So, I ditched the RX100...
Discussion
The RX100 deservedly gets a lot of love. But I've fallen out of love with it.
After another thread on here on budget DSLR v RX100 I thought I'd recount my recent experience, and my 'best of both worlds' solution:
For the last 3 years I've been a two camera guy. Canon 6D and primes for getting great photos, and the RX100 for family trips with my wife and 4 year old daughter. For landscapes and static objects the RX100 is great, however I've found when the conditions get challenging (like a child running around, or imperfect lighting) I was always making excuses for it:
"If it were just that bit lighter, it wouldn't have been so grainy", "She's just out of focus.", "Looks a little bit 'flat', but at least we had a camera with us."... I'd taken some 'good' shots with the RX100, but missed too many great ones, and had to dump way too many.
Three weeks ago, we'd booked a trip for a week around Paris and Disneyland. Photos that we'd look at for the rest of our lives. However, the camera would need to be carried by me for 10-12 hours a day, and fit inside 'carry on' hand luggage. So, the 6D, a zoom lens and camera bag were out of the question all ways round.
So, I discarded the camera bag and got a glass screen protector and a rubberised shell to fit over the 6D like this: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00CZ9RBQ0?psc=...
I discarded the 6D strap as it was always uncomfortable to me and screamed 'I have a big camera' from 100 yards and got this: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00LI7QNQO?psc=...
That's a very good strap with quick release toggles so you can detach it, put the straps on different places and put on a wrist strap like this: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00CBPIRSY?psc=...
Finally, I couldn't have a heavy lens on the end of the 6D, I wanted something compact. The 50mm Canon prime is pretty compact, but a bit narrow to have as my only lens, so I gave the Canon 40mm f2.8 STM pancake lens a punt: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B0089SWZDU?psc=...
(I don't work for Amazon, but I did buy all those things there and it was easier to link than pictures.)
The outcome:
Ergonomics
The 6D almost looks like it doesn't have a lens on it, and cut down on the weight a lot. This means that the camera hangs flat on the strap without toppling forward. The adjustable strap was pulled tight, and instantly loosened to take a photo. Most of the time I didn't bother putting the lens cap back on the lens as the glass is small and recessed and in little danger. Had it over my shoulder all day, and was perfectly comfortable either down at my hip, or pulled tighter over my stomach/chest.
Image quality
The 40mm lens at just over £100 is a bargain, and a perfect walk around lens IMHO. Sharpness is very slightly better than my Sigma 30mm f1.4 and identical to my Canon 50mm f1.4. Fully open at f2.8 it lets in an identical amount of light than the others at the same aperture. Slight vignetting fully open, but, a small trade off and not entirely bad, and can be fixed in post.
Getting the key shots
This was the killer. Portraits are detailed and look '3D'. Colours are true and landscapes have depth. I can stop action dead with fast shutter speed. I can take a photo under the Disney Castle of the dragon in near darkness, and at ISO 12,000 it looks like it was well lit. I can take photos of the firework display at night and get great shots.
Just for a fair comparison, I did take the RX100 to Disney for one of the days. I got one shot that I was happy with, and that was simply the composition rather than the quality of the photo - I wished I'd shot it with the 6D.
The outcome - I've fallen in love with taking the 6D pretty much everywhere we go as a family, and I wonder why I didn't take the plunge into doing that in the first place. The 6D of course does not fit in my pocket, but taking it around my shoulder is worth it for the fact that the shots are better in quality, and better in quantity as so much fewer are dumped.
Where does that leave the RX100? That's the thing - when I want to go out to take some photos it won't come with me.
But, what about when a DSLR really can't be taken with me, or is too obtrusive like a restaurant? There's only one thing more portable than the RX100, and that's an iPhone. And for posed photos and the odd snap, the new one is pretty bloody good.
After another thread on here on budget DSLR v RX100 I thought I'd recount my recent experience, and my 'best of both worlds' solution:
For the last 3 years I've been a two camera guy. Canon 6D and primes for getting great photos, and the RX100 for family trips with my wife and 4 year old daughter. For landscapes and static objects the RX100 is great, however I've found when the conditions get challenging (like a child running around, or imperfect lighting) I was always making excuses for it:
"If it were just that bit lighter, it wouldn't have been so grainy", "She's just out of focus.", "Looks a little bit 'flat', but at least we had a camera with us."... I'd taken some 'good' shots with the RX100, but missed too many great ones, and had to dump way too many.
Three weeks ago, we'd booked a trip for a week around Paris and Disneyland. Photos that we'd look at for the rest of our lives. However, the camera would need to be carried by me for 10-12 hours a day, and fit inside 'carry on' hand luggage. So, the 6D, a zoom lens and camera bag were out of the question all ways round.
So, I discarded the camera bag and got a glass screen protector and a rubberised shell to fit over the 6D like this: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00CZ9RBQ0?psc=...
I discarded the 6D strap as it was always uncomfortable to me and screamed 'I have a big camera' from 100 yards and got this: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00LI7QNQO?psc=...
That's a very good strap with quick release toggles so you can detach it, put the straps on different places and put on a wrist strap like this: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00CBPIRSY?psc=...
Finally, I couldn't have a heavy lens on the end of the 6D, I wanted something compact. The 50mm Canon prime is pretty compact, but a bit narrow to have as my only lens, so I gave the Canon 40mm f2.8 STM pancake lens a punt: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B0089SWZDU?psc=...
(I don't work for Amazon, but I did buy all those things there and it was easier to link than pictures.)
The outcome:
Ergonomics
The 6D almost looks like it doesn't have a lens on it, and cut down on the weight a lot. This means that the camera hangs flat on the strap without toppling forward. The adjustable strap was pulled tight, and instantly loosened to take a photo. Most of the time I didn't bother putting the lens cap back on the lens as the glass is small and recessed and in little danger. Had it over my shoulder all day, and was perfectly comfortable either down at my hip, or pulled tighter over my stomach/chest.
Image quality
The 40mm lens at just over £100 is a bargain, and a perfect walk around lens IMHO. Sharpness is very slightly better than my Sigma 30mm f1.4 and identical to my Canon 50mm f1.4. Fully open at f2.8 it lets in an identical amount of light than the others at the same aperture. Slight vignetting fully open, but, a small trade off and not entirely bad, and can be fixed in post.
Getting the key shots
This was the killer. Portraits are detailed and look '3D'. Colours are true and landscapes have depth. I can stop action dead with fast shutter speed. I can take a photo under the Disney Castle of the dragon in near darkness, and at ISO 12,000 it looks like it was well lit. I can take photos of the firework display at night and get great shots.
Just for a fair comparison, I did take the RX100 to Disney for one of the days. I got one shot that I was happy with, and that was simply the composition rather than the quality of the photo - I wished I'd shot it with the 6D.
The outcome - I've fallen in love with taking the 6D pretty much everywhere we go as a family, and I wonder why I didn't take the plunge into doing that in the first place. The 6D of course does not fit in my pocket, but taking it around my shoulder is worth it for the fact that the shots are better in quality, and better in quantity as so much fewer are dumped.
Where does that leave the RX100? That's the thing - when I want to go out to take some photos it won't come with me.
But, what about when a DSLR really can't be taken with me, or is too obtrusive like a restaurant? There's only one thing more portable than the RX100, and that's an iPhone. And for posed photos and the odd snap, the new one is pretty bloody good.
You know what? I went through exactly the same thought process last night.
The 100D at £250 would halve the weight and I think drop 30-40% of the bulk.
However, my sticking point was that I thought I would fall into the trap of leaving the 6D to fall fallow!
The 100D with any of the new 24mm, 40mm and 50mm primes would be a killer combo for £350.
The 100D at £250 would halve the weight and I think drop 30-40% of the bulk.
However, my sticking point was that I thought I would fall into the trap of leaving the 6D to fall fallow!
The 100D with any of the new 24mm, 40mm and 50mm primes would be a killer combo for £350.
That was actually my 'Option B'. That is ditch the 6D as well as the RX100 and go for the A7r or the A7r ii.
Zeiss make a couple of stonkingly sharp primes for it, and for the rest I can get an adaptor to use my Canon lenses.
The downside is it's two grand plus. That said, the 6D was £1200, and the RX100 £300 and it does the job of both, and beats them both comfortably.
Zeiss make a couple of stonkingly sharp primes for it, and for the rest I can get an adaptor to use my Canon lenses.
The downside is it's two grand plus. That said, the 6D was £1200, and the RX100 £300 and it does the job of both, and beats them both comfortably.
rich888 said:
JustinP1 what an excellent write-up and you have certainly complicated the decision making process, yet and at the same time made it somewhat clearer as to what I'm after.
I find myself despairing sometimes when trying to photograph the kids because they never sit still for very long so it really the case of take the pics as and when the opportunity presents itself and I seem to get caught wanting a much higher shutter speed so switch to shutter priority, only to note the ISO values climbing quite dramatically, or I want to blur out the background so switch to aperture priority, only to watch the shutter speed drops down to say 1/30th which isn't good when the kids are moving so damn fast.
You might find manual mode better then.I find myself despairing sometimes when trying to photograph the kids because they never sit still for very long so it really the case of take the pics as and when the opportunity presents itself and I seem to get caught wanting a much higher shutter speed so switch to shutter priority, only to note the ISO values climbing quite dramatically, or I want to blur out the background so switch to aperture priority, only to watch the shutter speed drops down to say 1/30th which isn't good when the kids are moving so damn fast.
For me, the shutter speed needs to be fast enough - at least 1/100th for kids, even 1/250th if they are moving around.
Then aperture, if they are moving and not very far away from the camera I'll stop down just to give a wider range of 'sweet spot' distance from the camera which will be in focus.
If you do it that way you have the shutter and aperture as you want it, and you can leave ISO to auto. For me, I'll live with slight grain if I can capture the photo I want, not blurred and in focus.
What would help you above that would be to move to a 'faster' lens (one that lets in more light) so you have to rely less on pushing the ISO up. The cheapest way to do that is to go with a prime lens.
Edited by JustinP1 on Wednesday 16th September 10:36
GetCarter said:
This morning. RX100. You keep ditching 'em, I'll keep selling 'em 
Believe it or not, when I wrote the first sentence of my OP, I had your photos in mind. The camera is a tool to take the photos you want to take, and for me and for what I want to do there are better options.
DibblyDobbler said:
JustinP1 said:
GetCarter said:
This morning. RX100. You keep ditching 'em, I'll keep selling 'em
Believe it or not, when I wrote the first sentence of my OP, I had your photos in mind. The camera is a tool to take the photos you want to take, and for me and for what I want to do there are better options.
Don't get me wrong - I've got some great landscape photos with the RX100 too.
It's been with me different places on holiday, in my jeans pocket hiking here and there.
For kids running round or something more challenging in terms of movement or light, I've more often than not been disappointed and wished my DSLR was more portable and wished I'd taken the photo with that.
Hence my experiment!
It's been with me different places on holiday, in my jeans pocket hiking here and there.
For kids running round or something more challenging in terms of movement or light, I've more often than not been disappointed and wished my DSLR was more portable and wished I'd taken the photo with that.
Hence my experiment!
Edited by JustinP1 on Thursday 17th September 14:58
johnfm said:
I just bought a Leica Type 109. I find one of these fits the bill just fine - good enough IQ for me, f1.8 is a fast enough lens. It is small enough for my needs. No doubt each for their own.
Yes, I looked at the 109, and also the Ricoh GR (28mm fixed lens APS-C sized sensor) for something pocketable that fits both bills for me. The other option on the horizon is the DXO (of DXOMark) 'One' which comes out in a month or so. That's an f1.8 lens and sensor as a 'sidecar' to an iPhone through the Thunderbolt port. So, you use the iPhone as the control, touchscreen and data storage.
I did a lot of research into the best 24-70 and did a comparison with the Canon 24-70 f2.8 MKII and the outside bet the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 IS.
I ended up with the Tamron. In terms of sharpness the difference (if at all) is minuscule, but you get the big bonus of IS which in low light makes a significant benefit.
Oh yes, the Canon is £1400, the Tamron is £600...
That said, my preference is an even better option - the Canon 40mm 2.8 STM prime at £110.
In terms of sharpness and light transmission it is pretty much identical to both of the other lenses, but it's a 15mm thick and 100g instead of 6 inches and the best part of a kilo.
The benefit is I don't need a bag to carry, and the 6D and 40mm goes over my shoulder on the Peak Designs strap, and it is genuinely there all day without noticing the weight. The DSLR now comes out for every outing instead of 20%.
Heres the DXOmark test comparison of the three:
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side...
I ended up with the Tamron. In terms of sharpness the difference (if at all) is minuscule, but you get the big bonus of IS which in low light makes a significant benefit.
Oh yes, the Canon is £1400, the Tamron is £600...
That said, my preference is an even better option - the Canon 40mm 2.8 STM prime at £110.
In terms of sharpness and light transmission it is pretty much identical to both of the other lenses, but it's a 15mm thick and 100g instead of 6 inches and the best part of a kilo.
The benefit is I don't need a bag to carry, and the 6D and 40mm goes over my shoulder on the Peak Designs strap, and it is genuinely there all day without noticing the weight. The DSLR now comes out for every outing instead of 20%.
Heres the DXOmark test comparison of the three:
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side...
Mr Will said:
JustinP1 said:
For that the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 would have been perfect.
As the specs show it lets in the same light as the 40mm prime, but has IS to you could probably leave the tripod at home. It's been a great all round lens for me. The only downside is the weight.
Better but not perfect, it's only a stop faster and the IS won't help freeze the dancers. I'd take a 50mm 1.4 for that personally - ISO 20000 at f4 means 10000 at 2.8 or only 2500 at 1.4As the specs show it lets in the same light as the 40mm prime, but has IS to you could probably leave the tripod at home. It's been a great all round lens for me. The only downside is the weight.
However, Speed addicted's addiction to speed falls short of compromising on needing a zoom lens.
My personal taste is for lightness, hence my love for the 40mm f2.8 prime. Personally, although I like the Tamron zoom, I mostly won't bring it due to the weight. If I were to bring another lens of that size or weight, I'd bring the Sigma 85mm f1.4 which is a big step above the Tamron in speed and IQ. That's an option worth considering if you don't mind the weight - 85mm on the camera, and the 40mm pancake in the pocket - and use your feet or cropping later for everything in between.
Edited by JustinP1 on Friday 9th October 15:45
Just seen thatCanon have just announced a new cash back deal.
So, the 40mm f2.8 pancake lens that I've mentioned in this thread goes from being £113.50 from Amazon, to having £20 cash back from Canon.
Also, the 100D body has £30 cash back too.
I'm not eligible for the lens cash back so no good for me, but might be good for someone else - especially if you are considering the 100D and 40mm portable combo.
ETA or the 28mm f2.8 prime - £20 cash back on that too.
So, the 40mm f2.8 pancake lens that I've mentioned in this thread goes from being £113.50 from Amazon, to having £20 cash back from Canon.
Also, the 100D body has £30 cash back too.
I'm not eligible for the lens cash back so no good for me, but might be good for someone else - especially if you are considering the 100D and 40mm portable combo.
ETA or the 28mm f2.8 prime - £20 cash back on that too.
Edited by JustinP1 on Saturday 17th October 18:25
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff