dan.carter
Well-known member
Actually, the RX10/100 allow all three adjustments much like the GH3.
or Sony RX10: What we've been looking for from Panasonic?
- Thread starter dan.carter
- Start date
Actually, the RX10/100 allow all three adjustments much like the GH3.
Exactly...does it allow saturation control Dan?
From the little I've seen that's worthwhile, and a good deal of still examples, the first thing I have to say as it pertains to the GH3 - I like the color, specifically skin tones, considerably more than the GH3.
It's why I still shoot real image and narrative stuff on Canons.
Really waiting to see some real work with the RX10...and well lit people.
From the little I've seen that's worthwhile, and a good deal of still examples, the first thing I have to say as it pertains to the GH3 - I like the color, specifically skin tones, considerably more than the GH3.
It's why I still shoot real image and narrative stuff on Canons.
Really waiting to see some real work with the RX10...and well lit people.
jonpais
Well-known member
Jim- I'm no expert at color correction or anything, but I'm quite pleased with the way my GH3 handles skin tones.
http://youtu.be/hUIdIxmar6k
dan.carter
Well-known member
Much like Panasonic Photo Styles allow setting Saturation, Contrast & Sharpening for each individual style, Sony RX10/100 Creative Styles allow the same three settings for each style.
Fingers crossed for some nicely done RX10 video soon.
Denniscasey
Well-known member
I have a AG-HMC40 (great little video camera),but have just started researching various mirrorless and DSLR type cameras for video work where I would like to vary depth of field. For a novice to the field of mirrorless or DSLR or HDSLR it seems there are many "warnings" I am becoming aware of like many features that are advertised but apply only to stills and don't work in video mode. In this context I have read about the Canon EOS 70 D (as also mentioned in earlier post on this thread). As has been mentioned many times in this thread there are no cameras that do everything. However, to help me understand what to watch out for when shopping for mirrorless/DSLR/HDSLR "still" cameras that also shoot video, I would appreciate understanding what "video" features the Canon 70D does not provide that the Sony RX10 is advertised to provide.
In no way would I say one is better than the other, just different, but just comparing 70D to RX10 to better understand what "video features" I will give up when going from HMC-40 to the other class of camera. For instance, the Canon 70D has a 22.5X15mm sensor compared to 13.2X8.8 mm sensor in RX10 and I thought larger sensors give better low light and better DOF adjustment. The 70D has phase detection focus and "dual pixel" focus which sounds good, but in real life may not be so great to focus on moving objects.
I have to say the main interest I have in DSLR type is to get more DOF flexibility for creative shots routinely accomplished with DSLR video. For instance I mostly film vintage sports car racing where the HMC-40 broad range of focus is great for capturing cars as they approach at high speed, come around curve close to me, and then go off into distance. But for some "standard type" creative shots I would like to have cars out of focus as they approach, come into focus where I want them, and then go out of focus. Same with scenery, have foreground in focus, background out of focus as is commonly done with DSLR video.
In no way would I say one is better than the other, just different, but just comparing 70D to RX10 to better understand what "video features" I will give up when going from HMC-40 to the other class of camera. For instance, the Canon 70D has a 22.5X15mm sensor compared to 13.2X8.8 mm sensor in RX10 and I thought larger sensors give better low light and better DOF adjustment. The 70D has phase detection focus and "dual pixel" focus which sounds good, but in real life may not be so great to focus on moving objects.
I have to say the main interest I have in DSLR type is to get more DOF flexibility for creative shots routinely accomplished with DSLR video. For instance I mostly film vintage sports car racing where the HMC-40 broad range of focus is great for capturing cars as they approach at high speed, come around curve close to me, and then go off into distance. But for some "standard type" creative shots I would like to have cars out of focus as they approach, come into focus where I want them, and then go out of focus. Same with scenery, have foreground in focus, background out of focus as is commonly done with DSLR video.
I've produced a few shorts and TV spots with the GH3 alone. I talked with the Filmconvert folks about developing the first GH3 presets (which I use as a first pass on most CCing.) I like what I can get, and I like a lot of what we can do with the MFT form. But there are also certain characteristics of FF cameras, lenses and certain camera's rendering of color that the GH3 doesn't reach.
But I'm sensor agnostic...as long as it meets some of the needs of a given project - slow motion, built NDs, fast zoom for some doc and action work, FF DOF and aesthetic for other parts and narrative.
I've produce with a lot of cameras, I'd love to shoot with just two. I'm certainly open to the possibility that the RX10 could become my new run and gun w/slo mo, small form camera. It certainly is the most video centric DSLR form camera on the market, needs nothing added to go in the field and get what may be there.
stoneinapond
Veteran
It's those last two that give me pause. A constant aperture zoom with this reach in Zeiss quality is certainly very attractive. But putting 20 mililon pixels on a 1" sensor just seems insane, unless that is a requirement for the whole system to function in some reasonable fashion. Sony maintains it is for low-light situations, but that seems to go against the laws of optics in that you have a small sensor with even smaller pixels. To me that is borne out in Mr Huff's short piece where he is filming his fiancee sitting opposite him on one of the rides and she is basically indistinguishable. My GH2 with a f0.9 lens, which together cost a little more than the RX 10, would have nailed that shot in all it's glory.
It would be nice if that were the case. I'll have to wait and see.
Thomas Smet
Veteran
I honestly don't know what level of controls the RX10 has. I just know that typically cameras aimed at the consumer market tend to bake in a look a lot more than professional cameras. This is because companies know 99% of the users will likely not want to configure their camera to get a good look and need to be able to yank it out of the box and start getting nice punchy HD video. That not to say the controls are not there but that they may be dialed in a certain direction out of the box. Consumer based cameras also tend to use a bit more electronic sharpening to make the detail appear higher. We saw this with the GH2 and GH3. The GH2 was gorgeous but for those that didn't like the electronic sharpening in camera you couldn't really get rid of all of it without using older a padded lenses. On the GH3 we now have more control to remove the electronic sharpening.
All cameras at a sharpness level of 0 are all different. 0 means something very different based on which camera it is. 0 on the RX10 might be more like +3 on the GH3. Same thing with saturation. 0 saturation on the RX10 will likely be very different than 0 saturation on the GH3. You cannot just yank both cameras out of the box and compare them at default settings. The RX10 is very likely aimed more towards a punchy image out of the box.
All cameras at a sharpness level of 0 are all different. 0 means something very different based on which camera it is. 0 on the RX10 might be more like +3 on the GH3. Same thing with saturation. 0 saturation on the RX10 will likely be very different than 0 saturation on the GH3. You cannot just yank both cameras out of the box and compare them at default settings. The RX10 is very likely aimed more towards a punchy image out of the box.
Right, but that's not the case with the camera we're discussing.
The parameters that we use to expand/flatten our in camera images are included in the RX10
And the fact is, there's absolutely nothing about this camera that makes it consumer, not if you look at the manual.
I've never heard of a consumer camera with all of the video centric features of the RX10.
XLR adapter, ND filter, peaking, real audio meters, uncompressed HDMI out, declicked aperture for exposure pulling and a lot of other features - none of which mean anything to a consumer or the alleged soccer mom.
The bottom line is no one knows who this is geared for or what the actual IQ might be in professional hands.
But Sony clearly created a camera with as many or more options for video production as the C100...or C300 for that matter.
If the fixed lens is as good as, say, the panasonic 12-35mm then it could be a home run.
If the AVCHD is implemented as well as on the C100, again, could be something.
The bottom line is, if the IQ is as good as the feature set, then it could be game changing run and gun camera.
Or the IQ could be horrible and this thread will die.
Either way, based on it's actual features, it's a more complete production tool than any DSLR on the market - it simply has video features that no other DSLR does.
Darren Levine
Veteran
you forgot it's main advantage over almost any interchangeable lens camera: a smooth, parfocal, constant Power Zoom
that sole reason making nearly all other options in this range a non starter for me and my intentions
that sole reason making nearly all other options in this range a non starter for me and my intentions
Right, but none of us none of us knows what the default settings and range of the controls are, but I really don't think anything is a given with this camera - it's different, in a good way, than any camera in my kit and I've got some serious cameras.
What we do know and that is that Sony has put out a feature set that checks virtually every box that thousands of us have had unchecked since we started using DSLRs in our professional projects.
And if they went so far as to include more professional video features than Canon or Panasonic or anyone else that makes DSLRs, then it might make more sense to expect that they also allowed for similar control over the image.
We'll see.
Interesting point Darren.
Even when we produced with big video cameras I usually had P&S mini 35s on the front shooting with cine primes.
But the winter we produced our first Olympic doc, I fell in love with manual and programable zoom lenses.
I got shots in the most challenging conditions, with no second take options, because of that glass.
That was the start of a lot of action and run and gun film making.
But I've grown to love the "intimacy" of filming with DSLRs and you're right, one of things that would be amazingly cool would be that unique strength of a par focal zoom in the DSLR form.
dan.carter
Well-known member
Darren,
Par-focal would be great, but I'll be very surprised if the RX10 lens is. Many were hoping the same from the Panasonic 12-35 & 35-100 f2.8 lenses.
Darren Levine
Veteran
of all the shots online, the ones with the user zooming in or out of the range, it's stayed perfectly in focus. whether thats due to true parfocalness, or a really good autofocus, the end result is the same
Thomas, it's not just a question of a 'baked in look' (the RX10 does allow PQ adjustments such as contrast, saturation and sharpness just as the GH3 does, and I think that's what Jim meant to say), but it's also a question of convenience.
The RX10 allows a 'one lens' solution. This is not the same as using the one lens solution that many use with the Panasonic 14-140 lens (as I have). The Sony lens is both stepless and a constant aperture. For those times that you need to zoom during the shooting, there will be a smoothness that is simply unattainable with any micro 4/3s lens that I know of with any significant zoom ratio. So those are qualities that I cannot get with the GH3 or my GX7. There are other pluses for the Sony such as better onboard sound quality and full sensor reading to mention two. You shouldn't minimize what the RX10 has to offer or certainly thumb your nose at it. Read some reviews and you'll see how a number of reviewers say this is a camera that's truly excellent and unfortunately might be dismissed by some because of its fixed lens nature. I can look beyond that.
It's great to be able to change lenses, but there are many times when doing run n gun type shooting that changing a lens is a PIA. You may miss the shot, drop a lens, drop the camera or get dust on the sensor in the process. It's not all roses.
I still have my GX7 for whenever the need arises. But hey, I still need to see the PQ of this unit before I give it two thumbs up. But some of what I've seen and read looks very promising.
The RX10 allows a 'one lens' solution. This is not the same as using the one lens solution that many use with the Panasonic 14-140 lens (as I have). The Sony lens is both stepless and a constant aperture. For those times that you need to zoom during the shooting, there will be a smoothness that is simply unattainable with any micro 4/3s lens that I know of with any significant zoom ratio. So those are qualities that I cannot get with the GH3 or my GX7. There are other pluses for the Sony such as better onboard sound quality and full sensor reading to mention two. You shouldn't minimize what the RX10 has to offer or certainly thumb your nose at it. Read some reviews and you'll see how a number of reviewers say this is a camera that's truly excellent and unfortunately might be dismissed by some because of its fixed lens nature. I can look beyond that.
It's great to be able to change lenses, but there are many times when doing run n gun type shooting that changing a lens is a PIA. You may miss the shot, drop a lens, drop the camera or get dust on the sensor in the process. It's not all roses.
I still have my GX7 for whenever the need arises. But hey, I still need to see the PQ of this unit before I give it two thumbs up. But some of what I've seen and read looks very promising.
PegLeg Media
Well-known member
dan.carter
Well-known member
Excellent Sony RX10 review. Korean, but good technical data, image & video samples.
http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2.php?id=slr_review&no=367
http://www.slrclub.com/bbs/vx2.php?id=slr_review&no=367
Thomas Smet
Veteran
Remember this is an electronic zoom lens with more in common with the Panasonic 45-175 zoom lens with electronic zoom than it is like any of the manual zoom lenses. This lens is designed to shoot video while zooming and so I would take a guess is 100% parfocal. The Panasonic 45-175 while dark and a bit of an awkward range and generally not the best optical quality handles zooming while shooting video very well. The SONY RX10 is kind of like the Panasonic FZ200 which also has an electronic built in zoom lens at a constant f2.8. The RX10 should be a visually superior camera to the FZ200 but the FZ200 has a parfocal electronic zoom lens at 24x. To me the RX10 is what many wished the FZ200 could have been. Except for the zoom range of course.
But it very well could be parfocal.
stoneinapond
Veteran
Thanks for the link. I'm trying really hard to like the camera and some of the video looks good. Could of done with a little less of the zooming feature, but every bit helps I guess.
Most of the photos I found a bit "meh." On the other hand there were a couple of gems.
Fixed lens = fail
While the DSLR movement was driven mainly by large sensors and shallow DOF, another reason why it is so popular is the interchangeable lenses. Before VDSL's there were no affordable video cameras with interchangeable lenses. Yes, there was the Canon XL1 and JVC equivalent but lens choice on these systems was very limited. The huge range of high quality stills lenses (both zooms and primes) available to DSLR users is a major advantage. While the RX10 lens looks great on paper, I don't want to be limited to one lens. For this reason, it's a non starter for me. While there is a definate market for a lens like the RX10s, It needs to be detatchable. I would love one for the GH3 if it is Parfocal and holds focus and aperture throughout the range without stepping. 24-200 2.8 with motor zoom and optical stabilizer would be a great documentary lens....... I'll take one without a camera please.
While the DSLR movement was driven mainly by large sensors and shallow DOF, another reason why it is so popular is the interchangeable lenses. Before VDSL's there were no affordable video cameras with interchangeable lenses. Yes, there was the Canon XL1 and JVC equivalent but lens choice on these systems was very limited. The huge range of high quality stills lenses (both zooms and primes) available to DSLR users is a major advantage. While the RX10 lens looks great on paper, I don't want to be limited to one lens. For this reason, it's a non starter for me. While there is a definate market for a lens like the RX10s, It needs to be detatchable. I would love one for the GH3 if it is Parfocal and holds focus and aperture throughout the range without stepping. 24-200 2.8 with motor zoom and optical stabilizer would be a great documentary lens....... I'll take one without a camera please.