1" sensor |
Page 12> |
Author | |
Phil Wood
Senior Member Joined: 24 March 2013 Country: United Kingdom Location: England Status: Offline Posts: 3290 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Topic: 1" sensor Posted: 29 July 2019 at 11:56 |
Looking for a pocket camera I investigated the RX100 series. The idea of a 1" sensor appealed - a decent size I thought. Then I saw the specs - 13.3 x 8.8mm - how can that be 1"? Even the diagonal (15.9mm) is way short of an inch (25.4mm). Does 1" no longer mean 1 inch? Have the Japanese invented a short inch?
|
|
Pallanza
Senior Member Joined: 07 September 2007 Location: Germany Status: Offline Posts: 237 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 29 July 2019 at 12:05 |
See here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_camera_tube#Vidicon, Chapter "Size".
|
|
mirthseeker
Senior Member Joined: 02 October 2011 Country: Australia Location: Melbourne Status: Offline Posts: 762 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 29 July 2019 at 12:10 |
Or see here.
|
|
bonneville
Senior Member Joined: 19 May 2007 Country: United Kingdom Status: Offline Posts: 2643 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 29 July 2019 at 13:49 |
Hi Phil. My two pence worth. Don’t bother with the sensor specs, look at an earlier version of the RX100 for a great value, good quality pocket camera. The later versions, not least the latest mk vii, are expensive and stuffed with features I don’t particularly want or need in a camera for the glove box.
My recently bought RX100iii goes with me everywhere, takes amazing images and was a real deal. Good revue here. Good luck with your quest. |
|
Aavo
Senior Member Joined: 03 April 2013 Country: Estonia Location: Tallinn Status: Offline Posts: 5407 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 29 July 2019 at 13:52 |
If you can accept, don't take superzoom models.
|
|
a6500 & some nice e-mount af lenses 20/24/56/17-70
|
|
Miranda F
Senior Member Joined: 11 January 2014 Country: United Kingdom Location: Bristol Status: Offline Posts: 4074 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 29 July 2019 at 15:07 |
The compact size of the RX100 series is appealing especially if you have small hands (and small pockets and a large wallet ) but for me it is essentially a very expensive toy camera however good the performance is. It's simply too small to use and is so weak and plasticky it's not for me. A Nex is much nicer to handle.
But if that doesn't bother you, the image quality and feature set are pretty good. For me, the Canon S100 is a nicer camera to use; it's about the same size and much cheaper. Less Mp though, if that bothers you. |
|
Miranda F & Sensorex, Sony A7Rii, A58, Nex-6, Dynax 4, 5, 60, 500si/600si/700si/800si, various Sony & Minolta lenses, several Tamrons, lots of MF primes and *far* too many old film cameras ...
|
|
QuietOC
Senior Member Joined: 28 February 2015 Country: United States Location: Michigan Status: Offline Posts: 3702 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 29 July 2019 at 15:52 |
The RX100 series have alloy bodies not unlike the later A7 cameras (or the NEX 5, 7). I don't like the feel of metal surfaces, but the market prefers them as quality signals. |
|
Sony A7RIV LA-EA5
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8 8.5/1.9 11.5/9 |
|
bonneville
Senior Member Joined: 19 May 2007 Country: United Kingdom Status: Offline Posts: 2643 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 29 July 2019 at 16:47 |
I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one. I too have a NEX-5 (hasn't seen the light of day for ages due mainly to the impossibility of viewing the screen in bright conditions). I then bought a NEX-6 for its viewfinder, which is much better but, the OP is looking for a "pocket camera" and whatever size lens is fitted to a NEX body, even the diminutive 16mm f2.8, it doesn't fit into any of my pockets other than a safari type jacket. Edit: But the NEX-6 has been a great tool for exploring the world of adapters and "interesting" lenses, so each have their own strengths IMHO. Edited by bonneville - 29 July 2019 at 16:52 |
|
Pallanza
Senior Member Joined: 07 September 2007 Location: Germany Status: Offline Posts: 237 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 29 July 2019 at 17:25 |
I have the RX100 iii parallel to my Sony A7R iii as stand-by camera. My criterion was "small" and "best image quality", so I accepted the minor zoom range (24-70 mm). On my last travel through Poland I had a problem with my A7R iii, so I used only the RX 100 iii. Not really a problem in most situation, except very (!!) low light. Most people will not see any differences in image quality.
If you do want a longer zoom range, you'll get the normal draw backs due to a smaller aperture. |
|
jvandegr
Senior Member Joined: 07 April 2008 Country: United States Location: New York Status: Offline Posts: 1004 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 29 July 2019 at 18:09 |
My strong advice is to stay away from one inch sensors, unless you only intend to take daylight snapshots that you won't develop much or make even medium size prints from. The small photo sites create too much noise for any other application. And yes, this is truly image destroying noise that is readily visible. On the other hand, I'm impressed with how far the sensors have come and they are certainly better than any cell phone camera. However, Micro Four Thirds is noticeably better than the one inch sensors in every aspect (except size for long telephoto focal lengths) for approximately the same size, weight, and cost. The Panasonic Lumix LX100 and Leica D-Lux Typ 109 are particularly easy to recommend.
|
|
Jon Van de Grift
Photojournalist and Educator |
|
addy landzaat
Senior Member Joined: 22 April 2006 Country: Netherlands Location: Netherlands Status: Offline Posts: 15628 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 29 July 2019 at 18:11 |
1" sensors have two downsides for me: 4x3 aspect ratio and 1" sensors are still quite small. That is why went for the APS-C sized Canon G1x3. Not quite as small, but it fits a coat pocket - noticeable smaller then a NEX or A6x00 camera.
But it is a weird way to measure sensor size calling this sensor 1". But it is catchy name |
|
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101
|
|
QuietOC
Senior Member Joined: 28 February 2015 Country: United States Location: Michigan Status: Offline Posts: 3702 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 29 July 2019 at 19:02 |
Sensor size doesn't matter for noise. Lens size is the main thing that matters. There's always a depth-of-field/noise trade-off. And by lens size multiply crop factor by the relative aperture. There are relatively huge lenses in some formats.
Sony's one-inch sensors are more efficient than their current APS-C sensors. But even the 8.8 mm F1.8 wide end of the faster lens is quite limited. |
|
Sony A7RIV LA-EA5
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8 8.5/1.9 11.5/9 |
|
addy landzaat
Senior Member Joined: 22 April 2006 Country: Netherlands Location: Netherlands Status: Offline Posts: 15628 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 29 July 2019 at 20:03 |
But the most important, tree foliage is mush with all 1" sensors I have seen. I do not know why this is so, but it is what I see. Maybe if lenses get better it changes, but for now it is the way it is. This is the reason I decided on the G1x3. |
|
Why not follow me on Instagram? @Addy_101
|
|
QuietOC
Senior Member Joined: 28 February 2015 Country: United States Location: Michigan Status: Offline Posts: 3702 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 29 July 2019 at 20:40 |
Well, I agree about mush, which seems to be be caused by over processing. I am very disappointed in the images taken by my new iPhone 8 Plus. There's hardly even 3 MP of image data left at ISO 20 in bright sunlight. No third-party application can reduce Apple's processing either. I mainly use my phone camera for my job where detail is important. Evidently their market thinks reality should look like a poorly rendered video game. My Pentax Q7 is similar. And I see calls by photographers to add more computational photography to cameras to be more like cellphones. I want less. Sony, get rid of the star eater; get rid of the raw vignette correction. But at least Sony allows turning off sharpening completely for JPEGs. Edited by QuietOC - 29 July 2019 at 20:46 |
|
Sony A7RIV LA-EA5
Pentax Q7 5-15 15-45/2.8 8.5/1.9 11.5/9 |
|
> Forum Home > Equipment forums > Camera Talk > Other camera systems | Page 12> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.
Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer
In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania
Feel free to contact us if needed.