sony rx100 videos and pictures at the same time? newer models?

[ggibson]

I have never tried taking photos while filming on my RX100 II, because it seems like a feature with a lot of compromises. You get a smaller file with JPG-only and no strobe. If you really want to try it, use a strong video light I guess. I have done dives where I mounted a Sony actioncam to the top of my camera housing when I wanted video and stills. But it's better to concentrate on one thing at a time--video or stills--to get the best results. There are a lot of things to think about when diving and shooting at the same time. I would rather get 1 stellar image than 100 mediocre shots. So now I just focus on shooting stills, and maybe take a video or two for fun.

On the topic of which RX100 model to get--the RX100 II is almost definitely worth the small price difference over the first model at this point. Much faster flash recycle time, better AF, better low-light performance.

The RX100 III and IV have some nice improvements over the II, but the lens change is debatable. The 24mm wide end makes it less compatible with wet wide lenses that are made for 28mm zooms. Also, the long end only being 70mm can be more limiting for macro situations, despite having a wider aperture. If you're using strobes, the wider aperture is less necessary.

 

[fish80]

Thanks both! I am thinking about getting the RX100 II as well. I do not what a strobe at this point: I am beginner i just want to learn and take some decent pictures and movies to show friends and family. Maybe print a picture if it turns out nice enough.

I tried the mark IV at a shop here (I am in Hawaii, went to several places but could not find a Mark II to try). As you can see from the attached, the picture + movie does give good quality, it is definitely not a simple frame grab. Of course it is just a JPEG and not a RAW, but the quality is comparable with the quality of the standard picture. I wonder: is this the case also with the Mark II? If any of you folks have the Mark II (or the Mark I) and could spend 5 minutes to try (on land of course) if this is the case I would be really grateful.

Why do I want this function? I think it is good for wide angle / large animals, which is what I like to see and take picture of mostly. The other day I was snorkeling with dolphins, i had to take or pictures or movies, and i really wish I would have been able to do both at the same time. Same the other month when I went really close to a nice gray shark while divine. Normally those guys don't stick around for long so I would like to be able to make the most of it.

Thanks a lot!

 

[AlMitch]

If you really want to get pics and video then I would suggest you bolt a go-pro to the top of the camera.

No one likes to see a grainy/fuzzy photo. So use the Sony to take good proper stills and the go-pro can catch the the action as it happens. That being said you really should decide what is your priority, video or stills. One of them, or possibly both, will suffer.

 

[fish80]

No one likes to see a grainy/fuzzy photo. So use the Sony to take good proper stills and the go-pro can catch the the action as it happens.

Did you see my attachment? It is not grainy at all, it has the same quality as a regular jpeg picture.. i thought about the gopro but I do not like that solution much, thanks.

 

[ggibson]

I totally understand the dilemma of choosing between stills or video for rare encounters. But RAW and a strobe or two are both really important for good still images below 10m, and you can't have these if you are shooting video at the same time. If you can't give up the idea of both and don't want a strobe, why not just a 4K GoPro? You can pull 8MP screenshots from that resolution, which is not going to be hugely worse than a 17MP jpg.

 

[fish80]

If you can't give up the idea of both and don't want a strobe, why not just a 4K GoPro? You can pull 8MP screenshots from that resolution, which is not going to be hugely worse than a 17MP jpg.

I have a gopro3 black, but for pictures it is really terrible believe me, particularly with ambient light. Eventually I may want to invest in a strobe to get better pictures, but at the moment I want to try to have both pics and video by getting a camera system which is flexible enough but that i can also expand in the future if I want to try to get really quality images.

Do you happen to have the rx100 MII? Is the quality comparable to the one i posted (i.e. picture during video similar quality to jpeg picture alone)?

 

[Altamira]

Did you see my attachment? It is not grainy at all, it has the same quality as a regular jpeg picture.. i thought about the gopro but I do not like that solution much, thanks.

I am not a photographer, well maybe a crappy one, but I can assure you that the ambient light photos/videos you get from a camera above the water are not the same as what you are going to get under the water. If you are not going to use strobes, you are not going to be happy with JPG underwater photos below @ 10'. You are going to need to shoot in RAW, or RAW + JPG (which is what I use) under the water because you are not going to be able to correct the white balance in post-production on a JPG photo, and you are going to lose most of the color unless you are correcting the white balance about every 5-10' of depth change. As I mentioned in a previous post, the Canon G7X one button in-camera while balance correction is wonderful because it allows the camera to do a pretty good job of correcting the color in both the RAW and JPG image. On my last dive trip, using that one button white balance correction, most of the photos needed very little or no post-production adjustments. I was very impressed, and happy that I followed the advice I was given about the value of that feature of the camera. Why Canon did not incorporate that feature in the Mark II is beyond me.

 

[AlMitch]

Why Canon did not incorporate that feature in the Mark II is beyond me.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME??!!! I was seriously looking at the G7X M II for the wife and that feature was one of the main reasons why I was considering it over the Sony RX100. The Sony SUCKS at white balancing underwater!
Really disappointed to hear that about the Canon.

 

[Altamira]

The G7X one button white balance worked very well on the six dives I did in Polynesia, but still learning the ins and outs of the camera. The guys at Backscatter.com actually talked me out of the Mark II because of the loss of the one button white balance. Sure glad they did.

 

[fish80]

I am not a photographer, well maybe a crappy one, but I can assure you that the ambient light photos/videos you get from a camera above the water are not the same as what you are going to get under the water.

Dude I truly appreciate your feedback, but really I believe we have different needs at the moment. I do not want my stuff to be published by national geographic, just want to have some pictures and movies to remember my dives. I also want the pictures to have higher quality than the movies. These are the scenarios I think I will face underwater:

a) Something nice and static on the reef, it allows getting closer and some pictures. Think a morey eel for example. There I can take some decent RAW + JPEG pictures with a good video light, and maybe also take a video.

b) A pelagic staying farther out, say a shark, then I can make a video. Picture quality will not be good anyway.

c) That said pelagic coming closer to me for 2-3 seconds. Then I want to be able to capture one or two stills of better quality, but if I have to stop the video I will not make it in time. That's why I want to be able to do both at the same time, even though the final quality will not be as good as in RAW. I do not want to lose the opportunity to record the video because I am hoping that the shark will come close. I rather have both the video and the still of lower quality than a RAW picture.

BTW from interceptor's blog and posts I understand that you can use a red filter to do white balance in the rx100 so I am not worried about that too much.

Hope this is clearer, and I hope somebody can answer my question regarding the quality of the Mark II dual mode.