New Sony Cybershot RX100

[Interceptor121]

I am aware of the zoom at wide angle however I also know that is not from the sensor but from the front of the lens, try taking a picture of something 5 cm from the sensor on a S95 and you get just blur
In general terms the R100 seems to offer the same zoom of the S95 roughly now I don't know when you zoom in to the max what is the minimum focus distance, on the S95 at 105mm equivalent this is approximately 20 cm as far as I can recall but I will test again
Now that specifications is not something you usually get told. When you add a diopter you typically shorten that distance
I find that most of the macro I shoot is between 15-25 cm unless is a nudibranch but could be one meter for a shy creature

For what concerns the blurred edges at wide angle if the camera is 28mm equivalent and you zoom in to 35 mm most of the blur should go as you zoom but again this needs checking

For what I am concerned I was looking at this camera as a possible mini video performance at wide angle is essential, and am not that bothered by super macro because if I zoom too much the shake makes the footage impossible to watch and I don't carry underwater tripods

Would be good to read the review of the RX100 where all the info is coming out

 

[Puffer Fish]

Interceptor, While it used to be normal to use the sensor, it seems you are correct that with the S95, it is from the front of the lens. Be careful, as that is not the common way of doing that (although it may be with Point and shoot camera's). It is the sensor with slr lens (for all I can check).

There are a few good reviews out now... and the closest macro focus is 21.6 inches (or 55 centimeters), but also appears to be front of the lens. The pany 14 -42, by comparison, is 30 centimeters, but it is from the sensor...with the actual focus from the lens, less than half that. (I have that lens)

Here is both focus information and the soft edge issue (which seems present across the entire zoom range):

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 Camera - Review

I have two series S camera's (S90 and S95) and they both have a minimum focus, when at maximum zoom, of around 30 centimeters. (roughly, did not do an accurate measure) They are better than the LX5, because they zoom out farther.

Well if you are shooting at 15cm, then you are obviously using an add on lens. I shoot, most of the time, at the minimum focus distance for a Point and shoot, and slightly closer with my macro lens. Actually around that 20cm mark. If there was a camera that would focus with the same magnification as my 90mm equiv. macro at 20 cm, I would not need to carry two camera's with me.

Video, at least from what I have read, is not this camera's strong suit.

PS You can do macro video with a gh2, without a lot of shake.

I am aware of the zoom at wide angle however I also know that is not from the sensor but from the front of the lens, try taking a picture of something 5 cm from the sensor on a S95 and you get just blur
In general terms the R100 seems to offer the same zoom of the S95 roughly now I don't know when you zoom in to the max what is the minimum focus distance, on the S95 at 105mm equivalent this is approximately 20 cm as far as I can recall but I will test again
Now that specifications is not something you usually get told. When you add a diopter you typically shorten that distance
I find that most of the macro I shoot is between 15-25 cm unless is a nudibranch but could be one meter for a shy creature

For what concerns the blurred edges at wide angle if the camera is 28mm equivalent and you zoom in to 35 mm most of the blur should go as you zoom but again this needs checking

For what I am concerned I was looking at this camera as a possible mini video performance at wide angle is essential, and am not that bothered by super macro because if I zoom too much the shake makes the footage impossible to watch and I don't carry underwater tripods

Would be good to read the review of the RX100 where all the info is coming out

 

[Interceptor121]

I think you are making some confusion here. It is true that at maximum telephoto the different cameras have different performance so for example whilst the S95 and G12 will focus at 30 cm a T end the Sony needs 55 cm
However not necessarily you shoot at telephoto end all the time, so if at comparable distance the subjects looks bigger with a camera with a higher zoom this does not mean you need can't work half zoomed in if you are closer. The camera will still focus but your subject will not fill the frame and you will need to crop more or add a diopter to fill the frame
I can shoot with my S95 easily at 15-25 cm without a diopter without being at telephoto end but if I add a diopter I achieve a magnification at the same focal lenght plus I can actually get closer and it will still focus
With the performance of this RX100 looks like without a diopter you can't really get a lot of macro and you will need to crop quite a bit with 24 MP that should not be a major problem

 

[alien]

Are you concerned it can only be charged in the camera? Not sold with separate charger

 

[IyaDiver]

Interesting. The specs say it focusses at 5 cm and the exif of those pictures indicates a loot of zooming

I wonder if they had a diopter on

Subsee +10 diopter
.

 

[Puffer Fish]

Interceptor, There are two things you need to get really good macro images:

1. Working space to allow for lighting and with some animals, to not scare them.

2. Magnification, so you don't have to crop (not important if all you do with your images is post them on the internet).[

It should be pretty clear, that with a normal setup, shooting from 5 cm from the lens is not very practical (obviously, if you are setup for super macro, that is a very different story).

How much working space you need, would depend on the strobes you have. How much space what you are taking pictures of "needs", well that varies.

If you look at your S95, best magnification is at 28mm eq....then 35mm...then 50mm...after that, you jump all the way to 105. It is a little different for the LX5 (but not much). So you can use 50mm, but to get that, you are working at around 7 cm....which is way too close for some animals, and not the easiest to get good lighting to. If you shoot at 20 cm at 50mm, well you would have been better off at 105. To get your 20 cm working distance, you have to be around the 50mm eq.

And I don't crop unless there is no other choice, as I use my images for prints.

If your concept of macro is shooting images of Elsia crispata (the nudibranch on your flicker page), then using 50mm eq. and taking your time makes a lot of sense. If it shooting tiny, fast moving animals, well then it does not work.

PS I like nudibranch images, but I shoot both.

To be honest, pretty much all the slow moving macro stuff has been photographed a million times over. People far better than me have captured lovely macro images of them. It turns out, that all the fast moving stuff is rarely if ever captured. As there is more of it, and it is much harder to photograph, it makes diving a whole lot more interesting.

I have a Pany GH1 and GX1, with a Leica 45mm macro, if all I want to shoot is macro stuff, but would love to have a general purpose camera...and the R100 was so close.

Note: Perhaps the GX1, with the 14 to 45, which can focus closer at 90mm eq, than any of these camera's, and still have a reasonable zoom range.


QUOTE=Interceptor121;6439955]I think you are making some confusion here. It is true that at maximum telephoto the different cameras have different performance so for example whilst the S95 and G12 will focus at 30 cm a T end the Sony needs 55 cm
However not necessarily you shoot at telephoto end all the time, so if at comparable distance the subjects looks bigger with a camera with a higher zoom this does not mean you need can't work half zoomed in if you are closer. The camera will still focus but your subject will not fill the frame and you will need to crop more or add a diopter to fill the frame
I can shoot with my S95 easily at 15-25 cm without a diopter without being at telephoto end but if I add a diopter I achieve a magnification at the same focal lenght plus I can actually get closer and it will still focus
With the performance of this RX100 looks like without a diopter you can't really get a lot of macro and you will need to crop quite a bit with 24 MP that should not be a major problem[/QUOTE]

---------- Post Merged at 10:16 AM ---------- Previous Post was at 10:14 AM ----------

I was, but don't know how fast the battery charges. One could alway buy two of them and use one as a charger.

Are you concerned it can only be charged in the camera? Not sold with separate charger

 

[Reef]

Today I took a look at this camera at one of the local shops. I was very impressed with the ease of the controls. The reviews I've read appear to be very positive. I've got a Canon S90 right now, and this appears to be a decent upgrade. I hope Ikelite decides to make a housing for it. I've been following this thread for a month now. Thanks for all the useful information.

 

[Interceptor121]

I have read that review of the camera it does have less optic performance compared to the S95 on the other hand at wide angle I would zoom in at 35mm so the softness may go
The macro performance seems to indicate that it will be a must to have a diopter probably at least +3 to bring it in line with other cameras without lens and most likely 6+ to have 1.5x subject size compared to my S95
The subsea +10 used in the demo photos looks more than adequate

 

[Neoviny]

Hi... I stumbled over this thread today and it's very interesting....

Maybe this will be interesting to others as well: I received an answer from Ikelite and they told me that there is a chance that after 4 to 7 weeks from now there could be a housing for the RX100...

I'm really looking forward to see such a housing

 

[scubaschupp]

Hi All, I'm new to this board. I came across it searching about the rx. I purchased this camera for my wife for her birthday to replace a broken tx20 that she loved. We are avid snorkelers (I am scuba certified but she doesn't want to get certified). My question is; does anyone have any experience with something like this ? http://www.ebay.com/itm/40m-Waterpr...r_Housings&hash=item27c8cc3168#ht_8694wt_1548

All of the up and coming housings from the big names sound amazing but since we are only snorkeling (not diving) and only get to go once or twice a year, we weren't sure if we wanted to put that kind of investment into it. Was hoping I could find a housing even in the $500 or less range. Any advice is much appreciated. I don't really trust the dicapac bags or anything of that nature. Really want a solid case of some kind. I do realize with a case like above you wont have full controls as you would the big names but I think once she got it set to where she liked the results she would generally leave it in that setting for the rest of our trips.