# Sony RX100 II @ 3200ISO, straight out from camera, zero PP



## Dylan777 (Sep 18, 2013)

I took this picture with Sony RX100II, in low light. This is 3200ISO, JPEG straight out from camera, zero PP.

RX1 & RX 100 II always amazed me...body size and IQ.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 18, 2013)

Are those diagonal stripes across the UPC bar codes on the original box? If added by the camera, it really ruins the image.


----------



## alexanderferdinand (Sep 18, 2013)

Speaking for the "classic" RX100:
Yes, this little camera is a class of its own, highest ratio IQ vs size.
Still my companion nearly everywhere.
Next week we visit Poland.


----------



## m (Sep 18, 2013)

Looks good.

Sorry for OT, but "Elektronenblitzgerät" seems to be a horrible translation of "speedlight"...oh wait, it's a Nikon. ;D


----------



## bainsybike (Sep 18, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Are those diagonal stripes across the UPC bar codes on the original box? If added by the camera, it really ruins the image.



If you download the original image, you don't see the stripes, at least on my monitor. I don't think they're added by the camera.


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Sep 18, 2013)

what amazes me is that people with a 700 euro camera post such "examples". 

i know.. i know.. it´s just a snapshot, an example.
but it reflects bad on you as a photographer nevertheless.
there are sure some more interesting motives around you?


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Sep 18, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Are those diagonal stripes across the UPC bar codes on the original box? If added by the camera, it really ruins the image.



lol... it´s typical when an images is not resized properly.
one more reason browsers suck for image viewing. missing or bad color management is another.

first time you see that in your browser?

btw: it looks better in FF then IE.


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 18, 2013)

Lichtgestalt said:


> what amazes me is that people with a 700 euro camera post such "examples".
> 
> i know.. i know.. it´s just a snapshot, an example.
> but it reflects bad on you as a photographer nevertheless.
> there are sure some more interesting motives around you?



Just helping a friend selling the flash on ebay..that all


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 18, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Are those diagonal stripes across the UPC bar codes on the original box? If added by the camera, it really ruins the image.



What "diagonal stripes across the UPC bar codes" are you talking about? I don't see it ???


----------



## heptagon (Sep 18, 2013)

It seems to have some potent noise reduction algorithm.

Please take a picture of something with structure... maybe a wooden table lit by candlelight.


----------



## cliffwang (Sep 18, 2013)

bainsybike said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Are those diagonal stripes across the UPC bar codes on the original box? If added by the camera, it really ruins the image.
> ...



That's very interesting. Why do the diagonal stripes show on the resized photo. By the way IQ of RX100 II looks little better than it older brother.


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 18, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> Lichtgestalt said:
> 
> 
> > what amazes me is that people with a 700 euro camera post such "examples".
> ...



What amazes me is all the people that think there is only one use for a camera and hold a negative view of anything outside their own artistic vision.
I'm reminded of the negativity Trey Ratcliff gets sometimes.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 18, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Are those diagonal stripes across the UPC bar codes on the original box? If added by the camera, it really ruins the image.
> ...


 All three of the bar codes have stripes on the posted image as viewed on my monitor, which is why I was wondering if they were actually there. Others are seeing them as well.

I downloaded the image and noted that there were no stripes, but there appeared to be a lot of NR. Cameras do add NR, even if turned off, and if its set to "Normal", they add more with high ISO. Its pretty typical of all cameras at high ISO using jpeg.

Can you process a raw image and clean it up so we can see what the camera can really do at its best?

Try resizing the image to 800 pixels on the longest side. That will prevent the built in resize software in the forum from causing any issues, but it will also prevent viewers from downloading the full size file, so that's unfortunate. Still, only a few download it for every thousand that view the image as posted.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 18, 2013)

The "stripes" are being caused by the forum interpolation algorithms, they are not in the file that you can drag and drop onto your computer. I have noticed with many of the images I have posted that the forum software is not kind when it re-sizes, that is why I only post 700px on the long edge images now.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 18, 2013)

privatebydesign said:


> The "stripes" are being caused by the forum interpolation algorithms, they are not in the file that you can drag and drop onto your computer. I have noticed with many of the images I have posted that the forum software is not kind when it re-sizes, that is why I only post 700px on the long edge images now.


I link to my image on Smugmug, which lets also me post larger images without the issue.

Either way, limit to 800 or less pixels on a side, or link to a web site that is more friendly about rendering images.

Another issue is that that web browsers can also downsize images and render them to the requested size.


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 18, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > Mt Spokane Photography said:
> ...



I don't raw files, just JPEG. It's "normal" NR in camera setting.


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 19, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> I took this picture with Sony RX100II, in low light. This is 3200ISO, JPEG straight out from camera, zero PP.
> 
> RX1 & RX 100 II always amazed me...body size and IQ.



Just incase anyone interested to see the remaining photos: 

http://albums.phanfare.com/isolated/OrMEuOZU/1/6234908

1st picture was taken this morning, around 5:30AM California time, indoor,with little light at 3200ISO. The remaining photos were taken this afternoon with decent lighting, next to patio door. All jpeg files. Copied straight from camera - zero PP.

The RX100 II is a great small camera for this type of work. It fits in jean and shirt pocket well. It delivers great IQ, even in JPEG. I carry this camera to work everyday.

Ohhh...almost forgot, please excuse my crappy composition


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 19, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > I took this picture with Sony RX100II, in low light. This is 3200ISO, JPEG straight out from camera, zero PP.
> ...


 
It is certainly great as to the advances made in digital cameras since my first Fujifilm MX700 in 1998. I recently bought a vintage 6MP Kodak DCS 460C from 1995 ($35,500 originally), and it could do about ISO 80 max. Now, many shoot at ISO 3200 and higher with impunity. I also remember the Polaroid ASA 2000 B&W film that would let you shoot by candlelight, but never quite lived up to that for me. (I think you had to increase the developing time to make it work.)

Have fun with it!!


----------

