Check out Wedding Photography section of our forum.
Discovered: a bird photography solution - Sony RX10m4
Jan 30, 2018 16:23:37 #
a6k
Loc: Detroit & Sanibel
The problem:
Most of my bird photography is from a car. We drive slowly through a refuge such as Ding Darling or Apopka North Shore, stopping as desired. So most of that is birds that are not in flight. For them, I use the slow multi-release so that I only get multiples when I want them. It's 5/sec. I also use the smallest central spot for AF and usually try for the eye. This works pretty well. But it is the wrong setup for BIF's. Of course, they usually also require being out of the car but that is a different issue.
Solution:
This camera has up to three registered groups of settings that can be called back instantly. This is not the same as choosing a configuration from a list ("MR") which this and many other cameras so. This is not a toggle, either; I have to hold the button down while shooting in the alternate configuration. The settings menu allows me to choose which button to assign to which, if any, registered group and after a few experiments with manual dexterity I chose the button in the middle of the circular control on the back. I can hold that in and still press the shutter. I have it set for the wide AF and the highest speed repeat. This camera can do BIF's well and it's why I upgraded from the otherwise excellent model 3.
I offer this intending to be helpful to anyone with a similar "requirement". Sony's infamous obscure menu and manuals may have kept someone else from discovering this, too.
Most of my bird photography is from a car. We drive slowly through a refuge such as Ding Darling or Apopka North Shore, stopping as desired. So most of that is birds that are not in flight. For them, I use the slow multi-release so that I only get multiples when I want them. It's 5/sec. I also use the smallest central spot for AF and usually try for the eye. This works pretty well. But it is the wrong setup for BIF's. Of course, they usually also require being out of the car but that is a different issue.
Solution:
This camera has up to three registered groups of settings that can be called back instantly. This is not the same as choosing a configuration from a list ("MR") which this and many other cameras so. This is not a toggle, either; I have to hold the button down while shooting in the alternate configuration. The settings menu allows me to choose which button to assign to which, if any, registered group and after a few experiments with manual dexterity I chose the button in the middle of the circular control on the back. I can hold that in and still press the shutter. I have it set for the wide AF and the highest speed repeat. This camera can do BIF's well and it's why I upgraded from the otherwise excellent model 3.
I offer this intending to be helpful to anyone with a similar "requirement". Sony's infamous obscure menu and manuals may have kept someone else from discovering this, too.
Jan 30, 2018 17:48:38 #
a6k wrote:
The problem: br Most of my bird photography is fro... (show quote)
So, this "instant" recall is via a menu item or menu is used to designate a button to choose this?
Jan 30, 2018 18:07:04 #
a6k
Loc: Detroit & Sanibel
You use the menu (camera 2, page 9) to assign instant recall to a button.
This is not the same as memory recall which gives you a list.
This is not the same as memory recall which gives you a list.
Jan 31, 2018 05:44:57 #
a6k wrote:
The problem: br Most of my bird photography is fro... (show quote)
I recently used my RX10M4 on an extended trip - and I shot a few birds here and there. It is a very good camera, and it's AF system is as good as it gets for speed of acquisition and tracking. However, it's tiny 1" sensor, which is also as good as it gets, is a bit small and gets noisy at ISOs higher than 400, pretty much topping out at around 800 for good image quality. I tried using it for birds locally, and to be truthful, it is nowhere nearly as good as a D800/D810 with a good long lens on it - I have a Sigma Sport 150-600 and a Nikkor 600mmF4 - for comparison.
That being said, here is a perched small bird taken with the M3 and a couple of others taken with the M4
Jan 31, 2018 11:08:51 #
a6k
Loc: Detroit & Sanibel
Gene51's opinion of the camera is correct in my opinion. I'm not trying to sell anyone on it, merely to give a tip to those who have it.
Jan 31, 2018 12:58:44 #
a6k wrote:
Gene51's opinion of the camera is correct in my opinion. I'm not trying to sell anyone on it, merely to give a tip to those who have it.
Question. Was your original post directed at PRO bird photographer's? If so then Gene's assessment is cogent. What about us "just-below" pro members like myself?
TFIC. If my math is correct Gene's kit would cost me between 13 and 14K. I could by near 8 RX10M4s. I have been trying unsuccessfully to take decent bird photos with a bridge camera myself. It's not easy with my measly 1.2/3" sensor. I would be absolutely giddy to own an RX10M4.Gene this in not meant in anyway to be offensive to you. I understand you're not implying you need your kit to take bird photos. I also understand even if I buy 8 RX10s I'm still not getting close to your image quality. It's just I have seen some excellent photos taken with this bridge camera and if anyone is considering a bridge camera I would urge them to consider this one if at all po$$ible.
a6K thank you for the tips. Signed RX10M4 Fan Boy!
Jan 31, 2018 14:09:11 #
ralphfr wrote:
Question. Was your original post directed at PRO b... (show quote)
Hmm. . .Now what would I do with $14K - well, I wouldn't spend it on camera gear, that's for sure.
On the other hand, that RX10M4 was surprisingly good for what it is. I have no regrets.
Now for some real, hard numbers for you.
I paid $1700 for a used D810, and a $1200 for a used Sigma 150-600 Sport. Before that I paid $1800 several years ago for a used D800. The 600mmF4 AF-S II I made mention of was purchased 6 yrs ago for $6500, at a time when they were backordered at Nikon. None of the images posted below were with that lens, btw. It would defeat the purpose of demonstrating the value proposition.
And this is what I took with the Sigma and either of these cameras.
D800
(Download)
D800
(Download)
D800
(Download)
D800
(Download)
D800
(Download)
D810
(Download)
D810
(Download)
Check out Smartphone Photography section of our forum.
Jan 31, 2018 14:22:45 #
Gene51 wrote:
Hmm. . .Now what would I do with $14K - well, I wouldn't spend it on camera gear, that's for sure.
On the other hand, that RX10M4 was surprisingly good for what it is. I have no regrets.
Now for some real, hard numbers for you.
I paid $1700 for a used D810, and a $1200 for a used Sigma 150-600 Sport. Before that I paid $1800 several years ago for a used D800.
And this is what I took with the Sigma and either of these cameras.
On the other hand, that RX10M4 was surprisingly good for what it is. I have no regrets.
Now for some real, hard numbers for you.
I paid $1700 for a used D810, and a $1200 for a used Sigma 150-600 Sport. Before that I paid $1800 several years ago for a used D800.
And this is what I took with the Sigma and either of these cameras.
Me neither. I'd have a boat!
What happened to the 600mm Nikkor? My pricing was for all new. One body and the 2 lenses. Either way your photos are awesome. That owl photo is my favorite of the ones you posted. It's your avatar so you must like it too!
Without question you can see the jump in IQ with the DSLRs. I however would be ecstatic with your M3/M4 images. You obviously know your way around a camera of any type as your M3/M4 pics show. Thank you for sharing them.
Jan 31, 2018 14:25:12 #
ralphfr wrote:
Me neither. I'd have a boat!
What happened to the 600mm Nikkor? My pricing was for all new. One body and the 2 lenses. Either way your photos are awesome. That owl photo is my favorite of the ones you posted. It's your avatar so you must like it too!
What happened to the 600mm Nikkor? My pricing was for all new. One body and the 2 lenses. Either way your photos are awesome. That owl photo is my favorite of the ones you posted. It's your avatar so you must like it too!
Thanks! The birds are the ones who should get all the credit. I just pointed the camera at them and they made themselves look great!
I edited the post to add the 600mm Nikkor. Which is for sale, btw. I haven't used it much since I got the Sigma 18 months ago. I don't need to shoot at F4 all the time, and after going back over my images, I found that I often shot at F5.6 and F8 with it anyway.
Jan 31, 2018 15:08:10 #
a6k
Loc: Detroit & Sanibel
The question was:...I have been trying unsuccessfully to take decent bird photos with a bridge camera myself. It's not easy with my measly 1.2/3" sensor. I would be absolutely giddy to own an RX10M4.
a6K thank you for the tips. Signed RX10M4 Fan Boy!
-----------------------------------------------------------------
My post was for anyone who has that camera or is considering getting one. In this case, the level of skill and how the owner uses photography don't matter. I just thought that the ability to instantly deploy an alternate setting was a very good thing for my issue with birds. UHH is, in part, about helping each other so I tried to do that.
I don't intend to argue that the RX10 m3/4 are as good as a crop frame or full frame camera either at ISO 100 or, especially, higher. That's a whole different subject. My RX10m4 is a very good camera for what I'm doing with it and for my own physical limitations. YMMV. There are many cameras that are able to give higher IQ and at higher ISO.
The sensor on this camera is twice as wide and twice as high as the "1/2.3" sensor or 4X the area. But it's also significantly smaller than full frame (2.7x on each side). Just to be clear about low light, it's not actually the size of the sensor that's the controlling factor; it's the size of the photo-sites. The smaller ones can't receive as much light for a given lens opening and shutter speed and thus require more amplification which is inherently prone to hurt IQ. A 16MP sensor vs a 24MP sensor when the 16 is only 25% the area necessarily dictates that the pixels are a lot smaller. The manufacturer's specifications back this up in both ISO ranges and, if stated, pixel pitch. Have you ever noticed that, for instance, the S model of the A7 has fewer pixels than the R model? That is probably the reason. That observation seems to hold true for many other brands and models, too (my sense of what I've read, worth what you choose to pay).
My a6500 with a Sony G lens is much sharper and at higher ISOs than my RX10 and when I used an A7R2 and a GM lens the difference was that much again. You can only put lipstick on the pig, so to speak. Some tiny sensors are better than other ones but the size of the sensor and the pixel pitch is a critical factor. We are all using approximately the same light-sensing chemistry so until that changes, this little rant will remain true.
It's been my opinion since my RX10m3 that the lens is better than the sensor. That doesn't matter but it's what makes the pictures at ISO100 or 200 very good and above that, not so much.
And BTW, Gene's pics are excellent!
a6K thank you for the tips. Signed RX10M4 Fan Boy!
-----------------------------------------------------------------
My post was for anyone who has that camera or is considering getting one. In this case, the level of skill and how the owner uses photography don't matter. I just thought that the ability to instantly deploy an alternate setting was a very good thing for my issue with birds. UHH is, in part, about helping each other so I tried to do that.
I don't intend to argue that the RX10 m3/4 are as good as a crop frame or full frame camera either at ISO 100 or, especially, higher. That's a whole different subject. My RX10m4 is a very good camera for what I'm doing with it and for my own physical limitations. YMMV. There are many cameras that are able to give higher IQ and at higher ISO.
The sensor on this camera is twice as wide and twice as high as the "1/2.3" sensor or 4X the area. But it's also significantly smaller than full frame (2.7x on each side). Just to be clear about low light, it's not actually the size of the sensor that's the controlling factor; it's the size of the photo-sites. The smaller ones can't receive as much light for a given lens opening and shutter speed and thus require more amplification which is inherently prone to hurt IQ. A 16MP sensor vs a 24MP sensor when the 16 is only 25% the area necessarily dictates that the pixels are a lot smaller. The manufacturer's specifications back this up in both ISO ranges and, if stated, pixel pitch. Have you ever noticed that, for instance, the S model of the A7 has fewer pixels than the R model? That is probably the reason. That observation seems to hold true for many other brands and models, too (my sense of what I've read, worth what you choose to pay).
My a6500 with a Sony G lens is much sharper and at higher ISOs than my RX10 and when I used an A7R2 and a GM lens the difference was that much again. You can only put lipstick on the pig, so to speak. Some tiny sensors are better than other ones but the size of the sensor and the pixel pitch is a critical factor. We are all using approximately the same light-sensing chemistry so until that changes, this little rant will remain true.
It's been my opinion since my RX10m3 that the lens is better than the sensor. That doesn't matter but it's what makes the pictures at ISO100 or 200 very good and above that, not so much.
And BTW, Gene's pics are excellent!
Jan 31, 2018 15:31:52 #
a6k wrote:
The question was:...I have been trying unsuccessfu... (show quote)
Thanks!
BTW, the sparrow shot was at ISO 800, and these shots below, with the M4, were at ISO 1600 and cropped a bit.
Check out Video for DSLR and Point and Shoot Cameras section of our forum.
Jan 31, 2018 23:31:22 #
Feb 1, 2018 05:13:51 #
Apr 17, 2018 23:19:30 #
Great discussion here. Gene, love all your photos. I'm currently trying the Rx104 and have been impressed with it so far. I think I was so worried about the small sensor that I had low expectations and it has favorably surprised me.
Sue
Sue
Apr 17, 2018 23:54:46 #
Key is to work within your budget and commit to the level you feel comfortable. The shortcoming of a Sony RX10m4 compared to a 600F4 with a 3000 dollar body are quickly diminished when one is within budget and the other is not.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Bridge Camera Show Case section of our forum.