Jump to content
Andrew Reid

Sony RX10 M2 - first part of my review and a mini-comparison with the A7S and Canon 1D C

Recommended Posts

EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

Shallow DOF Test RX10 (old one)

 

Thanks for sharing!

It's interesting to see what shallow depth of field looks like with this camera. It's better then I imagined it would be. Though from the looks of it, it only works in situations where you've got the subject close to the lens. And in the example the bokeh seems a bit busy with the blueish outlines.

Though technically a great camera, I'm still not convinced about the shallow DoF. At least when compared to a larger sensor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Been shooting again and I have to say: the RX10M2 handles motion much better than the NX1, it just doesn't look as fragile and rolling-shutterish. This must be the integrated DRAM (possibly the stabilization, too). Really impressed. You can just film a bird on-the-fly (haha) on 200 mm and it never looks crappy. I'm probably keeping the Sony, even though it's possibly going to be 1-300 Euros less in a few months.

If they manage to build larger sensors with that architecture, we're probably in for an even bigger treat than the A7RM2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi

Thanks for sharing!

It's interesting to see what shallow depth of field looks like with this camera. It's better then I imagined it would be. Though from the looks of it, it only works in situations where you've got the subject close to the lens. And in the example the bokeh seems a bit busy with the blueish outlines.

Though technically a great camera, I'm still not convinced about the shallow DoF. At least when compared to a larger sensor.

To get a hard number on it, the depth of field equivalent on a 5D (we all shot on one at some point) is about F8 throughout the range. 

So as you know, a 50mm F/8 lens on a 5D is a pretty deep look. But if you go to the longest end, a 200mm F8 lens on a 5D is pretty shallow. 

To give the information out there, 

there are three elements that control depth of field. 

1- Aperture 

2- Focal Length 

3- Distance to subject 

We don't have great no. 1 (aperture) on the RX10, it's f8. So you're going to have to play on the two other elements to get a shallow depth of field. Meaning, increasing focal length, and decreasing subject distance.

In short, you zoom in as far as possible, and get as close to the subject as the minimum focus distance allows. 

This is how we used to do it on the good old days before the 5D, go back and zoom in with that DVX100! 

IT IS a limitation on the RX10 that you will never get the shallow aesthetic you get with a s35 and a 50mm F/1.8, or 85mm F/1.8, that kind of look. I would not use the RX10 as a sole camera for narrative work, I'd definitely use it as an A camera but make sure to have even a s35 d3300 + 50mm F1.8 for those epic close ups when needed as a B camera, while the RX10 handles those wide detailed shots and long shots, handheld (IS), zooming, high DR scenes, etc. Just not alone for narrative/music work, depth if field is quite deep unless you really zoom in and get too close. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi

This is the test footage I have been waiting for; ungraded S Log 2 in 4K. Camera still, outdoors:


This certainly doesn't look good downloading the ProRes Vimeo file.

It's very soft, not organic soft, but mushy soft. And colours, this is typical a7s colour science, spot on. (whatever that means to you). 

It does downscale to 1080p with sharpening and makes very clear 1080p

looking at 4K 1:1 

1lRPHOp.jpg

Very mushy

However downscaling to 1080p and grading and sharpening gives sharp 1080p (these results look worse in compression than the originals due to EOSHD web upload)

mQM7RIa.jpg

owJGapb.jpg

It feels like I am grading my A7s S-Log files but just noisier, same colours, resolution, gamma, dynamic range, same ''image feel and aesthetic''.

@There are compression artefacts due to vimeo upload so I ignore that, but resolution and colour science are always pretty well conveyed through vimeo and youtube 4K.

Perhaps something went wrong with his pipe-line from shooting to post to uploading. So will reserve judgment entirely, just grabing whatever 4K S-Log files I could find and getting a first impression, not a real impression. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just learned something quite interesting which I assume most of you know, but perhaps other newbies like me don't. The equivalent aperture on the RX10ii is not a constant 2.8 really. It is actually closer to 8 when compared to other cameras.

Source: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx10/images/apertures.png ( rx10 is the darker, higher straight blue line).

Source 2: http://www.picturecorrect.com/tips/understanding-crop-factor-are-you-being-scammed-by-camera-manufacturers/ (he mentions the RX10 at 27.09 in the video, I enjoyed the whole thing)

In the video I also learned ISO isn't equal between cameras with different sensor sizes too. So when last night I told my friend S-Log 2 on this starts at 800, then he said his A7s starts at 3,200; I was wrong to think that the RX10 trumps the A7s. In the video at 13.00 he shows comparisons. The CX sensor seems to be around an inch and 800 ISO on that is equivalent to 6400 on a full frame camera like the A7s.

There are some comments on the second source with the video that say it is wrong, so it would be interesting to hear any thoughts here. From what I understand bokeh will not be good on the RX10 and keeping the ISO low should be a priority.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi

Mat, don't read these articles they are just ''excited'' and/or getting attention, clicks. Nobody is scamming us. We've had hard LONG debates on this before if you want to search but to recapitulatde and spare you the time and going through these uninformed articles about campanies ''scamming us'',  Equivalence among difference sensor sizes goes likes this: 

Crop factor is applied to 

-Focal Length:

So a 50mm lens on a 2.7x crop RX10 is a 135mm equiv. to FF

-Aperture: when it comes to depth of field

So a 50mm f2.8 lens on the RX10 will have the same depth if field as a 135mm F/8 on a FF.

Crop factor is not applied to 

-Aperture: when it comes to exposure, brightness

So a 50mm f/2.8 lens on the RX10 will have the same brightness and exposure as a 135mm F/2.8 on a FF. 

-ISO/sensitivity: 

Crop factor is not applied to sensitivity. It has nothing to do with it. It's a standard measurment, an RX at 100 ISO will have the same sensitivity/brightness as a FF at 100 ISO. Sensir performance and noise is another subject and depends on each sensor technology. 

So, there's no scam, it's just that companies don't mention the depth if field equivalent to FF and only mention the focal length equivalence, but it's not wrong, the lens on the RX10 is still an F/2.8, by physics, in exposure, just not equivalent to an F/2.8 lens on FF, but F/8 when it comes to depth of field. 

And re-read my previous comment on the RX10 DOF vs. 5D to get an accurate idea of how the lens will look: 

To get a hard number on it, the depth of field equivalent on a 5D (we all shot on one at some point) is about F8 throughout the range. 

So as you know, a 50mm F/8 lens on a 5D is a pretty deep look. But if you go to the longest end, a 200mm F8 lens on a 5D is pretty shallow. 

To give the information out there, 

there are three elements that control depth of field. 

1- Aperture 

2- Focal Length 

3- Distance to subject 

We don't have great no. 1 (aperture) on the RX10, it's f8. So you're going to have to play on the two other elements to get a shallow depth of field. Meaning, increasing focal length, and decreasing subject distance.

In short, you zoom in as far as possible, and get as close to the subject as the minimum focus distance allows. 

This is how we used to do it on the good old days before the 5D, go back and zoom in with that DVX100! 

IT IS a limitation on the RX10 that you will never get the shallow aesthetic you get with a s35 and a 50mm F/1.8, or 85mm F/1.8, that kind of look. I would not use the RX10 as a sole camera for narrative work, I'd definitely use it as an A camera but make sure to have even a s35 d3300 + 50mm F1.8 for those epic close ups when needed as a B camera, while the RX10 handles those wide detailed shots and long shots, handheld (IS), zooming, high DR scenes, etc. Just not alone for narrative/music work, depth if field is quite deep unless you really zoom in and get too close. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just learned something quite interesting which I assume most of you know, but perhaps other newbies like me don't. The equivalent aperture on the RX10ii is not a constant 2.8 really. It is actually closer to 8 when compared to other cameras.

Source: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx10/images/apertures.png ( rx10 is the darker, higher straight blue line).

Source 2: http://www.picturecorrect.com/tips/understanding-crop-factor-are-you-being-scammed-by-camera-manufacturers/ (he mentions the RX10 at 27.09 in the video, I enjoyed the whole thing)

In the video I also learned ISO isn't equal between cameras with different sensor sizes too. So when last night I told my friend S-Log 2 on this starts at 800, then he said his A7s starts at 3,200; I was wrong to think that the RX10 trumps the A7s. In the video at 13.00 he shows comparisons. The CX sensor seems to be around an inch and 800 ISO on that is equivalent to 6400 on a full frame camera like the A7s.

There are some comments on the second source with the video that say it is wrong, so it would be interesting to hear any thoughts here. From what I understand bokeh will not be good on the RX10 and keeping the ISO low should be a priority.

 

The f number is the relation between the size of the aperture and focal length, it measures light density so to speak. A 2.8 will always have the same brightness because it doesn't care about the sensor that's behind it, but when the sensor is bigger it recollects more light because density*area=amount of light.

The amount of light is the signal,the information. A bigger sensor area recieves more light so the signal is stronger. The sensor is the measuring device, a perfect measuring device doesn't have noise, but these devices don't exist. The bigger the signal is the less you will have problems with these imperfections, because the information is much bigger than the noise (the imperfections in measuring).

If we take a whole picture as measuring unit, we take the same picture on one full frame camera and on a 1" camera it will have the same exposure parameters (same speed, same iso, same aperture) so it will have the same exposure,but the small sensor will have to be better, more efficient, to have the same amount of noise. The DOF will be different. I don't know how efficient the sony sensor is, but I can imagine it will be ok up to iso 1600. And shallow DOF is not the thing you are looking for when buying a RX10ii.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Andrew thanks for the great review. I'm thinking about buying this camera but I was wondering if the practically non existent rolling shutter is also a reality in 4k or is just for 1080p.  Also do you know if the camera outputs 4k in 10bit or 12bit via hdmi?  Thanks again for the review.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Andrew thanks for the great review. I'm thinking about buying this camera but I was wondering if the practically non existent rolling shutter is also a reality in 4k or is just for 1080p.  Also do you know if the camera outputs 4k in 10bit or 12bit via hdmi?  Thanks again for the review.   

Rolling shutter isn't non existent in 4K but it's definitely less than on other cameras. Puts in a very respectable performance there.

Best to explain with images so please wait for final review.

HDMI is uncompressed 8bit 4:2:2 4K on both the RX10 II and RX100 IV... Yes 4K HDMI on a pocket camera :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rolling shutter isn't non existent in 4K but it's definitely less than on other cameras. Puts in a very respectable performance there.

Best to explain with images so please wait for final review.

HDMI is uncompressed 8bit 4:2:2 4K on both the RX10 II and RX100 IV... Yes 4K HDMI on a pocket camera :)

An important thing to test is given the overheating problems of the RX100IV whether external recording will help. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My friend took delivery of his RX10mk2 today. I played with it for about an hour. The image quality is superb. Sony has really fixed almost all my issues with the first version. Namely the zoom speed while recording is variable based on how much you toggle the switch- and it can be quite fast if needed.  There is a full Picture Profile menu, but with only Cine1 and Cine2 from the cine-gammas. Not a big issue but I will miss Cine4.

As for people saying you can't get bokeh with this camera- you can definitely get bokeh and good focus is actually quite critical even on wider shots. I kept the lens at f2.8 the entire time, and it is softer there than say f5.6. The internal ND is helpful but you'll need additional ND 0.6 to hold wide open in direct sunlight at ISO 100, do the math out if you want to shoot Slog2 at 400/800.

These are frame grabs from resolve. I shot 1080/24p, f2.8 at ISO100/200, Cine1/Pro, added filmconvert. 

It is a solid camera and I wouldn't hesitate to take it anywhere. I can see it being a great option for Doc 1-man band shooters, it is quite manageable once you have it programmed. The intelligent-active steadishot was very impressive too. I think paired with a tight little cage to hold the xlr audio adapter and the SmallHD 502/Sidefinder you could really work quite hard with this thing.

 

rx102_1.7.1.jpg

rx102_1.7.2.jpg

rx102_1.5.1.jpg

rx102_1.4.1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone could do a comparison with Panasonic FZ100 that would be very much appreciated. The price difference right now is huge and it is likely to remain pretty substantial for the foreseeable future. If slo-mo is not something you're after, FZ1000 still looks like a best-buy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My friend took delivery of his RX10mk2 today. I played with it for about an hour. The image quality is superb. Sony has really fixed almost all my issues with the first version. Namely the zoom speed while recording is variable based on how much you toggle the switch- and it can be quite fast if needed.  There is a full Picture Profile menu, but with only Cine1 and Cine2 from the cine-gammas. Not a big issue but I will miss Cine4.

 

The skintone is nice 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...