Reading mode: Light Dark

Very detailed RX10 Review

Go to last post
Chris43 said:
YiannisPP said:
Chris43 said:
Lol, the two pics of the girl failed to download when I looked at it, will try again.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I'd welcome your views on those two.
Click to expand...
I'm no expert, but I understand that you want my view because we were on the same boat, having the same doubts.

Well there's something strange going on there. It's bright sunshine, f2.8, ISO200 and only 1/200 or 1/250sec? I'm pretty sure he was testing/using the ND filter. Not that it should change anything but not sure. Someone who speaks Korean could verify maybe? Looks like many of his sunny shots have too low a shutter speed or too high an ISO for the aperture used (mostly f2.8).

That said they are still a bit overexposed. The last two are fine imo, the first one is hazy, maybe someone else can explain more scientifically what is happening.

Overall I am not worried as there are tons of photos there in various lighting angles and they're almost all pretty impressive. But yeah it would be nice if someone could explain the first shot ftp://rawdata.slrclub.com/compact/sony/1311_RX10/DSC09037.JPG
 
Last edited:
By the way I played a bit with one of the RAWs available and it confirmed what I was suspecting about some shady areas looking more noisy and mushy than I have come to expect from my RX100. It's because the RX10's jpeg pushes up the shadows, I guess more than it does on the RX100. Or maybe DRO was set to Auto. So a bit of "false" extra DR there but otherwise all good.
 
I thought that too so I downloaded and hit auto contrast in Elements 10. Is this any better?







 
They particularly did much more video work than I ever remember from dpreview. I do not really have as much of a question on the focusing speed. Some still may complain of the RX10 price tag, but I think these sample images and videos combined with a recognition of the multitude of excellent features and functions (stepped/smooth aperture ring stands out for me) in one package begin to make the retail range much more sensible. With that Zeiss glass, this is one fine bridge cam (or whatever we call the genre). I'm sold.
 
Yes, better, but still not good.

This image actually might be trying to illustrate something in particular and not intended to be an exemplary shot. The sun is low and behind, and the lens angle just might have caught a "moon halo" reflection effect, like trying to shoot directly into the light. Perhaps even an intentional challenge of the ND filter capabilities?
 
Jerry Stevens said:
With that Zeiss glass, this is one fine bridge cam (or whatever we call the genre). I'm sold.
Click to expand...
How is this for f2.8, ISO250 100% detail from that Zeiss? This was quickly converted from RAW with IDC, NR Auto.




RX10 ISO250 100% crop

 

Attachments

  • 2754600.jpg
    2754600.jpg
    728 KB · Views: 0
TOMSDPR said:
Does anybody know what exactly means 'sealed against dust and moisture' with this camera/lens?
Click to expand...
From everything that I've read about the camera, it is a 1 lens solution camera; so of course the lens is also sealed.

That being said, it's just felt around the lens so eventually dust will make it inside, and you really wouldn't want to use it in the rain. The felt and rubber grommets do well against humidity and maybe waterfall spray, fog mist, drizzle, and such, but it's not a bathtub toy.

Personally I'm just glad it has anything, and it's just one more thing that it does have instead of is missing. This camera sure does pack a punch with its feature sets.
 
YiannisPP said:
Chris43 said:
YiannisPP said:
YiannisPP said:
Lol, the two pics of the girl failed to download when I looked at it, will try again.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
I'd welcome your views on those two.
Click to expand...
I'm no expert, but I understand that you want my view because we were on the same boat, having the same doubts.

Well there's something strange going on there. It's bright sunshine, f2.8, ISO200 and only 1/200 or 1/250sec? I'm pretty sure he was testing/using the ND filter. Not that it should change anything but not sure. Someone who speaks Korean could verify maybe? Looks like many of his sunny shots have too low a shutter speed or too high an ISO for the aperture used (mostly f2.8).

That said they are still a bit overexposed. The last two are fine imo, the first one is hazy, maybe someone else can explain more scientifically what is happening.

Overall I am not worried as there are tons of photos there in various lighting angles and they're almost all pretty impressive. But yeah it would be nice if someone could explain the first shot ftp://rawdata.slrclub.com/compact/sony/1311_RX10/DSC09037.JPG
Click to expand...
That is a good photo. The RX10 has handled the situation very well. Its a nice back-lit shot and had added to the angelic nature with the sun-glowing hair tips.

Anyone can get/use Fast Stone Image Viewer. Simply doing an Auto colour adjustment can clean it right up. Pull back the green channel slightly and you have a great photo. Lightroom does a nicer job still.

Are there any photos that need shadows pulled back? That would be a more interesting test.

But overall, its a great all-round camera. Excellent review, just needs to be under several headings to avoid the long page load. Otherwise, this should be the gold standard for camera reviews.

Thanks to the OP for the link.
 
YiannisPP said:
Jerry Stevens said:
With that Zeiss glass, this is one fine bridge cam (or whatever we call the genre). I'm sold.
Click to expand...
How is this for f2.8, ISO250 100% detail from that Zeiss? This was quickly converted from RAW with IDC, NR Auto.


RX10 ISO250 100% crop
Click to expand...
Yes, very impressive.

Other cameras with slightly more focal length/zoom may magnify more, but if they dont have the lens quality to match, you are just getting a larger image with softer detail.

I wonder how this sharp Zeiss lens would compare to other lenses up to 240mm equivalent, because I'm thinking that once you start cropping, you're probably getting similar detail to other "normal" lenses up to 240mm. Just a theory.

--
Have a shooting great day,
Mario
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mario5200/
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/8024660727/albums
 
Last edited:
.

Yeah, I uploaded all the original files that guy posted and have been tweaking them

in PhotoShop with levels and a touch of USM. Most are close to dead on, but a few

show fairly dramatic improvement, as with any other camera I've ever used. This RX10

is a powerhouse though. I'm really looking forward to getting mine after examining these

images.

Here's another one of the little girl that had the milk on it that I tweaked a bit.

 

Attachments

  • 2754926.jpg
    2754926.jpg
    292.6 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
.

And the shoes. AutoLevels and a touch of USM in PhotoShop -- pop







 

Attachments

  • 2754929.jpg
    2754929.jpg
    440.5 KB · Views: 0
MarioV said:
YiannisPP said:
But yeah it would be nice if someone could explain the first shot ftp://rawdata.slrclub.com/compact/sony/1311_RX10/DSC09037.JPG
Click to expand...
That is a good photo. The RX10 has handled the situation very well. Its a nice back-lit shot and had added to the angelic nature with the sun-glowing hair tips.
Click to expand...
I certainly don't see it that way - the photographer made an error with this shot plain and simple.

As you say, the subject is back lit by the sun, which looks like it's quite low in the sky and the way it hits the lens has just washed out the whole image.
MarioV said:
Anyone can get/use Fast Stone Image Viewer. Simply doing an Auto colour adjustment can clean it right up. Pull back the green channel slightly and you have a great photo. Lightroom does a nicer job still.
Click to expand...
Or if the photographer had noticed the lens flare they could have simply shielded the lens from the sun with one hand.

Sure, you can 'rescue' such photos to a certain extent, but getting the shot right gives you better results.
 
2eyesee said:
MarioV said:
YiannisPP said:
But yeah it would be nice if someone could explain the first shot ftp://rawdata.slrclub.com/compact/sony/1311_RX10/DSC09037.JPG
Click to expand...
That is a good photo. The RX10 has handled the situation very well. Its a nice back-lit shot and had added to the angelic nature with the sun-glowing hair tips.
Click to expand...
I certainly don't see it that way - the photographer made an error with this shot plain and simple.

As you say, the subject is back lit by the sun, which looks like it's quite low in the sky and the way it hits the lens has just washed out the whole image.
2eyesee said:
Anyone can get/use Fast Stone Image Viewer. Simply doing an Auto colour adjustment can clean it right up. Pull back the green channel slightly and you have a great photo. Lightroom does a nicer job still.
Click to expand...
Or if the photographer had noticed the lens flare they could have simply shielded the lens from the sun with one hand.

Sure, you can 'rescue' such photos to a certain extent, but getting the shot right gives you better results.
Click to expand...
Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda. Its also possible that even with a lens hood, the flare would be in the bottom half of the image making simple global changes no longer an option.
 
MarioV said:
2eyesee said:
MarioV said:
YiannisPP said:
But yeah it would be nice if someone could explain the first shot ftp://rawdata.slrclub.com/compact/sony/1311_RX10/DSC09037.JPG
Click to expand...
That is a good photo. The RX10 has handled the situation very well. Its a nice back-lit shot and had added to the angelic nature with the sun-glowing hair tips.
Click to expand...
I certainly don't see it that way - the photographer made an error with this shot plain and simple.

As you say, the subject is back lit by the sun, which looks like it's quite low in the sky and the way it hits the lens has just washed out the whole image.
MarioV said:
Anyone can get/use Fast Stone Image Viewer. Simply doing an Auto colour adjustment can clean it right up. Pull back the green channel slightly and you have a great photo. Lightroom does a nicer job still.
Click to expand...
Or if the photographer had noticed the lens flare they could have simply shielded the lens from the sun with one hand.

Sure, you can 'rescue' such photos to a certain extent, but getting the shot right gives you better results.
Click to expand...
Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda. Its also possible that even with a lens hood, the flare would be in the bottom half of the image making simple global changes no longer an option.
Click to expand...
I expect you're right about the lens hood. Even if it was being used it may not help in a situation like this - which is why at times I've found I've needed to use my hand to shield the sun.

I can't imagine you could design a lens hood to work effectively at all focal lengths on a lens that covers such a wide focal range anyway.
 
2eyesee said:
MarioV said:
YiannisPP said:
But yeah it would be nice if someone could explain the first shot ftp://rawdata.slrclub.com/compact/sony/1311_RX10/DSC09037.JPG
Click to expand...
That is a good photo. The RX10 has handled the situation very well. Its a nice back-lit shot and had added to the angelic nature with the sun-glowing hair tips.
Click to expand...
I certainly don't see it that way - the photographer made an error with this shot plain and simple.
Click to expand...
I somehow doubt this guy made such a glaring error, given how good a job he did in general. He took 3 shots of that girl, he didn't have to post all 3 of them. I'm sure he noticed this one was obviously "milky" but he posted it anyway just to show what can happen and how the lens handles a situation like this.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I would tend to think that with the great composition and care of other shots, this shot was posted intentionally to illustrate something. Again, the "something" probably is explained in the narrative with the shot. We are speculating without having read the actual supplied comments.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top