|
I put the Tough TG-1 through its paces at the lake with my girlfriend. Sealing lives up to its bidding, and I'm really surprised at how bright underwater shots can be without any help from the flash, even on a cloudy day. I'll have some examples up soon. Two problems have come up so far that bear mentioning: 1: There is a program mode, but you can't set the focus point, and you can't manually set the aperture. It's usually fine for the most part but to be able to set it myself sometimes would be nice. That said, it seems clear this is still meant for more quick and fun shots rather than full manual P&S cameras like a G12 or S100. The focus point it chooses can be a little weird every so often. 2: The strap is incredibly strong, no denying that. The loop is huge and would easily allow you to get it on while wearing gloves, but one pretty big problem in this matter: You can't tighten the loop. I had a death grip on that camera when I was in the water. This seems like a pretty glaring oversight. I'd like to have that loop closed up snug against my wrist when I'm out in the middle of the lake. E: Oh by the way, that "Beauty" mode I hadn't figured out? Turns out it's basically its own photoshop in camera. It smooths the poo poo out of your skin to where honestly you look like a wax figure, then from there you can get nuts with the picture. Skin tone, eye color, eye and mouth size, lipstick color, teeth whitening, it's insane. And yes, maxing everything out leads to hilarious results. You can drat near make someone look like the pictures from that "crazy doll lady" that tried to sue Lowtax years ago. DJExile fucked around with this message at 15:54 on Jul 6, 2012 |
#
?
Jul 6, 2012 15:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 00:01 |
|
|
mediaphage posted:I stopped in to see what the thread thought of the RX100 I am definitely getting one. I might wait as late as Christmas to see if the price drops any, but I am definitely going to get one. It's pretty much the compact camera I've been waiting for.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2012 16:33
|
|
|
I would like to buy a simple P&S camera for my mother's birthday this week, and when I say simple, I mean it. She and my dad specifically won't want (and won't use) anything too complicated and fancy. This will be their first digital camera, as my mom's old film camera is no longer reliable and my dad's beloved Canon Elph uses increasingly-harder to find APS film cartridges. I see everyone is still recommending Canon, but is there a worthy Canon in the $100 range that can upload photos to a computer automatically, or at least very easily? Bonus points if it can shoot decent video and if it's small and light, but uploading the photos with no trouble will be the most important thing for them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2012 01:52
|
|
|
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "automatic" upload, but if it's some sort of WiFi/ad hoc connection between a computer and the camera, there are two models out right now that should theoretically have the ability to do that - Ixus 240 and 510 (not sure what they would be named on the US market). However, speaking from tech support experience, when you put any sort of "it's supposed to be wireless!" equipment into the hands of the not-so-technically-oriented, all hell breaks loose. Also, these cameras are probably out of your price range. If you're sticking with Canon, you're better off buying any Ixus (Digital Elphs in the US?) within your price range - they're not difficult to learn, since you don't have a lot of settings that you can set yourself. And they're all the same when it comes to transferring images to a computer - plugging in a USB cable and using the camera software most people seem to be able to manage (even the 80-year-olds I've spoken to). However, you could also just buy them a memory card reader and show them how to use it, to avoid any potential OS/camera incompatibility issues (especially if they're still running a computer on Windows 2000 or something, since some of the older systems have trouble recognising newer cameras).
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2012 08:17
|
|
|
I still have to remote desktop into my Mom's computer to copy-paste files from the camera to the computer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2012 15:07
|
|
|
Windows has a very simple wizard for importing photos. You connect the camera via USB, let the wizard run and it imports the photos to an appropriate location and even renames. I'd do it that way - once you've run it once, it's pretty easy for them to do it again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2012 15:37
|
|
|
Thank you, everyone. I got her one of the lower-end Canon PowerShot models, which will be just perfect for her needs, plus a 16-gig SD card and a case, and I even set up the camera before mailing it to her this morning. That's probably what I would have gone with anyway, but I appreciate the extra information!
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2012 17:54
|
|
|
Big Bad Voodoo Lou posted:Thank you, everyone. I got her one of the lower-end Canon PowerShot models, which will be just perfect for her needs, plus a 16-gig SD card and a case, and I even set up the camera before mailing it to her this morning. That's probably what I would have gone with anyway, but I appreciate the extra information! I'd talk them through downloading the photos in Windows. Once you've done it, you can (I think) save it as the default action when the camera is connected.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2012 18:28
|
|
|
You can set up auto-loading in Picasa when you put the SD card in, of course I'm not a huge fan of Picasa's organizational model but that's one step covered at least.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2012 16:52
|
|
|
mediaphage posted:I stopped in to see what the thread thought of the RX100; I can't wait to play around with one. I don't think I'll actually buy it, because that's just a poo poo-ton of money, but who knows? It reminds me a lot (and Sony, too, apparently, given the name) of the Sony DSC-R1 I used to have. I've got a trip to Disneyland in a couple of weeks where, due to toddler wrangling, I'll be keeping things as simple as possible in terms of camera gear - one mid-sized DSLR body, one walkaround prime. If I find that too restrictive, I'll probably get the RX100.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2012 19:45
|
|
|
Looking at upgrading from the camera on my iphone to a real camera. Budget is $100 to $300ish. Is it worth my time to pursue this? I'm really tired of my phone taking ~2 sec to take a picture, having lovely zoom, and being poo poo in poor light/glare conditions. Looking over the thread is the s100/95 something I should be looking at? I know nothing about photography beyond what I picked up through osmosis from my mom and her 35mm film cameras. I'd be using it in the immediate future to take pictures in dark museums (with floor to ceiling windows to boot) and at the London Olympics.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 22:47
|
|
|
I'm probably going to get an RX100 once I sell off some other gear. I'll have to try it out in the store first, but it looks like the perfect everyday camera for my uses. The MFT gear I have right now isn't enough smaller than my DSLR for me to break it out very often. The RX100, on the other hand, should be small enough to keep on hand pretty much at all times. High ISO performance is really impressive for such a small camera too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2012 22:54
|
|
|
Would I be stupid for upgrading to an RX100 from an S90? I've fallen in love with the compact form factor and the RX100 looks amazing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2012 22:58
|
|
|
My RX100 arrived today. I haven't had much chance to use it yet since I'm at work, but it's pretty cool so far. High ISO in particular is way beyond anything I've seen in a compact before. I'd say it's pretty well on par if not a bit better than my Panasonic G2 was. I've never used an S90 so I can't give any opinion on how the two compare, but everything I've seen so far suggests it's a step up from everything else in the size range. I picked mine up to be an always on me camera to compliment my D800 and so far I'd say it's going to be great for that. Now I just have to wait for Adobe to support its RAW files in lightroom.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2012 23:15
|
|
|
All it took was a short time playing around with an RX-100 to sell me on it. I've been looking for a digital solution that was unobtrusive enough to carry everywhere for when I'm not lugging around the medium format film gear. I love pretty much everything about it. Especially the fact that manual focus actually works really well on it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2012 00:59
|
|
|
gently caress, I'm tempted. I've also been looking at the Canon G1x, which is actually cheaper than the RX100 around here. But it's just too drat big!
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2012 11:21
|
|
|
I had a G10 before going to M4/3 and didn't like it all that much. Like the G1X it was very large for a point and shoot style camera. I couldn't fit it into my everyday bag and it seemed silly to have its limitations if I had to carry it on a strap anyway. What really killed if for me was the terrible low light performance, although I imagine the G1X excels in that area. For my money, I'd rather have my point and shoot be something that isn't a burden to carry around everywhere, everyday. M4/3 stuff, and the G1X possibly, are big enough that I'd need to change what I carry to accommodate them. At that point it's not much of a stretch to just carry a full size DSLR so I always wound up either carrying the big camera or nothing at all. The RX100 is small enough that even my tiny everyday bag swallows it without bulging, and its performance is pretty darn spectacular for such a teensy little camera. The only thing I don't like is how far you have to turn the focus ring in manual mode, and the peaking implementation is weird and not really what I expected. It's still by far the best MF I've ever used on a camera this size. Sorry for the lovely pictures, I haven't had time to really test it out yet. The cat pictures are at 1600 ISO.   
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2012 19:23
|
|
|
I was tempted to buy an RX100 before my trip to Disneyland. I decided against it because I figured it couldn't be too hard to keep an eye on a toddler AND photograph her and my wife while at Disneyland. I was wrong. I'm ordering an RX100 as soon as I get back (or maybe just before the next family trip). Bob Socko fucked around with this message at 16:01 on Jul 29, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2012 23:40
|
|
|
gently caress this, I'm sold. Just put my S90 up for auction, hope it fetches a decent price.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2012 13:50
|
|
|
Can someone with the RX100 try to take a few portrait headshots at 60mm 80mm and 100mm and show what kind of background blur and separation can be achieved? TIA
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2012 16:01
|
|
|
Here's a headshot of my cat at 100mm: I'll try to actually do a couple shots later this evening, but DP-review showed the lens being equivalent to f 13 on the long end for DOF, so don't expect the world from it. So far I pretty much leave it on the wide end all the time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2012 20:44
|
|
|
Considering that the S100 was an f/27 equivalent at the long end, that's still decently impressive.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2012 22:42
|
|
|
At least it's out of focus. The depth of field looks reasonably narrow - note that the tail and the right edge of the face are blurred. I just placed an order for an RX100, should arrive Friday. I feel like I've gone full circle, at least in terms of size and weight - I've gone from a pocketable point-and-shoot, to a full-frame DSLR with grip/flash/24-70 zoom, and now back to a pocketable point-and-shoot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2012 06:08
|
|
|
That's actually her corpulent belly and that tuft of fur is probably six to eight inches back from her face. I put up a gallery of some random shots if anyone wants to see more. None of them are that interesting—cats mostly, with some sky—but I did put in a shot with the auto portrait crop goofyness and a couple 3200 ISO jpegs to give a sense of what it looks like when the thing goes totally nuts on noise reduction. http://jonhustead.smugmug.com/Other/RX100-shots/24468046_kXTCt2#!i=1996273912&k=KjgdMv4 I'm incredibly happy with the RX100. I had a similar path of starting at a (not so) pocketable G10, moving to a mini version of my DSLR with the G2, and now back to an actually pocketable camera that easily beats the previous two in almost every regard. For someone like me who had M4/3 gear as a smaller alternative to a full size DSLR, this camera is a no brainer. It's much better suited to being a second everyday camera simply by virtue of its size. Compared to the G2 at least there's no compromise on quality. edit: smugmug is having issues serving photos at the moment so that link might not be so helpful for a bit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2012 15:30
|
|
|
MSRP on the Oly Tough TG-1 has dropped to $369. I'd imagine you can find it for cheaper if you poke around. I have loved the poo poo out of mine so far.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2012 15:42
|
|
|
I've just received my RX100 and uploaded a few test shots: http://parkettpolitur.smugmug.com/Other/RX100-test-photos/24523104_m7SpH6 Note: I took all of those in about two minutes, and I apologize for their shittiness. I like the performance at ISO 800 (door handle pic). The second shot of the stairs was done with DRO enabled; I think it helped. If anyone wants me to shoot or try out anything in particular, I'll try my best to help. Wengy fucked around with this message at 17:17 on Aug 2, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2012 17:06
|
|
|
poopinmymouth posted:Can someone with the RX100 try to take a few portrait headshots at 60mm 80mm and 100mm and show what kind of background blur and separation can be achieved? TIA These aren't great shots, but I did a few shots at different focal lengths for you: http://jonhustead.smugmug.com/Other/RX100-shots/24468046_kXTCt2#!i=2003790034&k=rwNRwwQ I'll let you figure out the focal length equivalents from the EXIF. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 15:37
|
|
|
You guys are making it really hard for me to wait until Christmas to get the RX100, as was my original plan. It is such an amazing little camera. Also, I can't believe I've never heard of this smugmug website. It's so much better designed for actual photo viewing than Flickr, Picasa, etc.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 16:02
|
|
|
Probably because there's no free option and the service is heavily focused on working photographers. Their userbase is muuuch smaller than any of the free sharing sites.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 16:24
|
|
|
powderific posted:Probably because there's no free option and the service is heavily focused on working photographers. Their userbase is muuuch smaller than any of the free sharing sites. Ah, I see, I just automatically assumed there'd be a free option. Beyond paying for it, a lot of people want lots of comments on their photos from the large userbase or friends on Flickr or Facebook, which would be a negative for SmugMug for the average amateur user. I'm not someone who cares about that sort of thing. $40/year is a little higher than I'd like to spend though, I have to admit, but I might do it anyway because the galleries are just so well designed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 16:46
|
|
|
It's well worth the price for me, but I'm using it for work and personal. I can't stand Flickr and Picasa—before smugmug I'd just use lightroom's built in galleries on my own hosting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 17:45
|
|
|
Banana Yaya posted:I've just received my RX100... Also purchased a RX100. Very, very pleased with the photos. As far as the video is concerned, the rolling shutter is fairly apparent. 1080p/60 is gorgeous though -- but the somewhat non-standard AVCHD codec for this iteration of 1080p (the 60 fps, bit) must usually be down-converted to 1080p/30 for uses other than simply show-and-tell. Occasionally Premiere gets pissed... This isn't a video forum - so I'm not going to harp on it, just keep that in mind when working in Premiere.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 18:59
|
|
|
powderific posted:These aren't great shots, but I did a few shots at different focal lengths for you: http://jonhustead.smugmug.com/Other/RX100-shots/24468046_kXTCt2#!i=2003790034&k=rwNRwwQ Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2012 20:52
|
|
|
The RX100 is pretty fun. When opened up to f/1.8, it is highly aberrant, although not unpleasantly so. It gets sharp quickly once you stop it down. Bonita Point by Sam Tellman, on Flickr  In the Wind by Sam Tellman, on Flickr  Untitled by Sam Tellman, on Flickr  Berry by Sam Tellman, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Aug 5, 2012 07:27
|
|
|
I got my RX100 on Friday and played around with it for a few days. Fantastic for its size, but it's not the camera for me. I found the power zoom and autofocus can't quite keep up with a toddler running toward me, which would be a regular use situation for me with the camera (vacation photos). Guess I'll finally have to start using a strap with my DSLR. I really, really hope they start using the RX100's menu system in NEX cameras. It's so much easier to navigate and understand than the NEX menus. It's not as pretty, but it's much more intuitive and actually makes sense. Bob Socko fucked around with this message at 06:48 on Aug 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 06:01
|
|
|
Bob Socko posted:I got my RX100 on Friday and played around with it for a few days. Fantastic for its size, but it's not the camera for me. I found the power zoom and autofocus can't quite keep up with a toddler running toward me, which would be a regular use situation for me with the camera (vacation photos). Guess I'll finally have to start using a strap with my DSLR. I think I'm gonna pick up an RX100 when I visit the States this week; I've heard similar compliments about the menuing system. I'm a little surprised you weren't satisfied in re autofocus and toddlers; the zoom doesn't surprise me too much, though. When it comes to DSLR straps, I gotta recommend the RS-7.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2012 08:36
|
|
|
To be honest, it could just be a question of technique or user error, but I felt like I had a lot fewer keepers than I did with my DSLR. To be fair though, fast motion toward the camera tripped up the NEX-5N I had earlier this year, so it could just be Sony's implementation of CDAF isn't on-par with phase detection. It's a bit of an extreme case though - for normal subjects, in normal situations, the camera is more than adequate. Good color, great contrast, good sharpness once stopped down one step. The camera definitely has promise, it's just not the camera for me. I have a Blackrapid strap already - the RS Sport, or whatever it's called. It's a nice strap, I've just fallen into this strange habit over the past couple of years of not attaching straps to my cameras. I got an a77 at launch and still haven't taken the OEM strap out of it's packaging.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2012 06:05
|
|
|
I just went from a massive SLR system (eos 400d, 4 different lenses, flashguns, tripods etc), sold the lot, and bought a Fuji X100. Arrived on Monday. I know it's old news now (the camera is ~18 months old), but holy hell -- everything seems to flow so much better. Normally I go out for walk to shoot stuff and come back having taken ~200 images, 1 or 2 of which might be printable. Last night I took about 45 shots, and came out with 7 that I'm very, very pleased with (the latest 7 on this page, if you're wondering). The very restriction of having just a single, prime lens without zoom, and simple 'aperture', 'shutter', 'exp. comp' dials and that's it seems to help my shooting style, I guess. All I know is I love it to bits already. Also, the sensor and lens is awesome in low light.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2012 15:47
|
|
|
Bob Socko posted:I have a Blackrapid strap already - the RS Sport, or whatever it's called. It's a nice strap, I've just fallen into this strange habit over the past couple of years of not attaching straps to my cameras. I got an a77 at launch and still haven't taken the OEM strap out of it's packaging.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 15:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 00:01 |
|
|
I hate neck straps too, if I ever use them, it's just to wrap around my hand. Currently I've got a wrist strap on my DSLR for safety's sake though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 15:58
|
|