Sony Classic VW's and the Magical Rx1.

Lucille

Veteran
Location
Hepcat City
Went to a car meet of classic VW's, So-Low car club, hung out with the boys and snapped images with the mighty point and shoot, Rx1.

Now I have read on various forums some hate on the Rx1, and I could care less whome hates it, it doesn't make owning and using this camera less enjoyable for me, people have no
control and influence over me in that manner, nor does the internet hurt my feelings.

The Rx1 is the most enjoyable camera experience I have ever had, bar none....because when I hit that shutter button at night time car meets, the Rx1 gives me such rich and colorful files with a autofocus that works just fine.


0306-6.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



0306-7.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



Everytime I use this pocket rocket I get blown away, simply, the sensor rocks, the lens rocks, call me a fangirl, I don't care...


0306-13.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



0306-12.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



I may in fact buy another one, or wait on a Rx2 or whatever the upgrade might be, as me and the hubby keep fighting over whom is using the Rx1, as we both love the ease of use and the 3d pop out of it.


0306-2.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



0306-3.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



I know our images are not all that great, but this camera just inspires me so much, just when I thought my fire and passion couldn't burn brighter, along came the little Sony Rx1.
I know this camera isn't for everyone, nor should it be, we are all different and have different needs, if we were all alike and did things the same, the world would be a boring place.

I have always been motivated and inspired to take pictures regardless of what camera I used, the Rx1 though takes those feelings to another level, and I can't say enough about this little magical gem..


0306-5.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



0306-9.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)




0306-1.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



0306-16.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



0306-17.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
These are just great. Unusual to see shots like these at night. Makes the bugs look more like toys! I think you have chosen a great angle to shoot at. Love the first shot of the rusty flat-bed.
 
Lucile, you could use an old Brownie "box", and make masterpieces. So don't go telling us that all we need is a Sony Rx1, to become a great photographer! That is a subversive temptation to GAS, lust, envy, discontent, and busted budget. :dash2:
 
I want that faded red station wagon (and that RX1, too!)

awesome shots as usual, Lucille!

I am with you, Luke, on all three counts. A Type 3 wagon given to me by my grandfather was my transportation during my last two years of high school. I loved that thing.

Fantastic shots, Lucille!

Cheers,

Antonio
 
Very, very nice. Admittedly I haven't been following it all that closely, but these are the first RX1 images I've seen that really show the camera off as being something a bit special.

I've seen quite a few. Whether it works for any given photographer or not, I don't think there's any question about the images it can turn out. I think both the RX100 and RX1 are serious "raise the bar" cameras. I didn't like the RX100 and have no idea if I'll like the RX1 when I get a chance to try one, but both of these cameras are a huge credit to Sony and will no doubt have a huge influence on any number of future cameras that most of us are very likely to use and like a lot in coming years.

So Lucille, what kind of processing on these? If you tell me they're untouched jpegs, I'm gonna start drooling all over myself!

-Ray
 
Well there doesn't seem much to hate about the camera. The online world is funny. It's not a camera for me at all, but I don't get hating a camera just because I don't want it.

Anyway, just keep going with the photography. That's what matters - and these ones are a real pleasure.
 
Love the shots, don't know much about the camera or care - don't get stuck on that, it doesn't matter. What you're shooting (and by that I mean both the subject matter, the way you're setting up shots, and the final results) have the look and feel of much more artistic / professional shots than a lot of peoples' would who haven't been shooting for a long time. I can see differences in the final shots that say "I wasn't shot on a pro rig", and I can see where a pro might have used a few tricks (extra lighting, or much longer shutter times to get car lights streaming by in the background) to get them 100% of the way to "this looks like a pro took it" shots. But you're getting like 90% of the way there with a casual pocketable point and shoot camera, which is incredible. You're doing the human part very, very well, and that little camera is punching way above its weight class too.

Also I love the cars, but I kept getting distracted by the extreme inward camber of the rear wheels on seemingly all of them. Cannot imagine how short the tire life must be...
 
I've seen quite a few. Whether it works for any given photographer or not, I don't think there's any question about the images it can turn out. I think both the RX100 and RX1 are serious "raise the bar" cameras. I didn't like the RX100 and have no idea if I'll like the RX1 when I get a chance to try one, but both of these cameras are a huge credit to Sony and will no doubt have a huge influence on any number of future cameras that most of us are very likely to use and like a lot in coming years.

So Lucille, what kind of processing on these? If you tell me they're untouched jpegs, I'm gonna start drooling all over myself!

-Ray


They are all shot jpeg, have yet to shoot raw.
Minimal time is spent in photoshop, We always shoot in manual mode underexpose a tad on purpose, then in pp we will go to shadow/highlights and do some recovery and also add some brightness if needed, Contrast and Saturation is also tinkered with, and of course resizing for the web. Maybe between 2 -4 minutes spent in pp on each image.
So no, there are not untouched jpegs, but they are not heavily edited either.

For whatever reason, by underexposing just a tad, I think all cameras make better color. Especially during the day when they sky/clouds are involved. I have done this on all my cameras, the problem with this technique is atleast on the e-pl1's that I use, you often get noise in the shadows, not so much with the Rx1 and OMD. But a little noise to me is acceptable.

What I do may not be a good process, I don't know, as I have much to learn with photoshop, as I am shooting images and adjusting shutter speeds, aperature, iso, I am looking at the LCD screen seeing how they effect the scene, and asking these questions as I do it. Am I getting a good exposure. Does the scene look the same as what my eyes see. Is the composition acceptable. And if using manualy focus, am I focused on what I want sharp.

Then in photoshop my mind works the same way.

I try and capture the scene and colors as the eyes see it in person. I often encounter car images on the web that are rather heavily photoshopped and I know it didn't look like this in person. And thats ok, a heavily pp image can be a thing of beauty and a work of art, but that isn't my style. I have often thought if you can capture a image with proper settings, exposure, alot of pp isn't needed. Which to be honest, I only enjoy just to see how the images came out, not to see how or what I can do with a image, in other words I rather would spend more time shooting then in photoshop. I am not saying this is the right way, just saying this is what I do with my limited skillset.
 
Love the shots, don't know much about the camera or care - don't get stuck on that, it doesn't matter. What you're shooting (and by that I mean both the subject matter, the way you're setting up shots, and the final results) have the look and feel of much more artistic / professional shots than a lot of peoples' would who haven't been shooting for a long time. I can see differences in the final shots that say "I wasn't shot on a pro rig", and I can see where a pro might have used a few tricks (extra lighting, or much longer shutter times to get car lights streaming by in the background) to get them 100% of the way to "this looks like a pro took it" shots. But you're getting like 90% of the way there with a casual pocketable point and shoot camera, which is incredible. You're doing the human part very, very well, and that little camera is punching way above its weight class too.

Also I love the cars, but I kept getting distracted by the extreme inward camber of the rear wheels on seemingly all of them. Cannot imagine how short the tire life must be...

The extreme camber is a result of the swingaxle transmissions found in 1967 and older VW's, the later IRS trannys don't suffer this as much. A lifted Baja with a swingaxle has the camber going in the opposite direction. You are correct, it does shorten tire life.
 
Here are some indoor shots of this same car club, shot of course with the Rx1, and again, me and hubby kept fighting back and forth for the camera, taking turns getting shots. Many folks were there with big DSLR's and big lenses, and I think we were actually annoying them with our tiny 'point and shoot' Sony Cybershot, I suspect many thought we were rather clueless....which I prefer actually.


supn-3.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



supn-7.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



supn-8.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



supn-9.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



supn-10.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



supn-11.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



supn-14.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
They are all shot jpeg, have yet to shoot raw.
Minimal time is spent in photoshop, We always shoot in manual mode underexpose a tad on purpose, then in pp we will go to shadow/highlights and do some recovery and also add some brightness if needed, Contrast and Saturation is also tinkered with, and of course resizing for the web. Maybe between 2 -4 minutes spent in pp on each image.
So no, there are not untouched jpegs, but they are not heavily edited either.

For whatever reason, by underexposing just a tad, I think all cameras make better color. Especially during the day when they sky/clouds are involved. I have done this on all my cameras, the problem with this technique is atleast on the e-pl1's that I use, you often get noise in the shadows, not so much with the Rx1 and OMD. But a little noise to me is acceptable.

What I do may not be a good process, I don't know, as I have much to learn with photoshop, as I am shooting images and adjusting shutter speeds, aperature, iso, I am looking at the LCD screen seeing how they effect the scene, and asking these questions as I do it. Am I getting a good exposure. Does the scene look the same as what my eyes see. Is the composition acceptable. And if using manualy focus, am I focused on what I want sharp.

Then in photoshop my mind works the same way.

I try and capture the scene and colors as the eyes see it in person. I often encounter car images on the web that are rather heavily photoshopped and I know it didn't look like this in person. And thats ok, a heavily pp image can be a thing of beauty and a work of art, but that isn't my style. I have often thought if you can capture a image with proper settings, exposure, alot of pp isn't needed. Which to be honest, I only enjoy just to see how the images came out, not to see how or what I can do with a image, in other words I rather would spend more time shooting then in photoshop. I am not saying this is the right way, just saying this is what I do with my limited skillset.

Glad to know there's SOME level of PP involved. It wouldn't be fair if any images came straight out of the camera looking that good!

I tend to underexpose either 1/3 or 2/3 of a stop as well (except for obvious backlight or shooting out of shadows situations) because I tend to like the results better too. Its the exact opposite of ETTR, but in really low light where noise is most likely to be an issue, I tend to be happy darkening the shadows anyway, so it LOOKS like low light...

Thanks for the explanation,

-Ray
 
I find that underexposing an Olympus camera in particular just exacerbates their tendency to oversaturate colours such as reds and especially blue skies. I finally got sick of having to fix it so often and so I went and changed the Hue, Saturation, & Luminance settings in my E-M5 Lightroom preset.
 
Very nice work Lucille! I really like some of the angles and perspectives you chose, keeps it visually interesting and there's some really cool VWs there.

I must admit have a hard time bonding with the RX1 interface and slow AF (lost more than a few people shots indoors hunting for focus), but its the image output that keeps me hooked. That sensor and lens combo is fantastic, as your images show. Great low light performance, resolution, and can't put my finger on exactly what does it, but I love the overall rendering.

Glad the RX1 is working well for you and you're enjoying it!
 
Very nice work Lucille! I really like some of the angles and perspectives you chose, keeps it visually interesting and there's some really cool VWs there.

I must admit have a hard time bonding with the RX1 interface and slow AF (lost more than a few people shots indoors hunting for focus), but its the image output that keeps me hooked. That sensor and lens combo is fantastic, as your images show. Great low light performance, resolution, and can't put my finger on exactly what does it, but I love the overall rendering.

Glad the RX1 is working well for you and you're enjoying it!

Honey, I was so used to my E-pl1, and used it all the time, that the Rx1 controls, interface, focus never seemed like a issue, then I have a Sony a65, so was already used to the menus...

Coming from my beloved E-pl1's, which are probably the lowest of all micro 4/3rds bodys, the Rx1 was a breeze and huge upgrade.
 
Wonderful photos, Lucille. Your vision and processing make these great, and the RX1 seems like the right camera for the job as well. I tried one in the store and thought it was operationally very intuitive and plenty quick.
 
Back
Top