A Man called Murph (and a search for a camera...your help needed)

[Steve Noel]

But back to your camping trip for a sec. Your first mistake was getting into your sleeping bag with all your clothes on. When you do that, you don't allow the heat to warm up the space between your body and the inside of the bag, that's how sleeping bags work. Sleeping in cloths in a sleeping bag is a no-no, you'll never get warm. Even at home on the sofa, ever fall asleep on the sofa after a big Christmas dinner and wake up cold?. Same principle.
I rode up from Germany in October, arrived in Denmark then Sweden in November then Nordkapp Norway in Dec and Jan. I was the first motorcycle sidecar at Nordkapp on Jan 1st. Temps all the way from middle Sweden never got above -15ºC which is 5ºF, and at night sometimes went down to -25ºC, 13ºF.

I camped out most of the way, it wasn't easy, challenging and cold, but once you stick to a few simple principles and rules it's do-able.
You take off your main layers first, pants and heavy sweater, get into the bag, then as the inside of the bag starts to warm remove your layers down to your underwear. Of course, you need a bag that is rated for zero and below for this to work. Ok, lesson over.

I totally agree. Get out of the clothes as quickly as possible. You sweat during the night (even if you are cold). The evaporation of the sweat into your clothes, carries off body heat. And, the next morning you will be shivering in your wet clothes. Saw guys try wearing the clothes in an arctic bag, in the military. Not pretty. Sweat is very dangerous in very cold weather. Ice will freeze against the skin, and then hypothermia sets in. We lived in Alaska, (down to -63f more than once,) and worked outside, for several years. After 62 years old, and heart failure, decided to move back South and let the old bones warn up.

 

[carlb]

Hmmm.

For no compromise on image quality from what you're used to, the only compact game is the RX1. I'm with Strat on that. Minuses to the RX1 - external viewfinder, no weather sealing, only one fixed (amazing) lens.

If you're really needing some weather sealing with a bit of rugged and do I remember video? High performance? No question: the Panasonic GH3. It's the closest to your rugged, weather-proof Nikons and Canons that you'll get at near the image quality you're used to, but in a considerably smaller and lighter frame.

My guess is the GH3 best suits your needs, but something like the Fuji X-Pro speaks better to your wants.

 

[Irish Murph]

Hmmm.

For no compromise on image quality from what you're used to, the only compact game is the RX1. I'm with Strat on that. Minuses to the RX1 - external viewfinder, no weather sealing, only one fixed (amazing) lens.

If you're really needing some weather sealing with a bit of rugged and do I remember video? High performance? No question: the Panasonic GH3. It's the closest to your rugged, weather-proof Nikons and Canons that you'll get at near the image quality you're used to, but in a considerably smaller and lighter frame.

My guess is the GH3 best suits your needs, but something like the Fuji X-Pro speaks better to your wants.

Needs and wants, yes. The thing I don't like about the GH3 is the aesthetics of the body, not as sleek and compact as I would like a compact to be. it still resembles a full-size dslr. And I don't need weather sealing. Not with this one, I have the D700 and D3s for that. Video?. Would be nice, but the more I research it, the less of an important feature it becomes. I'm more concerned with the camera and not the video.
The RX1 lens is supposed to be spectacular indeed, and the fixed 35, well, kind of forces you to be more of a photographer, more creative in your shooting and composition really. So that aspect I don't mind too much either. I could live with that if all else were good.
Xpro is starting to look real good.

 

[Ray Sachs]

•DOF is very important to me, I love it.

•From what I've read about the RX1 I get the feeling that it's a great camera, but like Leica, seems to have snob appeal and is overpriced. I could be wrong, but that's why I joined SC, to communicate with people like you who are more familiar with them.
.

The RX1 is a great camera, is expensive but arguably not overpriced (see anything close for less?) and the snob appeal is optional equipment (but with no additional charge!). If you like narrow DOF, small size, full frame DR and high ISO, etc, you can't touch it without going for a much larger setup, which you already have. Downsides are no built-in viewfinder and not particularly fast AF, but from the looks of what you shoot, the AF should be fine. The raw files are sublime.

I had an X-Pro. If you want interchangeable lenses, it's obviously better. The hybrid viewfinder is wonderful. The IQ is quite good but the raw files don't really compare to the RX1 - nothing else I've shot do. Your full frame gear probably comes very close, but unless you have a D800, I don't think it matches or tops it.

Good luck,

-Ray

 

[carlb]

If you do decide on a Fuji and you use Macs, the Iridient raw developer is a must. Do the rest of post with whatever you'd like, but the Iridient software really makes a big difference for detail from the X-Trans sensors.

 

[pniev]

So I've been told and I tried it but I haven't been able to see much difference for the type of shots I take (and I use a 30" calibrated EIZO monitor to compensate for my aging eyes). At least not enough to justify another step in the workflow. Probably I need to test a bit more then. Thanks.

If you do decide on a Fuji and you use Macs, the Iridient raw developer is a must. Do the rest of post with whatever you'd like, but the Iridient software really makes a big difference for detail from the X-Trans sensors.

 

[pniev]

........... but the raw files don't really compare to the RX1 - nothing else I've shot do. Your full frame gear probably comes very close, but unless you have a D800, I don't think it matches or tops it.

Ray, did you compare full size raw files at 100%? I did spend quite some time on comparing photos taken with the D800E and the x-pro1 (so not the RX1) in LR. Obviously at 100% the difference in detail is huge (e.g. ability to read a number plate of a car that is only a minor part in a photo) but those differences are gone when dimensions of photos are made equal. So the real advantage (besides the typical useability pros) related to cropping and large size printing. That was not enough for me to accept the extra size and weight.

BTW: I love the size and IQ of the RX1! Unfortunately it lacks an OVF.

Peter

 

[Ray Sachs]

Ray, did you compare full size raw files at 100%? I did spend quite some time on comparing photos taken with the D800E and the x-pro1 (so not the RX1) in LR. Obviously at 100% the difference in detail is huge (e.g. ability to read a number plate of a car that is only a minor part in a photo) but those differences are gone when dimensions of photos are made equal. So the real advantage (besides the typical useability pros) related to cropping and large size printing. That was not enough for me to accept the extra size and weight.

BTW: I love the size and IQ of the RX1! Unfortunately it lacks an OVF.

Peter

I haven't compared it with a D800, but I've compared the RX1 files with the various Fuji X-Trans, with the Nex 6 (currently doing a comparison of the RX1 and the Nex 6 with the Zeiss 24mm), the OMD, the Nikon A, GR, etc, etc, etc. There's a difference in detail but that's not my primary concern - if it was the DP(1-3)M series blows them all away. Where the RX1 sensor is amazing and notably more impressive than any of the APS or m43 gear I've owned and shot with is in terms of DR and low light/high ISO. The raw files are just incredible to work with. How often you NEED that difference is another question - generally not all that often. But its nice having one camera in the bag that's no compromises, at least by today's standards. And that's the sensor. Then there's the lens, which as Luke so aptly puts it, is made of magic unicorn powder (because I can't explain it technically, but its wonderful). The whole package just creates incredible images. The more I look back at my book of images from Italy in July, the RX1 images just stand out more and more in both obvious and subtle ways. Which takes nothing away from the Nikon A, XE1, OMD, and DP1M I also shot with on that trip - those are all wonderful cameras and none of them are going anywhere anytime soon. But the RX1 has something extra...

Its also really nice to shoot with, lack of OVF aside....

-Ray

 

[Luke]

The more I look back at my book of images from Italy in July,

Ray, any chance there is a cheapo digital version of that book to peruse. If there's too much family stuff in there and you want to keep it private, I would certainly understand. But I'd love to see those photos in a book form and all in one place.

 

[Ray Sachs]

Ray, any chance there is a cheapo digital version of that book to peruse. If there's too much family stuff in there and you want to keep it private, I would certainly understand. But I'd love to see those photos in a book form and all in one place.

Yeah, I think I put a link to it in the endless thread from the trip, but here you go - a free PDF... It doesn't have ALL of the images, but I guess my favorite 130 or so...

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzYbLKEAQf-lR25HUXNNT0lseU0/edit?usp=sharing

-Ray

 

[Irish Murph]

Yeah, I think I put a link to it in the endless thread from the trip, but here you go - a free PDF... It doesn't have ALL of the images, but I guess my favorite 130 or so...

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BzYbLKEAQf-lR25HUXNNT0lseU0/edit?usp=sharing

-Ray

Bloody great shots Ray. Lovely stuff indeed. I like the flavor of how you shoot. Much pp in them?.
And was that a mix of cameras or was that all RX1?.

 

[Ray Sachs]

Bloody great shots Ray. Lovely stuff indeed. I like the flavor of how you shoot. Much pp in them?.
And was that a mix of cameras or was that all RX1?.

Thanks Murph - appreciate it. The PP varies - a few have a lot, most have a bit, and a few have almost none. I play with 'em until they look right and that seems to depend on the shot and my mood that day...

I had five cameras with me and all of them are represented in the book. The most used was the RX1, but if I combined the two 28mm equivalents (Nikon A and a loaner Sigma DP1M) they had slightly more than the RX1 (this is of my total shots - I haven't really checked how the book shots break down on that). And I had a Fuji XE1 with the 14mm (21mm equivalent) lens to handle my wider angle shooting and it was fairly lightly used, but a good deal more than the OMD with the 75 (150 equivalent), which I mostly used for family candids. So, mostly 28 and 35, with more at 28. But if I hadn't had the DP1M loaner around, I suspect the RX1 would have gotten the bulk of the shots - I usually just took that out to get some of these scenes with max resolution and if I hadn't had it I'd have taken the RX1 more than the Nikon I suspect. But both were wonderful depending on what I was shooting...

-Ray

 

[Irish Murph]

Ray,
Thanks for all the info.
I am now back in the US, flew back here last week from Finland.
I decided to leave the bike unfinished in Finland and spend the Christmas season with Mum in Boulder, CO. But in all the time I was in Finland I was always researching a compact, but just couldn't decide on one. I was close to pulling the trigger on an X100s, but the fact that there were so many used ones FS on the boards over on FM bothered me a bit, but nonetheless it's super compactness and nearly pancake lens and pocketability were it's main factors for me. I also wanted an all black compact, and the silver x100s bothered me too. I know, black gaffers tape, but still, they should have made one in all black for those like me that want to go all stealth. They made an x100 all black, but not a 100s.
Then, the day before I was going to commit, this came up for sale at a price that I knew that hesitation was futile.......

It was a "buy it now" for about 1/3 less than retail or watch it be bought by someone else. So I did. It's BNIB from a camera store employee who passed the discount on to me.
So I may be pm'ing you on the Idiots Guide to the RX1r. I'm running through the menu's, seem pretty easy. Taking it out this morning on my 5 mile run to stretch it's legs and get initial impressions.
Please feel free to throw out any and all tips you care to.

Murph.

 

[pniev]

No tips, just congratulations! Looking forward to seeing the photos. Have fun with the camera.
Peter

 

[biglouis]

Murph

Congratulations. The RX1 or RX1r is really three focal lengths in one, 35-50-75 because of the amazing ability to crop. I did an impromptu shoot of my nephews wedding armed with on the RX1 a couple of months ago - my sister announced as I arrived that I needed to take photographs and I assumed they had hired someone! I only had the RX1 with me but I still managed to capture most of the ceremony, even from the back of the congregation thanks to the cropability (is that even a word?) of the sensor.

Mind you, be careful of serious compacts. I started with one (the DP2M) and now have four. In fact, someone in this thread should have pointed you in the direction of the Ricoh GR. You need one of these inexpensive wonder cameras just because it is the most portable, highest quality APS-C compact around. My recent Flickr stream abounds with examples.

Look forward to seeing the results of your RX1r.

LouisB
---
My Flickr stream, my latest book "Ampthill", and my website.

 

[Irish Murph]

Murph

Congratulations. The RX1 or RX1r is really three focal lengths in one, 35-50-75 because of the amazing ability to crop. I did an impromptu shoot of my nephews wedding armed with on the RX1 a couple of months ago - my sister announced as I arrived that I needed to take photographs and I assumed they had hired someone! I only had the RX1 with me but I still managed to capture most of the ceremony, even from the back of the congregation thanks to the cropability (is that even a word?) of the sensor.

Mind you, be careful of serious compacts. I started with one (the DP2M) and now have four. In fact, someone in this thread should have pointed you in the direction of the Ricoh GR. You need one of these inexpensive wonder cameras just because it is the most portable, highest quality APS-C compact around. My recent Flickr stream abounds with examples.

Look forward to seeing the results of your RX1r.

LouisB
---
My Flickr stream, my latest book "Ampthill", and my website.

Hi BigLouis,
Thanks for the response.
Yes, I've been reading up on the crop ability of the rx1, haven't played with it yet.
Initial low light "in the apt" shots are amazing, bokeh is just wonderfully dreamy, and IQ is absolutely sickening. Sharp is the understatement of the year. I'm blown away with just how sharp the images are handheld in a system that doesn't have any image stabilization in it.
These are SOC and unedited, nothing done to them....
View attachment 80938

View attachment 80939

Creamy Bokeh and my Inuit Sealskin Boots...
View attachment 80940

For some reason tho, outside it seems to have a hard time to focus lock. Landscape and close up too. Takes a few seconds while it pumps in and out, then doesn't focus on what I want it to. Probably operator error I'm sure. This is one shot that I couldn't seem to lock on to:

I'm including this shot, not for it's stunning composition (!!) but because I shot it at full ISO 25,600...

This was at 12,800...

Not the best photography examples but just initial low light hastily taken shots.

And too late for the warning Louis. I'm already looking for a second compact, this one with an interchangeable lens system as I have a fetish for some of the old Voightlander MF glass, so I want to get a compact body that I can use them with adapters if necessary. And thanks for the GR tip, I was just thinking of a simple easy to pull out compact as well to compliment the rx1. Besides, none of us have only 1 of anything, do we?. It's a sickness, but better than the one I had which was alcoholism. At least we can show and admire the fruits of having all that gear in our quest to be mentioned in the same sentence as Turnley, Cartier-Bresson, Steve Uzzell etc.

Murph.

 

[Lawrence A.]

Several people have mentioned m4/3 cameras, which are quite good. However, I'd stick with Olympus bodies, which have in-camera image stabilization, if you're looking to use legacy glass. I pooh-poohed image stabilization, which I never had on my film cameras, until the E-M5 started letting me shoot at 1/2 second hand-held. With the adapter plus the CV lenses, though, no m4/3 will be exactly tiny.