ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Gear > Equipment
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 05-02-2013, 09:44 PM   #16
FakeName
Wile E Coyote SuperGenius
 
FakeName's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Location: San Diego
Oddometer: 1,653
I don't mind using a screen for a viewfinder- years of using a ground glass on medium and large format. Most of the things I shoot while riding- odd, funky scenics with the bike as my star- allow a more contemplative creative approach, and the LCD/ground glass is quite comfortable.

Were I shooting action, a "real" viewfinder would be my only choice. But then I'd need a "real" camera for that as well.

Different jobs require different tools.

Shooting midrange with a zoom- say 135mm(ish) is not the same shot as walking closer to a subject with a 50mm(ish) lens. Very different results- but what do I care? I typically use the shortest lens combination available to me. But that's a personal style decision, it does not imply my way is better than anyone else's.

Look at your personal shooting style for guidance. Zooms are not terribly valuable to me for the kind of shots I like to make.

I love primes.
__________________
ADVdiscount Motorcycle Product Photography


2011 White 990 Adv S
2014 500EXC Black
FakeName is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 08:24 AM   #17
Stratlanta
Flabby Adventurer
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Location: Marietta, GA
Oddometer: 205
I've gone back and forth on this a bunch of times now. For me - and this is just my opinion - I find that even though they are capable of taking great pictures, I'm constantly disappointed with cameras that don't have an actual viewfinder (and an optical one at that, but that's a whole other story). Maybe it's just years and years of SLR use and I'm an old dog trying to learn new tricks, but it's just what I've come to realize. I recently took a week long trip up the coast of CA (by cage) and had my Canon 6D and Sony RX100 with me. Both took spectacular images and the RX100 is, in my opinion, one of the best small cameras available, but again I was constantly frustrated with not being able to see what I was framing due to sun on the screen. Also, I think DSLRs are just easier to use - yes, yes, I know that's counterintuitive, but the smaller cameras just have a tendency to be too fiddly with small buttons, too much menu diving, forcing things on me that I don't want, etc. At least with the DSLR I have total control and it's easy to make changes.
So anyway, just my opinion of course. I think some of the smaller/lighter DSLR's out there would make great travel cameras. And I have to admit that I'm dying to try the Olympus OMD5..... :-)
__________________
2012 BMW K1600 GTL

Stratlanta screwed with this post 05-03-2013 at 09:08 AM
Stratlanta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 09:53 AM   #18
Albie
Kool Aid poisoner
 
Albie's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Location: Upstate SC
Oddometer: 8,668
I think the line is pretty blurry between the lower end consumer DSLR's and even the mid range 4/3 camera's. My little NEX 3 which is at the bottom end of the range can take every bit as good a picture as my old 20D and it has every bit as much manual control. Or at least as far as I want to take manual control.

It is missing a viewfinder which I find I really want at times as well. But considering the thing cost 1/4 of what my 20D BODY cost, I really can't complain.

Oh, and I picked up a Canon FD adapter so I can use my old AE-1 FD 50 mm 1.4 prime lens if I ever get around to shooting any portraits.
__________________
Good. Bad. I'm the guy with the gun.

Another day, another foot injury!
Albie is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 02:09 PM   #19
Lost Rider
Roadie
 
Lost Rider's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Location: Ventura County, California Republic
Oddometer: 3,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stratlanta View Post
Both took spectacular images and the RX100 is, in my opinion, one of the best small cameras available, but again I was constantly frustrated with not being able to see what I was framing due to sun on the screen.

Have you tried changing the screen brightness setting to "sunlight"
I never had an issue framing in direct sunlight and I don't even use the bright setting but I have a screen protector on.






There's no right or wrong in cameras just like bikes and most things, to answer this question posted by the OP:

"I want something smaller, lighter and more convenient. So, I’m looking for something that will be easy to carry and always close at hand but still capable of taking some great pictures.

To me the obvious answer is the RX-100 (since there's no direct competitor out there yet), it can go in a pocket (jeans front pocket!) or tank bag, has a big enough sensor, fun to use for experienced photographers and at $650 holds great value, especially when you're talking about spending 2-3 times as much for a MILC system with multiple lenses and many times more bulk with very little IQ advantage. I've carried cameras the size of a MILC and it still needs a dedicated storage place on the bike making it not as convenient, for me at least, and that's not mentioning when you're off the bike, still needs to go around your neck or in your hand.



The RX-100 is perfect for motorbike travels IMHO making very high quality, large file images yet as small as a P&S making it very easy to carry on a bike.
It's not a P&S, it's a photographers tool with the largest sensor in it's class in a small package.
The controls are intuitive, fully customizable and it gives fast access to whatever you want to change most.
Fast lens, fast focus, RAW files, excellent high ISO performance, etc...
I'm not sure if Stratlanta is talking about the RX specifically when he said small cameras are fiddly, but the RX has the enough programable wheels and buttons to make controlling it not much different than a DSLR, just smaller.
Like anything if you use it often it becomes second nature, I don't need to look or think about it when I want to change something.


I didn't buy the RX thinking about what it will be worth on 2-3 years, it's a bargain right now and is cutting edge, in 2-3 years it will still take the same great photos too. If it's worth $300 in 2 years when I get the next latest and greatest, then $350 for 2 years with 1000's of great images in a tiny package is a steal. Any consumer digital camera will be worth about half in 2-3 years whether it has interchangeable lenses or not, I've bought and sold many throughout the years. Granted my 5D Mark II held a little more value and my M9 held all it's investment after 2 years, but those are in a different league than anything being discussed here.




here's a thread that has some more comments and samples I posted about the RX-100 in it:

http://www.advrider.com/forums/showt...=833788&page=6



It doesn't get any easier than this when carrying cameras on a bike, I've BTDT with a wide variety.






While no award winners here, I have no issue getting results for MC travels that make me happy with the RX-100.








































__________________
Photography for me is not about recreating what I saw through
the viewfinder but to show people the way I want to see the world.

LostRider.com

Lost Rider screwed with this post 05-03-2013 at 02:19 PM
Lost Rider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 03:09 PM   #20
skierd
Wannabe Far-Rider
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Location: Fairbanks, AK
Oddometer: 2,858
Hadn't heard of the RX-100 before, but that little camera seems like a winner to me.

Me personally, I like my DSLR (pentax k30) and its moderately long zoom (18-135mm), especially since both are weather and dust sealed. With the moderate zoom, which is only slightly longer than the kit lens, I never have to change lenses for 99% of what I'm doing. I'd like a couple wider fast primes for sure, particularly when the northern lights come out or if I'm shooting inside, but for most of my time this is the perfect setup. But I found for me, if I just want a snap shot I'll use my cell phone and if I want a nice shot I'll use the DSLR, and if I just want to have fun I'll bring a film body.
__________________
"We wish your trail a long one" - Darlene "Sid" Dowd ~ Never run out of traction, ideas, and real estate at the same time.
2008 Yamaha WR250X
Eastern TAT 8/2009 ~MD-Key West-Oklahoma 4/2011~Maryland to Alaska 3/2012
skierd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 03:53 PM   #21
Herbivore63 OP
Adventurer
 
Joined: Sep 2012
Location: Victoria, B.C.
Oddometer: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lost Rider View Post

There's no right or wrong in cameras just like bikes and most things...

To me the obvious answer is the RX-100 (since there's no direct competitor out there yet), it can go in a pocket (jeans front pocket!) or tank bag, has a big enough sensor, fun to use for experienced photographers and at $650 holds great value, especially when you're talking about spending 2-3 times as much for a MILC system with multiple lenses and many times more bulk with very little IQ advantage. I've carried cameras the size of a MILC and it still needs a dedicated storage place on the bike making it not as convenient, for me at least, and that's not mentioning when you're off the bike, still needs to go around your neck or in your hand.
Lost Rider....Great photos! Those are front page material.

They certainly demonstrate that the RX-100 has the capability to take great pictures if the photographer is up to the task. I've looked at it on several occasions, but I always cringe at the thought of spending that much for a P&S. That's probably not entirely rational given it's capabilities. You make a great case for it....
Herbivore63 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 04:38 PM   #22
Lost Rider
Roadie
 
Lost Rider's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Location: Ventura County, California Republic
Oddometer: 3,109
Thank very much, glad you like!

Most things, especially when "best" is used is always subjective, but going on being most compact, easy to use, and great IQ the RX is a game changer. I think it's a great camera that's fun to use and I also think it's good for us consumers because all the other camera makers will be trying to catch up and surpass the RX, jamming bigger sensors in smaller packages in the near future, giving us even more options.

Add in a magnetic polarizing filter and it's a perfect carry everywhere camera that doesn't sacrifice IQ for it's small size.

Good luck in your decision, fact is there's plenty of choices for quality cameras, only you know what's most important for your needs!



One more fun RX100 photo.

__________________
Photography for me is not about recreating what I saw through
the viewfinder but to show people the way I want to see the world.

LostRider.com
Lost Rider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 05:11 PM   #23
kelsow
Beastly Adventurer
 
kelsow's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Location: Halifax Nova Scotia
Oddometer: 1,104
Simply amazing quality. I don't see ANY pixels. Nothing at all.
__________________
"Kelsow's helmet is so tight, it cuts off the circulation to his personality."
Location: Doucheonia
Ride: 2010 BMW F800GS
Site: dualsport.ca and rideatlantic.ca
kelsow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 05:11 PM   #24
luckychucky
Studly Adventurer
 
luckychucky's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2011
Location: SE Missouri
Oddometer: 944
Hdr

Is it called HDR? What is it when you layer the pics called? Is the RX-100 an HDR camera?
luckychucky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 06:00 PM   #25
Lost Rider
Roadie
 
Lost Rider's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Location: Ventura County, California Republic
Oddometer: 3,109
Quote:
Originally Posted by luckychucky View Post
Is it called HDR? What is it when you layer the pics called? Is the RX-100 an HDR camera?


Taken from Google:

HDR is short for High Dynamic Range. It is a post-processing task of taking either one image or a series of images, combining them, and adjusting the contrast ratios to do things that are virtually impossible with a single aperture and shutter speed.
An HDR image is commonly made by taking three photos of the same scene, each at different shutter speeds. The result is a bright, medium, and dark photo, based on the amount of light that got through the lens. A software process then combines all the photos to bring details to the shadows and highlights both. This helps to achieve the same task in the final photograph that the human eye can accomplish on the scene.



There's a great HDR thread in Pics forum with nice examples of what you can do with HDR.


None of my photos posted use HDR, but the RX-100 does have built in assignable bracketing to shoot HDR photos to later process on a computer and a built in HDR mode that does the processing in camera.
I've not really played with that function much honestly so I can't comment on it, I don't shoot HDR photos.


It does have a pretty decent built-in "miniature" effect I've used along with an illustration effect that can be fun, but I usually go for a more natural look. After shooting with simple Leica cameras without any "effects" at all this new fangled tech is something I don't know much about and am exploring.

The built in panoramic feature on the RX100 works pretty well too, but I think most new cameras have that function. I still shoot single exposure shots to combine later in Photoshop, the sand dunes photo above is from two photos combined, but it's nice to have it built in for when I'm traveling and without a laptop, just using a iPad mini for photo review and sharing. Anytime you use any built in effects on the RX100 it comes out as a JPEG since it's processed in camera, I shoot RAW files only otherwise.



Minature




illustration









built in panorama function:




If anyone wants to pixel peep these or other RX100 photos, there's links to my smugmug gallery on my site where you can see the full res files.
__________________
Photography for me is not about recreating what I saw through
the viewfinder but to show people the way I want to see the world.

LostRider.com
Lost Rider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 07:03 PM   #26
luckychucky
Studly Adventurer
 
luckychucky's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2011
Location: SE Missouri
Oddometer: 944
Pretty Cool

I like it, good pics. Illustrated is way cool. Thnx.
luckychucky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 07:19 PM   #27
Stratlanta
Flabby Adventurer
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Location: Marietta, GA
Oddometer: 205
Great, great shots Lost Rider. Excellent examples of what the RX100 can do. I'm taking it with me in a couple of weeks on a bike trip and will play with the screen brightness. Thanks!
__________________
2012 BMW K1600 GTL
Stratlanta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 11:02 PM   #28
Callahan
Beastly Adventurer
 
Callahan's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2009
Location: Pacific Rim
Oddometer: 1,175
Olympus TG-2 iHS

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2
Callahan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-2013, 11:29 PM   #29
jbar28
Gnarly Adventurer
 
jbar28's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Oddometer: 161
Quick grab shots

After looking at some of Ghost Rider's images, there's no way I'm going to post any of mine here! Certain proof that any quality camera in the right hands can produce stunning shots. Well done!

I used to be much more concerned about image quality. I once mountain-biked all over Moab for a week with 15 pounds of Hasselbald medium format gear in a big padded fanny pack bag. I was younger, stronger, and dumber then. Now I'm more concerned with a decent image than none at all. My road trip equipment is a high-end P&S in a tank bag. For a long time a Canon G10 which was great until I killed it, and now a Panasonic Lumix LX7, which has a great wide-angle Leica lens but overal I'm still struggling to like it after 3 Canon's in a row. I think nearly any quality camera can take great shots when you take the time to set them up, it's more important to find one you're comfortable with and like the way it works. I wouldn't want to bother with changing lenses while on a ride, so something with a zoom works better for me, and I do use it in between the ends.

What I wish I could get better at is the one second grab shots, mostly while moving slowly. Shots that I don't want to stop for, either because it's not quite worth stopping for, or I'm not comfortable stopping there. I just got back from 21 days riding through Spain and Morocco, and there are lots of shots I wish I'd been able to take while on the bike. I'd settle for lower quality over no pic at all. I know a GoPro with a remote could help, but I'd love to have a left-handed compact camera on a magnetic mount or other secure holder up near the handle bar, something I could grab when I don't need the clutch, take a quick shot with the glove on, and put it away. Not the safest thing, I know, but I'm careful.
jbar28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-2013, 05:17 AM   #30
FuzzyDunlop
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Melbourne
Oddometer: 203
+1 on the RX-100. Simply THE best pocket camera out there. Sensational image quality.
__________________
Currently riding 2013 KTM 1190 Adv R

Check out my blog and let me know what you think
FuzzyDunlop is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 11:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014