p.337 #4 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
nehemiahphoto wrote:
It never disappoints
If you wouldn’t mind, are these jpg which are then treated or are you developing completely raw? I have a weird experience with my rx1 that I cannot get the same kind of sharpening in developed photos. It’s not that they aren’t sharp but they lack some pop the jpg have. Which is jsut weird, nothing like that with any other camera.
p.337 #5 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
h00ligan wrote:
If you wouldn’t mind, are these jpg which are then treated or are you developing completely raw? I have a weird experience with my rx1 that I cannot get the same kind of sharpening in developed photos. It’s not that they aren’t sharp but they lack some pop the jpg have. Which is jsut weird, nothing like that with any other camera.
Straight RAW, zero JPG interaction/influence.
I am traveling, but can post the sharpening for these if you’d like. Just let me know. Contrast increases perceptual sharpness as well.
p.337 #6 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
That would be helpful thank you. I understand light and distance and micro contrast and the like. I can get “pop” out if other gear like the 24L ii. But this camera. I don’t know what it is I cannot find the sweet spot with regularity. And I shot all 35mm previously as wel. Something is just off with my processing so I would appreciate the sharpening recipe - it would be very helpful thank you. To be fair I do get it sometimes just not regularly and it caused me to wonder if maybe the focus was off a hair - but that seems unlikely. Anyway thank you very much! Enjoy your trip.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Straight RAW, zero JPG interaction/influence.
I am traveling, but can post the sharpening for these if you’d like. Just let me know. Contrast increases perceptual sharpness as well.
p.337 #7 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
I had a thought I’m going to test when my back lets me up. I wonder if the uv filter I use (in lieu of a lens cap for speed purposes) is impacting micro contrast or something. It’s a ggreat quality filter but I’m removing it to test some things. I wonder if it affects the angles at which I get good results. I’m also going to shoot raw+jpg briefly and see what’s what with direct comparisons. Thanks again for your help.
h00ligan wrote:
If you wouldn’t mind, are these jpg which are then treated or are you developing completely raw? I have a weird experience with my rx1 that I cannot get the same kind of sharpening in developed photos. It’s not that they aren’t sharp but they lack some pop the jpg have. Which is jsut weird, nothing like that with any other camera.
p.337 #8 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
h00ligan wrote:
I had a thought I’m going to test when my back lets me up. I wonder if the uv filter I use (in lieu of a lens cap for speed purposes) is impacting micro contrast or something. It’s a ggreat quality filter but I’m removing it to test some things. I wonder if it affects the angles at which I get good results. I’m also going to shoot raw+jpg briefly and see what’s what with direct comparisons. Thanks again for your help.
Here you go! No grain added, all RAW processed, nothing done in photoshop. I use LR classic, and upon export I select:
Sharpen for: Screen
Amount: Standard
I think largely comes down to light, the lens, and processing of colors and contrast.
p.337 #9 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
h00ligan wrote:
That would be helpful thank you. I understand light and distance and micro contrast and the like. I can get “pop” out if other gear like the 24L ii. But this camera. I don’t know what it is I cannot find the sweet spot with regularity. And I shot all 35mm previously as wel. Something is just off with my processing so I would appreciate the sharpening recipe - it would be very helpful thank you. To be fair I do get it sometimes just not regularly and it caused me to wonder if maybe the focus was off a hair - but that seems unlikely. Anyway thank you very much! Enjoy your trip.
...Show more →
I had quite a few years experiences of shooting with RX1R, the lens has lower contrast than what we now used to see. I used to be very happy with the raws with little tweaking and now I look back to those old images, they looked a hit washed out to me.
Try increasing the contrast and see if it helps, at least it did for me even for smaller aperture shots. I appreciate what capture one do to Sony files too, it seems to render ARW files sharper.
p.337 #10 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
That’s really interesting. I have to think it’s something g weird with my uv filter then. Hopefully my back will be good enough to get up soon and I can go figure this out. I have to say tooling around the house randomly shooting things without the uv filter I seem to see more pop. But that could be confirmation bias or whatever. Thank you for detailing the info. I really appreciate it. I’m surprised to see nothing but standard raw and output sharpening. The one of the dog in the snow particularly stands out.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Here you go! No grain added, all RAW processed, nothing done in photoshop. I use LR classic, and upon export I select:
Sharpen for: Screen
Amount: Standard
I think largely comes down to light, the lens, and processing of colors and contrast.
p.337 #11 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
Interesting take. I see some extremely impressive images coming out of this camera. Like with any a lot is down to the photographer (just look at the Leica m10 Flickr pool most of which literally could be shot with a mobile phone)
Comparing good shots with other good gear I do feel the combo of sensor and lens have a really nice look (not that there aren’t frustrations with the camera as a whole) - I just feel that it’s either me or my copy that are having an issue. Time will tell I guess. I hope it’s just my decision to use a uv filter which proves to be a mistake though I would have though b+W would have been perfectly fine. Hopefully it’s Not some greater decentered lens or something - I’m going to begrudgingly test that too though I’m not sure I’d repair it if so. I wonder if the raw files from the original rx1 just don’t take sharpening g wel the way I was doing it like my older canon gear.
Anyway thank you. I’ll try some contrast and I also think the new texture slider adds a fair bit in lightroom too.
Cheers! jeffersoncasey wrote:
I had quite a few years experiences of shooting with RX1R, the lens has lower contrast than what we now used to see. I used to be very happy with the raws with little tweaking and now I look back to those old images, they looked a hit washed out to me.
Try increasing the contrast and see if it helps, at least it did for me even for smaller aperture shots. I appreciate what capture one do to Sony files too, it seems to render ARW files sharper.
p.337 #13 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
h00ligan wrote:
Interesting take. I see some extremely impressive images coming out of this camera. Like with any a lot is down to the photographer (just look at the Leica m10 Flickr pool most of which literally could be shot with a mobile phone)
Comparing good shots with other good gear I do feel the combo of sensor and lens have a really nice look (not that there aren’t frustrations with the camera as a whole) - I just feel that it’s either me or my copy that are having an issue. Time will tell I guess. I hope it’s just my decision to use a uv filter which proves to be a mistake though I would have though b+W would have been perfectly fine. Hopefully it’s Not some greater decentered lens or something - I’m going to begrudgingly test that too though I’m not sure I’d repair it if so. I wonder if the raw files from the original rx1 just don’t take sharpening g wel the way I was doing it like my older canon gear.
Anyway thank you. I’ll try some contrast and I also think the new texture slider adds a fair bit in lightroom too.
Cheers!
...Show more →
You might not want to hear this - I've owned 3 different copies of the same RX1R (24mp). First one for stolen after having it for 4 years, bought a used one and the rendering was gritty and seeming not as sharp (hard to describe, it's "sharp" but not pleasingly so), didn't know it after comparing my older photos shot with the older copy. Sold it and bought one more copy and pretty happy with it as it's in pretty clean condition...That probably explain it unfortunately
I quote one of my older post, this was shot with the 2nd copy which didn't render quite like the good copies I owned... jeffersoncasey wrote:
Browsing my RX1R photos and haven't upload this, one of my favourite shot from the trip last year. RX1R.
p.337 #14 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
h00ligan wrote:
That’s really interesting. I have to think it’s something g weird with my uv filter then. Hopefully my back will be good enough to get up soon and I can go figure this out. I have to say tooling around the house randomly shooting things without the uv filter I seem to see more pop. But that could be confirmation bias or whatever. Thank you for detailing the info. I really appreciate it. I’m surprised to see nothing but standard raw and output sharpening. The one of the dog in the snow particularly stands out.
I do bump the contrast, using the tone curve rather than the contrast slider, typically as I find results and transitions more natural. On that particular photo, part of the pop at least, is the ledge my dog is standing on. It's shot at f2, and behind is a valley that's probably a quarter mile off, but it looks to be a pretty natural transition in that photo.
I've owned something like 8 or 9 RX1/RX1r/RX1RII's, and my experience has been that the models render differently, but always with lots of pop and contrast, even wide open. So, not sure if you have a bad copy or UV filter or drab light, but your experience is puzzling to me.
I can think of a couple but very few lenses with more micro-contrast, like the ZM 35 1.4 which is just screaming. But the RX1 sonnar has as much contrast the Sigma Art lenses, Batis lenses, ZA lenses, Sony GM lenses, Tamron's or really anything else. I realize some new lenses have less CA, but I don't get the feeling of color depth and micro-contrast as I do with some Zeiss glass.
I was just reading in another thread multiple people preferring the colors and contrast of Zeiss to CV lenses, which is my experience as well, despite owning many CV lenses and really wanting to like them as much because the ergo, prize, size and technical IQ is so impressive.
Please let me know if you figure it out, I am curious. You think maybe you have faint fungus or something on your lens?
p.337 #15 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
Thanks again for the response. No way it’s fungus - the camera lived in Arizona until the last year when I moved back to the London. I definitely al starting to believe it was the fikter. But when the light breaks (maybe in the next week!) I will pop out for some testing. There’s some construction machinery across the street which would be good for this and a “boathouse“ on the river that would also render itself helpful to this test. I’ll post back results but even early on I am thinking the uv filter is to blame.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I do bump the contrast, using the tone curve rather than the contrast slider, typically as I find results and transitions more natural. On that particular photo, part of the pop at least, is the ledge my dog is standing on. It's shot at f2, and behind is a valley that's probably a quarter mile off, but it looks to be a pretty natural transition in that photo.
I've owned something like 8 or 9 RX1/RX1r/RX1RII's, and my experience has been that the models render differently, but always with lots of pop and contrast, even wide open. So, not sure if you have a bad copy or UV filter or drab light, but your experience is puzzling to me.
I can think of a couple but very few lenses with more micro-contrast, like the ZM 35 1.4 which is just screaming. But the RX1 sonnar has as much contrast the Sigma Art lenses, Batis lenses, ZA lenses, Sony GM lenses, Tamron's or really anything else. I realize some new lenses have less CA, but I don't get the feeling of color depth and micro-contrast as I do with some Zeiss glass.
I was just reading in another thread multiple people preferring the colors and contrast of Zeiss to CV lenses, which is my experience as well, despite owning many CV lenses and really wanting to like them as much because the ergo, prize, size and technical IQ is so impressive.
Please let me know if you figure it out, I am curious. You think maybe you have faint fungus or something on your lens? ...Show more →
p.337 #16 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
Maybe there is a lot of copy variation. Definitely shouldn’t happen isn’t his price range. Fingers crossed.
jeffersoncasey wrote:
You might not want to hear this - I've owned 3 different copies of the same RX1R (24mp). First one for stolen after having it for 4 years, bought a used one and the rendering was gritty and seeming not as sharp (hard to describe, it's "sharp" but not pleasingly so), didn't know it after comparing my older photos shot with the older copy. Sold it and bought one more copy and pretty happy with it as it's in pretty clean condition...That probably explain it unfortunately
I quote one of my older post, this was shot with the 2nd copy which didn't render quite like the good copies I owned... ...Show more →
p.337 #17 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
h00ligan wrote:
Maybe there is a lot of copy variation. Definitely shouldn’t happen isn’t his price range. Fingers crossed.
I researched on this forum and turned out there were reports of copy variations. I recalled those were new copies though. As of now there could be also some possibilities where shit happens the lens assembly could've been replaced, which I doubt will be done under the same precision like the assembly line, or thoroughly tested.
Just for the record, my current copy is actually a used Japanese model, but with many language menus (with Japanese language choice on top I think). I think it's a rare model where you can only buy such in Japan as international model, I bought it off eBay from a Japanese store. Funnily there seem to be no switching between pal/ntsc though.
p.337 #18 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
Tha is for the further info. I’ve had this since new - and unfortunately didn’t use it much for a very long time and so I never realised what I now see. That said the shots I’ve taken around the house with no filter seem to bear out that it’s just fine and it was the filter. Which is so strange for a b+W filter. Despite feeling heavy and brass I wonder if it’s counterfeit. I’ll have to check my records and see where I bought it. Thanks again for all the info/help.
jeffersoncasey wrote:
I researched on this forum and turned out there were reports of copy variations. I recalled those were new copies though. As of now there could be also some possibilities where shit happens the lens assembly could've been replaced, which I doubt will be done under the same precision like the assembly line, or thoroughly tested.
Just for the record, my current copy is actually a used Japanese model, but with many language menus (with Japanese language choice on top I think). I think it's a rare model where you can only buy such in Japan as international model, I bought it off eBay from a Japanese store. Funnily there seem to be no switching between pal/ntsc though....Show more →
p.337 #20 · Sony RX1, RX1R, RX1R II and RX1R III Image Thread
h00ligan wrote:
Tha is for the further info. I’ve had this since new - and unfortunately didn’t use it much for a very long time and so I never realised what I now see. That said the shots I’ve taken around the house with no filter seem to bear out that it’s just fine and it was the filter. Which is so strange for a b+W filter. Despite feeling heavy and brass I wonder if it’s counterfeit. I’ll have to check my records and see where I bought it. Thanks again for all the info/help.
Then you can probably rule the assembling issue out. Hopefully you'll figure out what went wrong.
