIFF with LR5 (some of the spot editing features, grad filters, etc...) or right click again and now edit the TIFF in NIK.

Several downsides: I end up with 1 or more 100mb intermediary TIFF files that I either need to manually delete or quickly fill my data drive.... secondly, if I delete the TIFF files (which I do), the beauty of a non-destructive workflow is somewhat shot to the extent I do further adjustments to the PN TIFF file in LR5 or NIK (which is likely).

All in all, it is a good efficient merge of the 3 different software packages to capitalize on the strengths of each.

 teseg's gear list:teseg's gear list
Sony RX1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
teseg
Senior MemberPosts: 2,037Gear list
Like?
Re: How I interpreted ncsakany......
In reply to DFPanno, Aug 25, 2013

DFPanno wrote:

The area in focus on the RX1R will be very sharp and very detailed.

If you are off it will be somewhat more apparent on the RX1R than on the RX1.

That was my guess but maybe there is more to it..........

-- hide signature --

Agreed, my take as well. while the OP statement may not be technically accurate, the jist of it is the RX1R increased sharpness creates additional burden to the user to be exacting in their DOF management, as it has already been identify that the narrow DOF with the RX1, used in portrait photography, can really create challenges getting tack-sharp eyeball focus on a very consistent basis.

The RX1R sharpness will further expose even the slightest of misses.

 teseg's gear list:teseg's gear list
Sony RX1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
teseg
Senior MemberPosts: 2,037Gear list
Like?
Re: Loss Selling RX1 Could Better be Spent Elsewhere
In reply to viztyger, Aug 25, 2013

viztyger wrote:

I would hope that I could get at least €2000,- for my RX1 if I had to sell it. But I have no intention of doing that as I'm still amazed by the excellent results this camera is able to produce. Sure, the RX1R resolves a little more fine detail but perhaps at the price of extra moire. In any case, the difference between the two cameras' image quality seems minimal - nowhere near enough to be worth losing €1000,- exchanging the RX1 for the RX1R. I'd rather invest that money in getting a camera to complement and backup my RX1. But that's just me.

-- hide signature --

I can only imagine how much more improved my own photography would be if I spent $1000 on photography lessons from a real pro, or even better, a PP expert, rather than the slightest tweak of image difference generated by the R.

 teseg's gear list:teseg's gear list
Sony RX1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ncsakany
Senior MemberPosts: 1,409Gear list
Like?
Re: Hunh?
In reply to JohnK, Aug 25, 2013

JohnK wrote:

ncsakany wrote:

DOF is also reduced with the RX1

But both cameras have the same lens, please explain how DOF is reduced with the RX1?

-- hide signature --

JohnK
Take a picture, it'll last longer.

My bad, should have said perceived DoF. The posters above are right in their explanations. I think I also read this on one of the previews of the RX1R so I must not be the only one noticing such.

 ncsakany's gear list:ncsakany's gear list
RX100 III Nikon D810 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4G ED VR +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Robgo2
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,504
Like?
Re: Agree mcshan. RAW+photo Ninja = win.
In reply to teseg, Aug 25, 2013

teseg wrote:

Robgo2 wrote:

Chris Crevasse wrote:

Question to those of you who use Photo Ninja: if you've already processed your raws (after converting them to DNG) in Camera Raw or Lightroom, will PN still read the DNG as though it has not been touched by a different raw converter? And what happens to the DNG after you tinker with it in PN -- will ACR/Lightroom ignore the changes PN made to the DNG?

Photo Ninja will ignore the raw adjustments made in other programs and vice versa. If you are on a Mac, simply drag the thumbnail from LR onto the PN icon, and the base raw image will open. There are other ways to pass files between programs. This tutorial may be helpful.

Photo Ninja & LR

Rob

I actually used these directions above to have my workflow set up like this and it works well (been using this flow for over a month). LR5 manages my image library, I right click a RAW image in LR5 "to edit" in PN, LR generates a TIFF and PN open with the TIFF file sitting next to the RAW file but PN opens and works on the RAW file. When done doing my thing with PN, I click the Quick Render button at which point PN replaces the TIFF that LR created with a TIF of the RAW file that PN now just created. I then hop back to LR5 and the TIF it created is there, only now it is the one replaced by the one PN created. From there, if I desire I can convert the TIFF to jpeg, do further edits to the TIFF with LR5 (some of the spot editing features, grad filters, etc...) or right click again and now edit the TIFF in NIK.

Several downsides: I end up with 1 or more 100mb intermediary TIFF files that I either need to manually delete or quickly fill my data drive.... secondly, if I delete the TIFF files (which I do), the beauty of a non-destructive workflow is somewhat shot to the extent I do further adjustments to the PN TIFF file in LR5 or NIK (which is likely).

All in all, it is a good efficient merge of the 3 different software packages to capitalize on the strengths of each.

Teseg,

Any time you work at the pixel level, you lose non-destructive editing, unless you work strictly in layers, which requires Photoshop or a similar program. (It's one reason why I prefer using PS for converted files.) But even in Lightroom, if you use any of the NIK filters, you are working on a TIFF.

The drag and drop method from LR to PN on a Mac avoids the intermediate TIFFs. Just open the folder in LR's import window and the newly rendered TIFFs from PN will be highlighted and ready for importation. I don't know if it can be done the same way on Windows. I would be interested in learning about that.

BTW, I would never render all of the images that I edit in Photo Ninja. Only those that require further development (local adjustments, fine tuning, printing, web publishing etc) get the full treatment. The others stay put in PN. This is a clear advantage to using a browser, as opposed to a catalog, for file management. All of your files, raw and converted, are always available to the browser. There is no need to reimport them to a catalog. The browser that I love is Photo Mechanic. It is very fast and powerful, and it plays nicely with Photo Ninja and all my other editing software. What it cannot do is create virtual collections.  I don't know how important they are to you, but I manage to live without them quite nicely.  There is no reason why you could not use a good browser in conjunction with Lightroom, which would then be reserved for the sorts of things that cannot be done in Photo Ninja.  Just a thought.

Rob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
teseg
Senior MemberPosts: 2,037Gear list
Like?
Re: Agree mcshan. RAW+photo Ninja = win.
In reply to Robgo2, Aug 26, 2013

Robgo2 wrote:

teseg wrote:

Teseg,

Any time you work at the pixel level, you lose non-destructive editing, unless you work strictly in layers, which requires Photoshop or a similar program. (It's one reason why I prefer using PS for converted files.) But even in Lightroom, if you use any of the NIK filters, you are working on a TIFF.

The drag and drop method from LR to PN on a Mac avoids the intermediate TIFFs. Just open the folder in LR's import window and the newly rendered TIFFs from PN will be highlighted and ready for importation. I don't know if it can be done the same way on Windows. I would be interested in learning about that.

BTW, I would never render all of the images that I edit in Photo Ninja. Only those that require further development (local adjustments, fine tuning, printing, web publishing etc) get the full treatment. The others stay put in PN. This is a clear advantage to using a browser, as opposed to a catalog, for file management. All of your files, raw and converted, are always available to the browser. There is no need to reimport them to a catalog. The browser that I love is Photo Mechanic. It is very fast and powerful, and it plays nicely with Photo Ninja and all my other editing software. What it cannot do is create virtual collections. I don't know how important they are to you, but I manage to live without them quite nicely. There is no reason why you could not use a good browser in conjunction with Lightroom, which would then be reserved for the sorts of things that cannot be done in Photo Ninja. Just a thought.

Rob

To clarify, I think we are on the same page about RAW and TIFF files.  But to further clarify:

  • Even though LR creates catalogs, the files and resulting XMP files remain located in the original file browser location and are never moved around by the catalog... the catalog just points to file locations
  • With the syncing of LR and PN, I never have to import anything between the 2 programs beyond clicking in LR "Edit in PN" which opens PN to edit the RAW file while creating a TIFF that mirrors the RAW file and clicking in PN "Quick Render" which takes the PN RAW output and makes the now existing TIFF mirror it, while generating an XMP file linked to the RAW file to match that output.  That TIFF is now visible in the LR catalog
  • If I wanted, I could just take the PN RAW file and convert to jpeg, but agreed, by taking the step to Quick Render and then convert the resulting TIFF to jpeg in LR, now the jpeg is in the LR catalog, whereas if I converted straight to jpeg from PN, the resulting jpeg would not be in the LR catalog... and would have to be separately, manually, imported to the catalog.  With that said, with whatever I convert to TIFF in PN, there is a resulting PN XMP file for the RAW file for whatever that image coming out of PN looks like... so I now always do retain my initial non-destructive edits in PN

Only because NIK is still new to me, I probably use it more than I should, but really love the Viveza 2 color editor where I can spot add a little bit of brightness here and spot add a bit of structure there.  I also think the dynamic noise reduction and spot sharpening are really clever, further making my image my own vs. that of the RX1.

Why LR catalog vs. just file browsing my images?  I have really embraced the tagging concept.  Immediately after downloading images from a shoot I tag them.  If I'm at the marina, I tag 'Marina'.  If it is at dawn, I add 'Dawn', etc... IN LR I just have to type 1 or 2 words and almost immediately LR sorts through 15K+ images and brings up those images with the tags.  Previously I had file browsed creating files sorted chronologically, with sub-folders for each day.  While my imports from my SD card still get automatically filed this way, I realized if I keep this photography hobby for a number of years it would become unmanageable.  Before embracing tagging, I was starting to find myself spending 3-5 minutes trying to locate a particular image from only a year ago.  It would become more problematic over time.

Ultimately everyone has their own thing that works, but after hopping around trying a number of different things I feel like I have now harnessed the demosaicing power of PN, the catalog and spot editing power of LR and the image PP enhancement power of NIK and rolled them into a relatively efficient workflow.  After spending >$350 for these 3 bits of software I wanted to ensure I maximized their usage.

Back to RX1 vs. RX1R, as ncsakany has pointed out, the RX1R works well for his style of photography, and because I find joy in both the actual photographing and the post processing, I am less concerned about the potential slight increased sharpness and detail SOOTC the RX1R may provide as my amateur hobbyist PP intervention would likely muck it up anyway.

 teseg's gear list:teseg's gear list
Sony RX1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Robgo2
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,504
Like?
Re: Agree mcshan. RAW+photo Ninja = win.
In reply to teseg, Aug 26, 2013

teseg wrote:

Robgo2 wrote:

teseg wrote:

Teseg,

Any time you work at the pixel level, you lose non-destructive editing, unless you work strictly in layers, which requires Photoshop or a similar program. (It's one reason why I prefer using PS for converted files.) But even in Lightroom, if you use any of the NIK filters, you are working on a TIFF.

The drag and drop method from LR to PN on a Mac avoids the intermediate TIFFs. Just open the folder in LR's import window and the newly rendered TIFFs from PN will be highlighted and ready for importation. I don't know if it can be done the same way on Windows. I would be interested in learning about that.

BTW, I would never render all of the images that I edit in Photo Ninja. Only those that require further development (local adjustments, fine tuning, printing, web publishing etc) get the full treatment. The others stay put in PN. This is a clear advantage to using a browser, as opposed to a catalog, for file management. All of your files, raw and converted, are always available to the browser. There is no need to reimport them to a catalog. The browser that I love is Photo Mechanic. It is very fast and powerful, and it plays nicely with Photo Ninja and all my other editing software. What it cannot do is create virtual collections. I don't know how important they are to you, but I manage to live without them quite nicely. There is no reason why you could not use a good browser in conjunction with Lightroom, which would then be reserved for the sorts of things that cannot be done in Photo Ninja. Just a thought.

Rob

To clarify, I think we are on the same page about RAW and TIFF files. But to further clarify:

  • Even though LR creates catalogs, the files and resulting XMP files remain located in the original file browser location and are never moved around by the catalog... the catalog just points to file locations
  • With the syncing of LR and PN, I never have to import anything between the 2 programs beyond clicking in LR "Edit in PN" which opens PN to edit the RAW file while creating a TIFF that mirrors the RAW file and clicking in PN "Quick Render" which takes the PN RAW output and makes the now existing TIFF mirror it, while generating an XMP file linked to the RAW file to match that output. That TIFF is now visible in the LR catalog
  • If I wanted, I could just take the PN RAW file and convert to jpeg, but agreed, by taking the step to Quick Render and then convert the resulting TIFF to jpeg in LR, now the jpeg is in the LR catalog, whereas if I converted straight to jpeg from PN, the resulting jpeg would not be in the LR catalog... and would have to be separately, manually, imported to the catalog. With that said, with whatever I convert to TIFF in PN, there is a resulting PN XMP file for the RAW file for whatever that image coming out of PN looks like... so I now always do retain my initial non-destructive edits in PN

Only because NIK is still new to me, I probably use it more than I should, but really love the Viveza 2 color editor where I can spot add a little bit of brightness here and spot add a bit of structure there. I also think the dynamic noise reduction and spot sharpening are really clever, further making my image my own vs. that of the RX1.

Why LR catalog vs. just file browsing my images? I have really embraced the tagging concept. Immediately after downloading images from a shoot I tag them. If I'm at the marina, I tag 'Marina'. If it is at dawn, I add 'Dawn', etc... IN LR I just have to type 1 or 2 words and almost immediately LR sorts through 15K+ images and brings up those images with the tags. Previously I had file browsed creating files sorted chronologically, with sub-folders for each day. While my imports from my SD card still get automatically filed this way, I realized if I keep this photography hobby for a number of years it would become unmanageable. Before embracing tagging, I was starting to find myself spending 3-5 minutes trying to locate a particular image from only a year ago. It would become more problematic over time.

Ultimately everyone has their own thing that works, but after hopping around trying a number of different things I feel like I have now harnessed the demosaicing power of PN, the catalog and spot editing power of LR and the image PP enhancement power of NIK and rolled them into a relatively efficient workflow. After spending >$350 for these 3 bits of software I wanted to ensure I maximized their usage.

Back to RX1 vs. RX1R, as ncsakany has pointed out, the RX1R works well for his style of photography, and because I find joy in both the actual photographing and the post processing, I am less concerned about the potential slight increased sharpness and detail SOOTC the RX1R may provide as my amateur hobbyist PP intervention would likely muck it up anyway.

Hi, Teseg,

Obviously, there is more than one way to skin this cat.  I am on a Mac, and I do not use Lightroom, but I am fairly familiar with its organization and flow.  As I understand it, if you tell LR to use Photo Ninja as an external editor, an intermediate TIFF is generated.  When you finish editing in PN and render a TIFF, it goes directly back into LR, but the intermediate TIFF persists and has to be deleted.  It's not a big deal, but it is an extra step that could be avoided by the drag and drop method.  OTOH, with drag and drop, you would have to reimport all of your rendered files.  That would be my preference, as it could speedily be done in a single step.

Regarding file management, it seems that you are rendering JPEGs from all PN edits in order to place them in LR's cataloging system.  With a browser, this is not necessary, because the underlying raw files as well as converted files can always be found in their original folders.  There is no need to create a JPEG to put in a catalog.  I understand that you want to use keywords for organizing and quickly locating image files. This is all possible with Photo Mechanic, which has very powerful organizing tools.  You can still use LR for local adjustments, printing etc and as a host program for Nik plugins, but you would not have to render all of your PN edits.  To me, that is a huge plus.

If you are satisfied with your current workflow, then by all means continue using it, but I thought you might be interested in knowing that there are other workflows that have certain advantages.

Rob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
earful
Senior MemberPosts: 1,109
Like?
Re: Loss Selling RX1 Could Better be Spent Elsewhere
In reply to teseg, Aug 26, 2013

teseg wrote:

viztyger wrote:

I would hope that I could get at least €2000,- for my RX1 if I had to sell it. But I have no intention of doing that as I'm still amazed by the excellent results this camera is able to produce. Sure, the RX1R resolves a little more fine detail but perhaps at the price of extra moire. In any case, the difference between the two cameras' image quality seems minimal - nowhere near enough to be worth losing €1000,- exchanging the RX1 for the RX1R. I'd rather invest that money in getting a camera to complement and backup my RX1. But that's just me.

-- hide signature --

I can only imagine how much more improved my own photography would be if I spent $1000 on photography lessons from a real pro, or even better, a PP expert, rather than the slightest tweak of image difference generated by the R.

totally agree (not about you, about me). the rx1 deserves better photography and pp skills than i have been offering it. on the other hand, the basic output is so good that it is easy to just ride that wave. we should all have such dilemmas in life.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads