xdayv
Top Veteran
- Location
- Tacloban City, Philippines
- Name
- Dave
Now that is has been announced, will this be a difficult choice to choose between this and the RX1? (Considering the price is the same). Interested to know your thoughts...
Wow!! Those images do look pretty amazing compared to the current RX-1. So same price, sharper images......why would anyone buy the std RX-1???The guys at Imagine Resource reckon the difference is quite noticeable, surprisingly noticeable in fact...thats quite something given the RX1 was crazy sharp anyway.
Got some handy comparison shots too. Interestingly, same price !
Wow!! Those images do look pretty amazing compared to the current RX-1. So same price, sharper images......why would anyone buy the std RX-1???
For real smooth sharpness, you know my answer Sigma DP Merrill.
That's a Moire
The answer to the first question is – yes. There is a difference. The Rx1N is sharper. But as with the Nikon 800e vs the 800, the difference is very small. In fact, my experience is that only in direct on-screen side-by-side comparisons at 100% magnification is that difference really noticeable. Also, once an image has been properly sharpened with an experienced eye, that difference become de minimus. I should mention though that when sharpening, the amount of sharpening required is noticeably less with the Rx1N, so this is both a subjective and an objective observation.
Now to the second question – is moire an issue? Again, just as with the 800e vs the 800, this is solely a question of the subject matter. In the "natural" world, moire is extremely difficult to see. I've been working for years with medium format cameras and backs which don't have AA filters, and never once doing landscape and nature photography have I ever seen moire. Similarly with the Nikon D800e.
But in the man-made world there is the possibility. If you look for it, you can find it in fine mesh window screens and in certain woven fabrics. But, move an inch or two forward or backward and it disappears. I set out to create some examples for the article, shooting bug mesh screens, and found that even a small change in position would create images that had it and those that didn't.
I honestly have to look pretty hard to notice a difference in that first pair. If I have to look that hard at 100%, at any even remotely normal viewing size, I'd never see it. I sort of went through this when comparing the Coolpix A and the DP1M - in that case I could see the difference pretty evidently at 100% most of the time (on a couple of images it was real hard to tell). But I still had to ask myself if I'd ever see it at normal viewing sizes and I THINK I could when comparing them closely, side by side. But beyond that, not really. And I think there was a much bigger difference between those two than between these...
-Ray
Speaking of RAW file comparisons ...
Digital Photography Review
Interestingly, when using DPR's comparison tool, the NEX7's RAW file at ISO 100 appears to render more detail than either the RX1 or RX1r.
Hmmmmm......
I'll probably get one, I need a backup for my e-pl1.