Post your Sony RX100 Pictures Here

audiobomber · 09-01-2012, 07:24 PM

Originally posted by kenafein

It's a great camera. The quality of the body and the output I've seen in this thread make me feel that it's really worth the money they're charging for it.

I agree, but I'm still waiting to see if anything else hits at Photokina. The Sony's strength is the comparatively large sensor vs body size. The weaknesses are the comparatively slow lens and lack of a viewfinder. Even a tunnel type would be big plus for me. If no one can match the RX100 in the next month, I will pay the price and not regret it.

twitch · 09-02-2012, 03:49 PM

watercolour effect

Here's my thoughts so far on what types of scenes the in camera effects suit
1) illustrator seems to suit simple scenes with clean surfaces
2) "water colour" is the opposite, seems to suit busy scenes with lots of texture and especially trees
3) "miniature" suits scenes where you are up high shooting down on a busy scene

I wish I could figure out how to apply an in camera effect and keep the original jpeg though, say by shooting ordinary jpeg and then applying effect in camera afterwards. Anyone know how?

nosnoop · 09-03-2012, 02:38 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by twitch

I wish I could figure out how to apply an in camera effect and keep the original jpeg though, say by shooting ordinary jpeg and then applying effect in camera afterwards. Anyone know how?

Yes, but it can only use Watercolor or illustrator effect.

While playing back the photo, press "Menu" -> "Playback 2" -> "Picture Effect".
Select Watercolor or Illustrator (3 settings), you get a preview of how the picture would turn out, and you can elect to save it or discard it.
When you save it, it would save as a new image and the original JPG is untouched.

twitch · 09-03-2012, 05:07 AM

Originally posted by nosnoop

Yes, but it can only use Watercolor or illustrator effect.

While playing back the photo, press "Menu" -> "Playback 2" -> "Picture Effect".
Select Watercolor or Illustrator (3 settings), you get a preview of how the picture would turn out, and you can elect to save it or discard it.
When you save it, it would save as a new image and the original JPG is untouched.

Thank you, exactly what I wanted to know

tsammyc · 09-10-2012, 06:14 PM

These were taken at the Vanderbilt Mansion in upstate New York. It was very dark in the rooms such that you couldn't see much detail with the naked eye, but the RX100 pictures came out fine. They are ISO 1600, F1.8 at 1/20th-1/30th second. The image stablisation worked quite well.

cali92rs · 09-11-2012, 11:55 AM

From the LA County Fair:

twitch · 09-11-2012, 09:09 PM

Originally posted by tsammyc

These were taken at the Vanderbilt Mansion in upstate New York. It was very dark in the rooms such that you couldn't see much detail with the naked eye, but the RX100 pictures came out fine. They are ISO 1600, F1.8 at 1/20th-1/30th second. The image stablisation worked quite well.

Very nice, the high ISO is pretty amazing.

EDIT: I wonder how these shots would have gone with the inbuilt HDR?

twitch · 09-14-2012, 09:30 PM

It's great to have a small camera to whip out when something catches your eye

RyanW · 09-15-2012, 06:58 PM

I'm really liking the deep vibrant reds this camera puts out. I haven't seen much of the blown reds that turn pinkish as some other cameras do. The reds look like film.

rawr · 09-15-2012, 09:29 PM

Originally posted by twitch

It's great to have a small camera to whip out when something catches your eye

Nice. #1 in particular (kids in gallery) is very cool. Would be nice if it were a tad punchier, though that might just be the low contrast of high-ISO.

cali92rs · 09-17-2012, 04:26 PM

I took my RX100 to Sea World on Sunday, in the blazing sun, and the rear LCD did a great job

(i set it to "bright daylight" setting).

Buuuuut, it did expose a weakness of the camera, the 1/2000 second max shutter speed. There were a few times where I really could've used either a faster shutter speed or a built in ND filter :/

audiobomber · 09-17-2012, 06:12 PM

Originally posted by cali92rs

Buuuuut, it did expose a weakness of the camera, the 1/2000 second max shutter speed. There were a few times where I really could've used either a faster shutter speed or a built in ND filter :/

What aperture did you use?

cali92rs · 09-17-2012, 07:17 PM

In some cases I had to stop all the way down to f7.1 @ ISO 125 to get a shutter speed of 1/1600. I could lower my ISO to 80, but that wont get me near the large aperture that I wanted to use.

cali92rs · 09-20-2012, 11:00 AM - **1 Like**

Some of the Sea World Shots

audiobomber · 09-20-2012, 11:22 AM

Originally posted by cali92rs

In some cases I had to stop all the way down to f7.1 @ ISO 125 to get a shutter speed of 1/1600. I could lower my ISO to 80, but that wont get me near the large aperture that I wanted to use.

Lowering your ISO would surely be better than closing down the aperture below 5.6. I agree though, 1/2000 is low, especially when they don't give you a built-in ND and you can't screw one on.

09-14-2012, 09:30 PM	#113
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571 Original Poster	It's great to have a small camera to whip out when something catches your eye Last edited by twitch; 09-15-2012 at 09:16 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Sony RX100	Clicker	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	138	08-25-2012 04:50 PM
Quick Comparison: Q vs RX100 (and a few others)	ndjedinak	Pentax Q	10	08-06-2012 02:58 PM
Sony DSC-RX100 20MP, 1" sensor compact	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	5	06-07-2012 06:09 AM
Pentax K-5 or Sony A580 for baby pictures	daffy2003	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	28	12-21-2011 08:54 AM
Who can post pictures in the post your pictures category?	Sitting Bull	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	3	12-14-2010 05:41 AM

09-01-2012, 07:24 PM	#106
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by kenafein It's a great camera. The quality of the body and the output I've seen in this thread make me feel that it's really worth the money they're charging for it. I agree, but I'm still waiting to see if anything else hits at Photokina. The Sony's strength is the comparatively large sensor vs body size. The weaknesses are the comparatively slow lens and lack of a viewfinder. Even a tunnel type would be big plus for me. If no one can match the RX100 in the next month, I will pay the price and not regret it.

09-02-2012, 03:49 PM	#107
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571 Original Poster	watercolour effect Here's my thoughts so far on what types of scenes the in camera effects suit 1) illustrator seems to suit simple scenes with clean surfaces 2) "water colour" is the opposite, seems to suit busy scenes with lots of texture and especially trees 3) "miniature" suits scenes where you are up high shooting down on a busy scene I wish I could figure out how to apply an in camera effect and keep the original jpeg though, say by shooting ordinary jpeg and then applying effect in camera afterwards. Anyone know how?

09-03-2012, 02:38 AM - 2 Likes	#108
nosnoop Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 1,299	Originally posted by twitch I wish I could figure out how to apply an in camera effect and keep the original jpeg though, say by shooting ordinary jpeg and then applying effect in camera afterwards. Anyone know how? Yes, but it can only use Watercolor or illustrator effect. While playing back the photo, press "Menu" -> "Playback 2" -> "Picture Effect". Select Watercolor or Illustrator (3 settings), you get a preview of how the picture would turn out, and you can elect to save it or discard it. When you save it, it would save as a new image and the original JPG is untouched.

09-03-2012, 05:07 AM	#109
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571 Original Poster	Originally posted by nosnoop Yes, but it can only use Watercolor or illustrator effect. While playing back the photo, press "Menu" -> "Playback 2" -> "Picture Effect". Select Watercolor or Illustrator (3 settings), you get a preview of how the picture would turn out, and you can elect to save it or discard it. When you save it, it would save as a new image and the original JPG is untouched. Thank you, exactly what I wanted to know

09-10-2012, 06:14 PM	#110
tsammyc Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 101	These were taken at the Vanderbilt Mansion in upstate New York. It was very dark in the rooms such that you couldn't see much detail with the naked eye, but the RX100 pictures came out fine. They are ISO 1600, F1.8 at 1/20th-1/30th second. The image stablisation worked quite well.

09-11-2012, 11:55 AM	#111
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	From the LA County Fair:

09-11-2012, 09:09 PM	#112
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571 Original Poster	Originally posted by tsammyc These were taken at the Vanderbilt Mansion in upstate New York. It was very dark in the rooms such that you couldn't see much detail with the naked eye, but the RX100 pictures came out fine. They are ISO 1600, F1.8 at 1/20th-1/30th second. The image stablisation worked quite well. Very nice, the high ISO is pretty amazing. EDIT: I wonder how these shots would have gone with the inbuilt HDR?

09-15-2012, 06:58 PM	#114
RyanW Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 583	I'm really liking the deep vibrant reds this camera puts out. I haven't seen much of the blown reds that turn pinkish as some other cameras do. The reds look like film.

09-15-2012, 09:29 PM	#115
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by twitch It's great to have a small camera to whip out when something catches your eye Nice. #1 in particular (kids in gallery) is very cool. Would be nice if it were a tad punchier, though that might just be the low contrast of high-ISO.

09-17-2012, 04:26 PM	#116
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	I took my RX100 to Sea World on Sunday, in the blazing sun, and the rear LCD did a great job (i set it to "bright daylight" setting). Buuuuut, it did expose a weakness of the camera, the 1/2000 second max shutter speed. There were a few times where I really could've used either a faster shutter speed or a built in ND filter :/

09-17-2012, 06:12 PM	#117
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by cali92rs Buuuuut, it did expose a weakness of the camera, the 1/2000 second max shutter speed. There were a few times where I really could've used either a faster shutter speed or a built in ND filter :/ What aperture did you use?

09-17-2012, 07:17 PM	#118
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	In some cases I had to stop all the way down to f7.1 @ ISO 125 to get a shutter speed of 1/1600. I could lower my ISO to 80, but that wont get me near the large aperture that I wanted to use.

09-20-2012, 11:00 AM - 1 Like	#119
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Some of the Sea World Shots

09-20-2012, 11:22 AM	#120
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by cali92rs In some cases I had to stop all the way down to f7.1 @ ISO 125 to get a shutter speed of 1/1600. I could lower my ISO to 80, but that wont get me near the large aperture that I wanted to use. Lowering your ISO would surely be better than closing down the aperture below 5.6. I agree though, 1/2000 is low, especially when they don't give you a built-in ND and you can't screw one on.