Why don't you shoot in M mode with Auto ISO?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
New RX100 to have 24-70mm f1.8-2.8 lens!
- Thread starter jintoku
- Start date
That's the other problem with the RX100 cameras. There is no auto-ISO in the M mode! Auto-ISO in the M mode would be a more-than-acceptable work-around, especially if you could also dial in an exposure compensation.
Last edited:
Tonkotsu Ramen
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,380
- Reaction score
- 1,326
Yup! no Auto ISO in M on the RX100 or the RX100M2.
It would actually be ok if it were an option.
No fear though, while sony is known to not really update firmware unless its crucial, they've also been known to put new softare updates into its newest models. Their newer models all have auto ISO in M, so it is acceptable to assume the next RX will have it as well! :-D
maple
Senior Member
The new lens specs makes me think whether Sony should also come up with another 1" sensor RX model for the zoom range beyond, say, 80-300mm, to pair with it The duo shall be smaller than RX10.
And such a semi compact tele remain model could also prove to be popular as complementary camera to larger sensor cameras, interchangeable lens or fixed. Tele zoom for larger sensor are just too cumbersome to keep handy, even if you can afford them.
--
Maple
And such a semi compact tele remain model could also prove to be popular as complementary camera to larger sensor cameras, interchangeable lens or fixed. Tele zoom for larger sensor are just too cumbersome to keep handy, even if you can afford them.
--
Maple
Last edited:
I hope you're right. The new A6000 is great in this respect. Even at the widest end with the 16-50mm kit lens, the minimum shutter-speed with auto-ISO is 1/60. It also has auto-ISO in the M mode with exposure compensation. But it still doesn't let you dial in a minimum shutter-speed for auto-ISO in the A and P modes, which would be my first choice. With auto-ISO in the M mode, you still need to keep a close eye on the light meter, so you don't get over-exposed shots if the ISO setting bottoms out.
The other issue with the 1/30 minimum shutter-speed is that it prevents you from confidently handing your camera over to a third party for a quick snapshot. There is a very decent chance to get blurred shots. I think 1/60 is a much better choice for a full-auto mode.
Last edited:
lancespring
Senior Member
Ah, but this was addressed in the RX10. It does have Auto ISO in Manual mode.
I consequently would be extremely surprised if this feature is not also included in the RX100M3
The RX100M3 may well be the cat's meow.
Last edited:
Tonkotsu Ramen
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,380
- Reaction score
- 1,326
love it!!
Would be better if they put out 2 new RX100s with the 2 rumored lenses, and let people choose.
Sean Nelson
Forum Pro
If that cat is any indication of the size of the RX100M3 then I don't want anything to do with it!The RX100M3 may well be the cat's meow.
Are you sure that isn't from some view camera forum?
It would not be smaller than RX10, just the 80-300mm model would be a lot bigger due to the 300mm. Not a good idea, this would not have any practical advantage except maybe optimizing the optical performance of the lens which would be tele only (but the target audience doesn't seem very interested in high optical quality ...).
There is a 70-300mm equiv. zoom for Nikon 1. But this works because Nikon 1 has removable lenses ...
Indeed. I'm fine with 1/30 second but when handing to other to take a shot I slip it into S mode and 1/60 ;-)
Fredy Ross
Veteran Member
I like the new focal width but not long enough. I love my rx100ii but sometimes wish it were a little bit wider and a little bit longer. 70mm is too short as I am finding out with my a7r and always seem to be cropping but have so many more mps to play with. I won't be getting the new model.
You're killing me ! I haven't had G.A.S. in a couple years (since getting my RX100) ... nothing I want for my DSLR, no new lenses, don't even desire an upgrade to my 3-4 year old DSLR body. My RX100 has been great, but give it a built in VF, tilting LCD, f/1.8-2.8 lens (the range is ok; I'd trade in the extra tele in exchange for f/2.8 at 70mm equivalent) *and* Auto ISO in M mode and all I can do is hope that it's a big beastly thing that would never fit in my pocket, so I have no desire for it
- Dennis
I'm relieved with the specifications. There will be no temptation whatsoever to buy this one. I find the 100 mm zoom range and the F stop at max zoom the most limiting factor, and 28 mm at the wide end just fine. Bringing the lens down to 24 mm is going to mean major barrel distortion that is going to have to be corrected in the RAW software. The correction required for the existing 28 mm is near the maximum that can be corrected already.
Samaistuin
Senior Member
- Messages
- 1,075
- Reaction score
- 558
Seeing that they're sacrificing the long end of the zoom so as to widen it, why would it be?
Hmmm, I was thinking that I'd happily trade away the tele end in exchange for f/2.8 at the 70mm equivalent mark. But looking at the chart that dpreview put up in its 2012 compact roundup, it appears that the RX100 is f/4 at 70mm equivalent. So the new lens would be just 1 stop faster.
Now I'm not so sure which I'd prefer (the existing 1.8-4.9 or the shorter 1.8-2.8) if given the choice. I also find the RX100s lens a bit short at times, and would prefer 28-140 equivalent. Anything shy of 300mm equivalent is going to be short at some point ... but I had 28-140 on an old Canon and found that lens very satisfying. The thing is, my RX100 is a pocketable alternative to my DSLR, so I'm happier with some compromises than if it were my primary camera. Fast lens or not, I'm intrigued by the built in VF and tilting LCD that SAR claims it will have. A couple nights ago, I was shooting into a sunset with EV -1.7 and having a really hard time seeing what I was shooting in the LCD. A viewfinder would have helped.
- Dennis
Exactly, Ron is wrong in his assumption. It is a different lens, not the original 28-100 stretched even further down. Shorter maximum tele, shorter zoom reach - both should help in producing better image quality, if they want (= if they don't try to make the lens even more compact than it already was). Just look at APS-C and FF, there are some excellent lenses with that focal length range and very little distortion.
If anything, 28mm on the RX100-3 should have less distortion and sharper corners than 28mm on the RX100-1/2.
The distortion problem is at the wide end, not the long end. The RX100 has essentially zero distortion at 100 mm. At 28 mm however it is really bad. It of course was part of the lens design and the JPEG engine takes it out, and so does the better RAW developers. Time will tell which is worse, but this is what a 28 mm shot looks like from the RX100 without correction. And, yes, the shot is of normal graph paper with straight lines.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum