Sony RX10 user experience thread

[Jeff Harper]

Dave, try shooting a pic, then remove the puffer without moving the camera any more than you have to. Then take another photo. See if you can tell any difference in the second photo.

I have done just that, the darned thing actually makes no difference. It doesn't seem logical, but that's what I have found.

[Noa Put]

Originally Posted by Jeff Harper

Noa, the photos you sent me were were excellent

It's maybe worth mentioning that I shot all photos in raw but even with my limited experience in lightroom I managed to make them pop quite easily, there is still a lot to learn about the camera, I do like the live view I get when taking a photo so can see in advance how it will look like. I have been planning to sell the camera many times but every time find something about it that makes me wanna hold onto it a bit longer :)

[Todd Mizomi]

I've had the RX-10 for about a month now, and have been pretty happy with it. Like Noa, I'm finding the slow zoom during recording really tries my patience sometimes. Love the video quality - was able to incorporate it into a multi camera shoot of a recent college graduation ceremony - the footage cut well with a Sony ea50 and nx5u. Getting the footage off the card and into FCPX was a chore - had to run the avchd through a converter program to extract the individual clips into pro res format before Fcpx could read it. For some reason fcpx can read the avchd files from my canon xa10 with no problem, but it doesnt see the avchd file on the sd card from the rx10 (i'm probably doing something wrong).

On the stills side, I'm really liking the Zeiss 24-200 constant f2.8 lens. Normally when I shoot wedding photos , i'm lugging around a 5dmkii and a 7d, and 24-70+70-200 for lenses. It gets pretty tiring really fast. On recent jobs I've slowly been mixing in shots from the RX10 and my clients have had no complaints. Seriously considering doing my smaller sunset beach weddings with just the RX10 with my 5D as a backup. ;-)

Plus the fact that the RX10 lets me flash sync at up to and over 1/1000 as opposed to my 5d which tops out at 1/160-1/200, really makes me love this camera.

Planning to use this at our upcoming glamour photography workshop this weekend for both stills and video. Hopefully will be able to post some stuff on vimeo later, (but might be a little NSFW) .

[Dave Blackhurst]

@Jeff -

Took a few test shots, some were nearly identical, others noticeable differences, so it does depend on the particular "scene". I think much like the onboard mics, the pop up flash on the RX10 is better than most, and any inbuilt exposure compensation makes for better looking results.

Shoot a close shot of a person (or an object), with a few feet between the subject and the background (anywhere the target will cast a shadow) - check "shadows"... this is a pretty common shooting scenario, and you should be able to see where a diffused flash will improve the resulting shot. Basically the difference between a "hard" and a "soft" light source. Typically the latter will be more "flattering".

Just curious if your diffuser is glossy or matte finish - I just noticed I have two different "versions"... the matte one seems to be giving results more pleasing to my eye, as well as a bit more effective. They look like they came out of the same molds, maybe different materials, but I'd say the one is noticeably better.

[Jeff Harper]

Dave, interesting. thanks for sharing. It seemed to me to not diffuse that much, but I will give it another go and try it in more situations.

It would be worth taking along Friday night to see if it helps with some shots I need to take!

My diffuser is bumpy and of course opaque, certainly not glossy. just a dull plastic finish http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I bought it for my Lumix camera but it fits my Sony perfectly.

[Dave Blackhurst]

I was surprised when I noticed the glossy ones in my pile of stuff, and they don't work as well, the matte/dull work better! I think the gloss reflects more of the flash "back", seems to reduce the output even though they are about the same opacity.

They are pretty much a "universal" design - just pick the set of holes that center your pop up emitter!

I was introduced to bounce and diffusers when I noticed how you'd get harsh shadows behind your subjects (or shadows under chins or next to noses!) - it's worse the further the flash is from the lens axis of course (so it's not as bad on the RX), and is usually worse in "portrait" mode, as the shadowing will be to the left or right depending on the camera orientation.

Bounce is of course used to direct the flash off off any convenient large light colored surface to create a bigger/diffused "soft" light source. Diffusers seem to work best to soften the flash, spread, and if you're lucky "bounce" some of that single point light source.

Lighting is of course a "dark art" of good imaging - and use of flash is definitely one of those "tricks" that tends to separate the "pros" from the "average". Fill flash is another "trick" that is worth using (and the diffuser can also be useful there).

I actually have taken to sticking the diffuser on the camera (still fits in my bag that way), and just popping the flash when I think it's needed - my preference is to shoot "ambient", using the fast lens and the in camera processing, but having another "tool" in the box is always good!



There's a lot to learn on the RX's (I include the RX100 series "baby sister", as it's a fine camera for many things on its own merits), it takes a while to find all the tricks and options, but they are fun to use, and very capable when used to their full potential.

I know that there inevitably will be a "Mk2" and so on, but the RX10 is definitely a camera I've waited for a long time. The AX100 is beginning to "settle in" for me in much the same way - I'm liking the "package" of the RX100M2 (and the M3 actually looks like a decent update...), RX10, and AX100. Compact multicam, not much you can't shoot with that trio, and your "baggage" is much lighter!

[Jeff Harper]

Thanks for sharing and for the tips Dave. Will experiment as soon as I have time.

[Bruce Dempsey]

Please forgive me for asking a question in regards to comparing rx10 video to cx550v video as it may well have been addressed in this long thread
Apart from the no p mode on my cx550v is the video produced by the rx10 worth another thousand buck investment?
I have a hx300 which for my needs is sufficient in the stills department and it's video is ok.enough
I'm itching to buy another video camera but I want a dv to hdv experience.

[Noa Put]

Can't say if it's worth the extra cost over your cx550 but it certainly is worth it's price, many have complained about the fact that its' an expensive camera but actually it's not expensive at all if you see what features and especially what lens it has. I have got lenses that cost as much as the rx10 and for that price the rx10 offers you nd filters, peaking, zebra's, waveform, a stabilised constant f2.8 power zoomlens, good enough internal audio, clickless irisring, sharp viewfinder and lcd screen and a very good functionality in run and gun which is much better then any other dslr out there which is what I"m comparing it with. You can also shoot pictures in raw and while it's not a 5dIII I got some very decent photos out of it eventhough I have very less experience in photography.

It's not all gold that shines, I find the zoom much too slow and the OIS is not very good, batterylife is also not that good, those are the 3 main issues that stand out for me. If I had to take one camera only with me for photos and video and to shoot a whole variety of situations this would be the camera I would take with me. It's a swiss army knife.

[Dave Blackhurst]

I'd have to do some digging to find stuff I shot with a CX550... I'm sure you would get some improvements in quality, but I'd say you also will get better low light performance, and some boost from p vs. i. I don't think it will be as obvious as "dv to hdv", but it should be better.

Sony cameras tend to be "incrementally" better between model years, the 1" class sensor represented an entirely different "shift".

If stills are part of the requirements, you'll likely see a bigger jump there from the HX300 to the RX10 - I just dumped a card the other night with shots from both... and the AX100... Let's just say that when displayed on a 4K display, the differences start to become rather noticeable, where they weren't that big on an HD display - building a 4K system has been literally an "eye opener"... stills perhaps more than video really show the differences...

Much as Noa says, the RX10 is a competent "swiss army knife" camera that will do both stills and video at a quality level that should easily meet the expectations of a camera at this price point. You can easily spend as much for a DSLR rig, or a video camera that won't be as versatile.



Here's where it gets interesting... to get that "dv to hdv" jump, you can go 4K with the AX100, and literally get that same 4x "jump", with some limitations. I'm still adjusting to 30p motion... and experimenting with shutter speeds and computer capability!

I've shot (using the AX100, which has several modes) a bit of comparison between AVCHD 28Mbps 1080/60p (typical "best" quality on prior Sony models), XAVC S 50Mbps 1080/60p, and XAVC S 50Mbps 4K/30p. 4K is obviously insanely sharp, but the higher bitrate 1080 is also "better" than the older AVCHD, keep in mind you may need more computer horsepower to process it. No free lunch as the saying goes...

The AX100 is of course oriented towards video more than the RX10, but seems to take good stills so far in my limited use. More $$, and you may end up spending for a new high end computer too, but you'll get a "DV to HDV" jump on both stills and video!


Sony's 1" class sensor cameras are expensive, but not overly so when contrasted to older high end "consumer class" cameras, and I've sold off enough other gear to offset what initially seemed like "painful" purchases. No regrets on the purchases when I look at the resulting images.

A very real question becomes whether stuff I've shot with say an older CX, PJ, TX or HX (been shooting video with still cams for a while) is so massively "inferior" that it hurts my eyes <wink>? Nope, it's still "valid", the quality is not terrible, and the stuff that is captured, was as well captured as it could be with the technology available at the time. I could shoot with any of the cams I've owned (and some I still have!), and be reasonably happy with the results...

Here's the part that isn't quantifiable, but is widely reported... the RX is FUN to shoot with, it WILL put a smile on your face when shooting, and when looking at results. That's something that there is no "spec" for, but it's been a pleasant part of shooting with the RX100, the RX10, and so far with the AX100.

To put another angle on it, IF I had to get rid of every other imaging device (I don't consider my smart phone in that category!) I've got... the RX10 would be the one I'd keep, for image quality and versatility.

[Jeff Harper]

I'd guess that based on what you're shooting with you'd be pleased with the RX10. As Noa put it so well, all that glitters is not gold. It is not a perfect camera. But I love the video from it. Really, really great images.

[John McCully]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder as is perfection whether it glitters or not. Jeff, we know the RX10 is not perfect for you and your needs. Please understand that for others it may well indeed be a perfect camera. For me it is absolutely perfect, most of the time :-)

[Jeff Harper]

Interesting that you should single me out John. Why? My criticisms are identical to most everyone else! I praise the video quality of the camera, so I certainly do not bash it! I admit I've not been happy with the photos but I never said they were horrible, just not to my liking. I've also taken suggestions from Dave to improve things.

The camera's shortcomings are very real and EVERY professional reviewer has mentioned the same ones that Noa, Dave and I have specified: the zoom, battery life, and more. The focus ring is abysmal. These issues are not debateable, they are fact. Now, whether they interfere with a person's shooting is individual and will vary from person to person.

[Jeff Harper]

I'm doing a rehearsal dinner tonight, I'm not doing the wedding.

Customer called this morning and asked that before the speeches, (which I'm videotaping) that I use his Canon t3i for photographs of the people early in the evening.

No, I'm not comfortable using his camera, total weirdness to me, but before I call him back, I have a question.

Does anyone here have an idea of how the RX10 will perform against the rebel with an 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Lens?

I suspect the Canon Rebel will blow the Sony away at higher ISOs, but I would prefer to use my RX10 because live view is poor on the rebel, at least I think it is. I am not comfortable using viewfinders due to my poor eyesight.

The first thing that popped in my mind is how much larger the sensor is on the Canon. Common sense dictates it would be the camera of choice, but would like to get away with the RX!0. Customer wants no flash.

Any thoughts?

[Bruce Dempsey]

@Dave
Thank you sir that was a really good piece.
Is the x8 zoom just a tad short? (I realize it is a fabulous lens) but the reach is less than a sports shooter needs imo