@npaulroberts on Twitter gets some brilliant results as well. And Paul is the first to say he’s absolutely a birder first and foremost.
Rich
Rich
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Sony RX10 1V the new boy. (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter nikonmike
- Start date
After all the deliberation, research, changing my mind then changing it again, I have finally ordered a Sony RX 10 IV. In the end, I decided that the only way I'll know whether it will be suitable for me is to actually use it for a time. I've ordered one from Panamoz, and it should be with me in 7-10 days.
Anyway, I just wanted to thank everyone on here who chipped in with help and advice while I struggled to make up my mind. Your input was much appreciated.
Malcolm
Anyway, I just wanted to thank everyone on here who chipped in with help and advice while I struggled to make up my mind. Your input was much appreciated.
Malcolm
MKinHK
Mike Kilburn
Those Gannet pix are terrific Chris S.
I've been waiting several year for my RX10iii to give up the ghost so I can upgrade to the RX10iv in good conscience. Some COVID deals have had me considering Sony's micro 4/3 route, but double/triple the cost and weight cools my ardour every time I go into a showroom to "consider" more carefully.
Pix like yours definitely serve to get me excited about the prospect of the RX10iv again.
Cheers
Mike
I've been waiting several year for my RX10iii to give up the ghost so I can upgrade to the RX10iv in good conscience. Some COVID deals have had me considering Sony's micro 4/3 route, but double/triple the cost and weight cools my ardour every time I go into a showroom to "consider" more carefully.
Pix like yours definitely serve to get me excited about the prospect of the RX10iv again.
Cheers
Mike
Great indeed! Congratulations.:t:
Steve Babbs
Well-known member
I'm sure that macro was used loosely but just so potential buyers aren't mislead it is not a true macro as it does not have a reproduction ratio of 1:1. I believe it is 1: 2 which is very good but not a macro lens.
If I recall correctly, 1:2 was considered a macro in analog times.
Steve Babbs
Well-known member
One lens called itself a macro with that. I think I had it a 90mm(?) Tamron but it was generally accepted to be 1:1. The Tamron did have a screw on lens converting it to a 1:1 as an optional extra.
It is an impressive ratio though, even if it is not available throughout the zoom range which is a bit annoying.
Catadioptric simulation?
I notice somewhat irritating out-of-focus highlights similar to what one finds in catadioptric (mirror) telelenses. But I presume the Sony lens is not based on that technique?
The depicted bird is a "Waldrapp", a Northern Bald-Ibis with a transmitter on its back. I took the picture in central Switzerland The ibis is part of an on-going reintroduction project in central Europe. The first few years, these individuals wander around before they start breeding. This one carries a blue band numbered 217. It is hoped to breed next year in the Überlingen area on Lake Constance in southern Germany, just north of the Swiss border. It has its winter quarters in central Italy south of Florence.
I notice somewhat irritating out-of-focus highlights similar to what one finds in catadioptric (mirror) telelenses. But I presume the Sony lens is not based on that technique?
The depicted bird is a "Waldrapp", a Northern Bald-Ibis with a transmitter on its back. I took the picture in central Switzerland The ibis is part of an on-going reintroduction project in central Europe. The first few years, these individuals wander around before they start breeding. This one carries a blue band numbered 217. It is hoped to breed next year in the Überlingen area on Lake Constance in southern Germany, just north of the Swiss border. It has its winter quarters in central Italy south of Florence.
Attachments
Last edited:
I think that is sometimes just a characteristic of small sensor cameras i get background anomaly sometimes with my m4/3
I dont know if you know it can often be improved with PP
Attachments
No, I'm not familiar with such tools. Also, I presume that's rather time consuming? Definitely solved the problem with my sample photo, though.
Sc0tty
Well-known member
I hope someone can answer you because I have exactly the same question.
If you look back a few posts in this thread, you'll see that Mark Harper posted some beautiful photos of swifts taken with the Sony. These could serve as an example of this camera's capabilities with BiF.
Earlier BF comments on the P1000 suggested that it was much better for BIF shots because of the manual zoom. Plus there was some follow on indicating the P950 was materially more responsive than the P900.
No personal knowledge of the RX10 IV, but as a user of the Sony RX100 VI pocket zoom, I can vouch for the speed of the Sony auto focus, reserving my brickbats for Sony's color science and their truly awful menus.
Tony Knight
Well-known member
Hi All. I currently use a Canon D7mkii, 300mm prime canon lens and Canon 2x so effectively getting me 600mm based on some great advice from this forum 5 years ago. Great shots but 3.7kg over my shoulder on a black-rapid strap. I'm 57 and getting shoulder and back pain when I carry this for long periods or many days in a row on holiday so was looking at this camera and wondering how the picture quality would compare at 600mm. I usually crop photos too. Presumably you can still compensate for backlit and dark background shots +1, -1 stop etc as you can with an SLR ? Can you choose a wide aperture for 600mm or does it just do that automatically....I've never used a bridge camera before. I'm planning to go walking for a week in the nth Yorkshire Moors from this weekend so lots of long walks with just the odd bird. Looks like this camera would be perfect and then keep the heavy canon kit for African jeep safaris. What do you think ?
Thanks
Tony
Thanks
Tony
Last edited:
Tony Knight
Well-known member
Thanks for the suggestion Nils. I hadn't even heard of 4/3 cameras. Is the picture quality better than the Sony pure bridge camera ? How does the 100-400 get you to 800mmm - is that using a 2x converter ? I guess i'd need another lens for the wide angle if I went that route though could just use iphone ?
After much deliberation, I bought the Sony RX10 IV a couple of months ago. I still haven't decided if I like it enough to keep it. In its favour are fantastic flexibility and excellent image quality in decent light. But, for me, there are certain ergonomic and functional issues which make me think I probably won't keep it.
My initial buying dilemma was between the Sony and moving to micro four thirds with the Olympus OMD EM-1 III. I think I was disuaded from the latter when Olympus sold off its camera division.
I haven't quite made up my mind. I think that, ultimately, the Sony isn't for me. But do I go back to a DSLR or jump into micro four thirds? That I don't know.
To answer your question about how the Panasonic 100-400 gets you to 800mm, the size of the micro four thirds sensor means there is a 2x crop in terms of the equivalent full-frame field of view. So, you get more "reach" but you also sacrifice a certain amount when it comes to a shallow depth of field.
Malcolm
My initial buying dilemma was between the Sony and moving to micro four thirds with the Olympus OMD EM-1 III. I think I was disuaded from the latter when Olympus sold off its camera division.
I haven't quite made up my mind. I think that, ultimately, the Sony isn't for me. But do I go back to a DSLR or jump into micro four thirds? That I don't know.
To answer your question about how the Panasonic 100-400 gets you to 800mm, the size of the micro four thirds sensor means there is a 2x crop in terms of the equivalent full-frame field of view. So, you get more "reach" but you also sacrifice a certain amount when it comes to a shallow depth of field.
Malcolm
