Sony RX100 - Master compilation thread

[Interceptor121]

This is my first video clip with the RX100 Mark II

[youtubehq]vDsJaR2Crgs[/youtubehq]

And a mini review of the Mark II in action and some considerations on the white balance

Barbados: First Sony RX100 Mark II Feature | Interceptor121 Underwater Video

 

[hellhole]

nice video...

is it me or youtube... i find the quick moving objects are kinna jerky ...
ie.. the beginning with the people moving on the boat..
.. the 0:20 - the diver with the small school of fish swimming by. the diver looks fine.. as he/she is slow.. the fishes...seems to have a little bit of jerky
.. the 0:40 - the moray eel.. when it venture out .. the movement seems jerky...

i was watching on youtube at 1080....

let me try that vimeo one...its loading...

ah! its definely youtube.... the vimeo looks fine and smooth!!

 

[coralgirl]

Anyone have issue with the camera dial mode. Mine gets really hard to rotate or stuck sometime, resulting in my nauticam housing nob not working for the dail mode. Any idea on how to fix it r how to change shooting mode without using teh dail mode maybe by reassigning the shooting mode funtion to other button.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[robtark]

I've been reading with great interest the various commentaries about close-focus issues and options regarding the RX100. I'm considering purchasing this camera (with Nauticam housing) However, I am still somewhat wary about the camera's close-focus problems. Thus I hoping that this forum's users will be able to answer a few questions for me.

[BTW, I'm interested in photos, not video.*]

(1) Sony's RX100 specifications say that the camera has a "Macro Focus Range" of 5cm (1.97 inches), which I understand is about 7cm under water. That seems pretty "close" to me. So I'm not clear why every review cites close-focus concerns as an issue and forums like this dedicate a lot of space to workaround lenses. I'm confused.

-If the RX100 can focus that close -- without any added wet lens -- what is the problem?

-Without any added lens, is it that the subject is in sharp focus but it appears too small, or what?

-Without any added lens, does the problem just involve macro photography (that is, life size 1:1 imaging), or does it include close-ups (perhaps one-quarter to one-tenth size?) as well.

-In reality, if the camera's actual focus range is somewhat further from the subject than the specs indicate, how close is too close for this camera?

-Is the minimum focusing distance determined with the lens zoomed out (widest) or zoomed in (narrowest)?

(2) As evidenced by many closeup/macro photos posted on this and other forums, it is obvious that the problems, whatever they may be, can be overcome.

MY QUESTION: Does it takes tons of practice and lots of skill to master close-focus u/w with the RX100, or can a fairly casual hobbyist* expect reasonable success -- given the additional purchase of, for example, the UCL165 lens.

[Note: I'm not asking if I will create fantastic images. To start, I'd just like a decent chance of getting images in focus without the equipment being an obstacle.]

(3) Assuming that Manual focusing is often required, is it simply a matter of using the front lens ring? If so, what steps are needed to switch the ring to that functionality?

(4) What does "peak" focusing add , and how does one do that with this camera?

(5) While I understand that the Sea&Sea YS-D1 may be the best strobe for the RX100, I already own an Inon D2000. Since I have no plans for buying a second strobe, would I only notice problems in shooting wide angle or would other deficiencies be apparent?

(6) Assuming I would be using a single D2000 strobe and am willing to compromise on the angle of coverage, is there a WA lens that might work best with my strobe?

Thanks in advance for your help.

*My background: I've been using an Olympus C-5050 w/Ike housing and strobe for the last 10 years. While I enjoy u/w photography, I don't claim any special talent. As I look to upgrade, I'm interested in minimalist approaches. Hence, I'm also considering the Canon S-110 or S-120, which seem to offer less hassle and more versatility for close-up work, albeit at the cost of some image quality, doing without TTL, and not being able to stop-down to f11. With a new system, I'm hoping to broaden my shooting to do more WA and macro. For me, satisfaction is more important than cost, and I love simplicity. Less really can be more.

 

[JDelage]

(2) As evidenced by many closeup/macro photos posted on this and other forums, it is obvious that the problems, whatever they may be, can be overcome.

MY QUESTION: Does it takes tons of practice and lots of skill to master close-focus u/w with the RX100, or can a fairly casual hobbyist* expect reasonable success -- given the additional purchase of, for example, the UCL165 lens.

It's fairly easy to use peak focus out of the water. I don't know yet UW.

(3) Assuming that Manual focusing is often required, is it simply a matter of using the front lens ring? If so, what steps are needed to switch the ring to that functionality?

Yes. I believe the front ring automatically gets dedicated to focus when switching to MF. Otherwise, it's a trivial customization function in your settings menu

(4) What does "peak" focusing add , and how does one do that with this camera?

How 'Focus Peaking' works

 

[Interceptor121]

-If the RX100 can focus that close -- without any added wet lens -- what is the problem?

Every camera has a minimal capture area (width x height) at the closest focus distance. As the RX100 has a large sensor the capture area is big so thing look tiny in the picture compared to a camera with a smaller sensor (i.e. canon S120)

-Without any added lens, does the problem just involve macro photography (that is, life size 1:1 imaging), or does it include close-ups (perhaps one-quarter to one-tenth size?) as well.

The Rx100 does very nice portraits not sure what one-quarter of you refer to? feet?

-Is the minimum focusing distance determined with the lens zoomed out (widest) or zoomed in (narrowest)?

Minimum focus distance for compacts is always at wide end but if you look at the spec there will be also tele end. In this case 5cm to 50cm at tele side

(2) As evidenced by many closeup/macro photos posted on this and other forums, it is obvious that the problems, whatever they may be, can be overcome.

MY QUESTION: Does it takes tons of practice and lots of skill to master close-focus u/w with the RX100, or can a fairly casual hobbyist* expect reasonable success -- given the additional purchase of, for example, the UCL165 lens.

[Note: I'm not asking if I will create fantastic images. To start, I'd just like a decent chance of getting images in focus without the equipment being an obstacle.]

(3) Assuming that Manual focusing is often required, is it simply a matter of using the front lens ring? If so, what steps are needed to switch the ring to that functionality?

(4) What does "peak" focusing add , and how does one do that with this camera?

Good results can be obtained with manual focus or assisted manual focus where you first look for peaking in the image (areas in focus get a zebra pattern and then focus in auto

(5) While I understand that the Sea&Sea YS-D1 may be the best strobe for the RX100, I already own an Inon D2000. Since I have no plans for buying a second strobe, would I only notice problems in shooting wide angle or would other deficiencies be apparent?

A single Inon D2000 will do fine for macro and close up work. For close up wide angle you can also get decent results balancing ambient light however two strobes would be better this is not an RX100 issue

(6) Assuming I would be using a single D2000 strobe and am willing to compromise on the angle of coverage, is there a WA lens that might work best with my strobe?

Whatever lens you get with a single strobe the coverage will be limited to the centre of the frame and relatively small objects (one foot). It makes sense to get the widest angle of coverage so that you can get closer and make the most of your strobe. At present the only flat lenses that work with the RX100 are the Inon UWL-H100 and the Epoque DCL-30. The inon can be converted in a fisheye later adding a dome. A lens like the fix uwl28 or UWL-04 has already semifisheye coverage and is reasonably priced. Choice of lens depends on optical quality and ergonomics

 

[robtark]

I've never used anything other than auto focus, so I like seeing words like "easy." Thanks for the comments.

---------- Post added February 2nd, 2014 at 01:00 PM ----------

Thanks for your comments. Unless I'm willing to buy another strobe, I guess wide angle's not going to be much of an option for me. I was just hoping that there was a lens providing some wider coverage, but not so wide as to leave big dark corners with my strobe. Obviously, a forlorn wish.

I know that a second strobe is the way to go, but I have been loathe to expand the amount of carry-on equipment I take on a plane. I fly out of a relatively small airport (Charleston, SC) which usually means my initial flight is on a 50-seat regional jet with really tiny overhead storage bins. What can't fit above gets put in the hold below. Which scares me, so size really matters. Notwithstanding my constraints, obviously you do a lot of air travel and I'd be interested in knowing what scuba/photo gear you (and other forum users) treat as carry-on and how you protect what gets stowed?