Sony R1: In-depth Technical Review

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by deryck lant, Nov 20, 2005.

  1. deryck  lant

    deryck lant Guest

    http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/R1/R1A.HTM

    Quote:
    The R1 produces excellent pictures with exceptional optical quality
    at a relatively bargain price.

    Beautiful crisp 13x19inch prints with very good tonality.
    ISO 1600 soft but usable at 8x10.

    Deryck
     
    deryck lant, Nov 20, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. deryck  lant

    filodeclic Guest

    yes i think so.
    but i expect some more détails as you can see

    http://lesiohc.net/SONY NEW



    "deryck lant" <> a écrit dans le message de news:
    ...
    > http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/R1/R1A.HTM
    >
    > Quote:
    > The R1 produces excellent pictures with exceptional optical quality
    > at a relatively bargain price.
    >
    > Beautiful crisp 13x19inch prints with very good tonality.
    > ISO 1600 soft but usable at 8x10.
    >
    > Deryck
     
    filodeclic, Nov 20, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. deryck lant <> writes:

    > ISO 1600 soft but usable at 8x10.


    Result of heavy noise reduction?

    --
    Måns Rullgård
     
    =?iso-8859-1?q?M=E5ns_Rullg=E5rd?=, Nov 20, 2005
    #3
  4. deryck lant wrote:

    > http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/R1/R1A.HTM
    >
    > Quote:
    > The R1 produces excellent pictures with exceptional optical quality
    > at a relatively bargain price.
    >
    > Beautiful crisp 13x19inch prints with very good tonality.
    > ISO 1600 soft but usable at 8x10.


    This is a sensational camera. Digital as it should be done. I may get
    one just to study it.

    Gary Eickmeier
     
    Gary Eickmeier, Nov 20, 2005
    #4
  5. deryck  lant

    Chris Brown Guest

    In article <>,
    deryck lant <> wrote:
    >http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/R1/R1A.HTM
    >
    >Quote:
    >The R1 produces excellent pictures with exceptional optical quality
    >at a relatively bargain price.
    >
    >Beautiful crisp 13x19inch prints with very good tonality.
    >ISO 1600 soft but usable at 8x10.


    *cough* Er, the 19*13 prints from my EOS 5D aren't "crisp", at least not
    compared to the same sized prints from 6*7, so I find that conclusion rather
    suspect.
     
    Chris Brown, Nov 20, 2005
    #5
  6. deryck  lant

    deryck lant Guest

    The message <>
    from Måns_Rullgård <> contains these words:

    > deryck lant <> writes:


    > > ISO 1600 soft but usable at 8x10.


    > Result of heavy noise reduction?


    The Sony does use powerful noise suppression to flatten the noise.

    Deryck
     
    deryck lant, Nov 20, 2005
    #6
  7. deryck  lant

    deryck lant Guest

    The message <>
    from Chris Brown <_uce_please.com> contains these words:

    > In article <>,
    > deryck lant <> wrote:
    > >http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/R1/R1A.HTM
    > >
    > >Quote:
    > >The R1 produces excellent pictures with exceptional optical quality
    > >at a relatively bargain price.
    > >
    > >Beautiful crisp 13x19inch prints with very good tonality.
    > >ISO 1600 soft but usable at 8x10.


    > *cough* Er, the 19*13 prints from my EOS 5D aren't "crisp", at least not
    > compared to the same sized prints from 6*7, so I find that conclusion rather
    > suspect.


    We have an exceptional lens here. And only 0.2 percent barrel distortion
    at 24mm!

    This is what the man says:

    The real secret to getting incredible detail from the Sony R1 is to
    shoot with the camera's internal sharpening control on its Low setting,
    and then apply strong/tight unsharp masking in Photoshop(tm) or other
    imaging software. The crops above show the difference this makes. With
    the internal sharpening dialed down, the images get very soft, but the
    artifacts caused by the camera's sharpening are almost completely
    eliminated. To compensate for the absence of the camera's sharpening,
    you need to apply quite a lot of unsharp masking (try 400% or more), but
    if you keep the radius very small (0.3 pixels, 0.4 at most), the result
    is very crisp images, with virtually no sharpening artifacts, and
    exceptional fine detail. (In the images above, note how the R1's default
    sharpening coarsened the delicate stems on the leaves, and how soft the
    edges of the leaves appear, particularly when compared with the results
    of the Photoshop sharpening. - Click on either crop to see the full-size
    image.)

    http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/R1/R1A13.HTM

    This camera could be useful to some architects and fine art people. Dead
    quiet too for
    live theatre use.

    And of course no vibration for longer exposures.

    Deryck
     
    deryck lant, Nov 20, 2005
    #7
  8. deryck  lant

    Chris Brown Guest

    In article <>,
    deryck lant <> wrote:
    >The message <>
    >from Chris Brown <_uce_please.com> contains these words:
    >
    >> *cough* Er, the 19*13 prints from my EOS 5D aren't "crisp", at least not
    >> compared to the same sized prints from 6*7, so I find that conclusion rather
    >> suspect.

    >
    >We have an exceptional lens here. And only 0.2 percent barrel distortion
    >at 24mm!


    It could be the best lens in the world, the thing ain't got enough pixels to
    make a "crisp" 13*19 print, not if it's full of foliage.
     
    Chris Brown, Nov 20, 2005
    #8
  9. deryck  lant

    Kinon O'cann Guest

    It looks nice, but unless you need one of it's unique features, like silent
    shooting, who will buy it? It's not much smaller than a 20D, and doesn't
    offer any of the "swiss army knife" features of the 828. I've thought about
    this, as a replacement for the 828, and I can't see it. The 828 makes a nice
    adjunct to the 20D system, and offers movie mode, a nice zoom range, etc.
    But the R1 doesn't really offer me anything that the 20D doesn't, and isn't
    really a suitable adjunct to the 20D. Not for me, I guess.

    "deryck lant" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/R1/R1A.HTM
    >
    > Quote:
    > The R1 produces excellent pictures with exceptional optical quality
    > at a relatively bargain price.
    >
    > Beautiful crisp 13x19inch prints with very good tonality.
    > ISO 1600 soft but usable at 8x10.
    >
    > Deryck
     
    Kinon O'cann, Nov 20, 2005
    #9
  10. deryck  lant

    Rich Guest

    On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 20:22:42 GMT, deryck lant <>
    wrote:

    >The message <>
    >from Måns_Rullgård <> contains these words:
    >
    >> deryck lant <> writes:

    >
    >> > ISO 1600 soft but usable at 8x10.

    >
    >> Result of heavy noise reduction?

    >
    >The Sony does use powerful noise suppression to flatten the noise.
    >
    >Deryck


    Doesn't matter. That library shot that showed up in early samples
    (1600ISO) was very good. Great detail and good sharpness in the
    picture.
    -Rich
     
    Rich, Nov 21, 2005
    #10
  11. deryck  lant

    Rich Guest

    On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 15:27:30 GMT, Chris Brown
    <_uce_please.com> wrote:

    >In article <>,
    >deryck lant <> wrote:
    >>http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/R1/R1A.HTM
    >>
    >>Quote:
    >>The R1 produces excellent pictures with exceptional optical quality
    >>at a relatively bargain price.
    >>
    >>Beautiful crisp 13x19inch prints with very good tonality.
    >>ISO 1600 soft but usable at 8x10.

    >
    >*cough* Er, the 19*13 prints from my EOS 5D aren't "crisp", at least not
    >compared to the same sized prints from 6*7, so I find that conclusion rather
    >suspect.


    Apparently, the Zeiss lens on the Sony isn't a piece of crap. I've
    seen exceptional results with the 5D...Using Leica lenses, that is.
    -Rich
     
    Rich, Nov 21, 2005
    #11
  12. deryck  lant

    Chris Brown Guest

    In article <>, Rich <dfs> wrote:
    >On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 15:27:30 GMT, Chris Brown
    ><_uce_please.com> wrote:
    >
    >>In article <>,
    >>deryck lant <> wrote:
    >>>http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/R1/R1A.HTM
    >>>
    >>>Quote:
    >>>The R1 produces excellent pictures with exceptional optical quality
    >>>at a relatively bargain price.
    >>>
    >>>Beautiful crisp 13x19inch prints with very good tonality.
    >>>ISO 1600 soft but usable at 8x10.

    >>
    >>*cough* Er, the 19*13 prints from my EOS 5D aren't "crisp", at least not
    >>compared to the same sized prints from 6*7, so I find that conclusion rather
    >>suspect.

    >
    >Apparently, the Zeiss lens on the Sony isn't a piece of crap.


    Perhaps not, but the closeup vision of someone who regards a larger-than-A3
    print from a 10 megapixel camera as "crisp", rather than "acceptable" might
    very well be. YMMV.
     
    Chris Brown, Nov 21, 2005
    #12
  13. deryck  lant

    deryck lant Guest

    The message <>
    from Chris Brown <_uce_please.com> contains these words:

    > In article <>,
    > deryck lant <> wrote:
    > >The message <>
    > >from Chris Brown <_uce_please.com> contains these words:
    > >
    > >> *cough* Er, the 19*13 prints from my EOS 5D aren't "crisp", at least not
    > >> compared to the same sized prints from 6*7, so I find that
    > >> conclusion rather
    > >> suspect.

    > >
    > >We have an exceptional lens here. And only 0.2 percent barrel distortion
    > >at 24mm!


    > It could be the best lens in the world, the thing ain't got enough pixels to
    > make a "crisp" 13*19 print, not if it's full of foliage.


    In my youth I was a member of the Richmond and Twickenham Photographic Society
    where many of the Royal Photographic Society members and others produced
    a lot
    of their landscape pictures with the Leica loaded with Kodachrome. The weekly
    lectures projected much of this work and the quality was stunning. Of course
    many used Rollieflexes and large format for their 16x20 prints.

    Take a look at the photo galleries for some beautiful pictures:

    http://www.rtps.org.uk/
    http://www.rps.org

    Deryck
     
    deryck lant, Nov 21, 2005
    #13
  14. deryck  lant

    MTBike1970 Guest

    <snip>
    "Chris Brown" <_uce_please.com> wrote in message
    news:...
    > >>*cough* Er, the 19*13 prints from my EOS 5D aren't "crisp", at least not
    > >>compared to the same sized prints from 6*7, so I find that conclusion

    rather
    > >>suspect.

    > >
    > >Apparently, the Zeiss lens on the Sony isn't a piece of crap.


    > Perhaps not, but the closeup vision of someone who regards a

    larger-than-A3
    > print from a 10 megapixel camera as "crisp", rather than "acceptable"

    might
    > very well be. YMMV.


    I guess it's all relative. The problem with terms such as "crisp" is that
    they are subjective and quite impossible to quantify. I've made 13 x 19
    prints from my 7 MP camera that were "crispy" enough for my taste, but yes,
    they aren't as crisp as what I can get from my 6*6 transparencies. Perhaps
    stating that the R1 will give you a 13 x 19 print at 200 dpi, and that those
    prints look great, would be more accurate.... but still subjective....
    The R1 is a rather impressive camera for the price...
    regards...M
     
    MTBike1970, Nov 21, 2005
    #14
  15. deryck  lant

    Clyde Guest

    Kinon O'cann wrote:
    > It looks nice, but unless you need one of it's unique features, like silent
    > shooting, who will buy it? It's not much smaller than a 20D, and doesn't
    > offer any of the "swiss army knife" features of the 828. I've thought about
    > this, as a replacement for the 828, and I can't see it. The 828 makes a nice
    > adjunct to the 20D system, and offers movie mode, a nice zoom range, etc.
    > But the R1 doesn't really offer me anything that the 20D doesn't, and isn't
    > really a suitable adjunct to the 20D. Not for me, I guess.
    >
    > "deryck lant" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >>http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/R1/R1A.HTM
    >>
    >>Quote:
    >>The R1 produces excellent pictures with exceptional optical quality
    >>at a relatively bargain price.
    >>
    >>Beautiful crisp 13x19inch prints with very good tonality.
    >>ISO 1600 soft but usable at 8x10.
    >>
    >>Deryck

    >
    >
    >


    It is just about the perfect camera for my wedding photography business.
    I need a sharp, all-in-one lens that I don't have to change during a
    wedding. It seems that every time a lens is changed during a wedding, a
    shot is missed. I also don't have worry about dust getting inside. The
    lens is sharp.

    The manual zoom and manual focus are great features for me. I need to be
    able to zoom to what I want very fast. I also need fine zoom control.
    i.e. Just be able to bump the zoom.

    Ten MP is more than enough for wedding pictures. Most of my final
    pictures are less than 8x10" with only a handful of 8x10" pictures. It
    is very rare that I get a request for a print larger than that and they
    are all 11x14". 10 MP is more than enough.

    The movable LCD is VERY nice for taking some candids without being
    noticed. You can't do that with and SLR. It can make a number of
    pictures that otherwise wouldn't be there.

    The silent shooting is critical for pictures during the ceremony. The
    sound of a SLR shooting during the ceremony WILL be noticed. If noticed,
    it will get on someone's nerves.

    In the past, small sensor bridge cameras were all that would do all of
    this. Now there is this larger sensor camera that will do it. The noise
    is less and the dynamic range is higher. It looks like the best DR is in
    RAW, but that is the case with all digital cameras. The noise is more
    than acceptable when I use Noise Ninja. I've even happily tried it on
    3200 samples that I've found floating around.

    Yeah, I'd like to have a tad longer lens that 120mm - say 200mm. This
    will do fine though. The only place that will really hurt me is in those
    shots from the back of the church during the ceremony. That is only in
    large churches that don't have a closer option. I do love the 24mm end.

    I'd like anti-shake and a smaller lighter camera, but I don't really
    need them. The smaller camera probably isn't possible. The anti-shake
    may not be either, in this design. I've never had that on a camera yet
    and have been successful.

    I've heard good and bad about the AF speed. I'm sure it can't be as bad
    as some cameras I've used in weddings in the past. (How about those many
    weddings I shot with manual focus lenses?) I'm a prefocus guy anyway and
    that speed is very fast. Anticipating shots is one of the arts of
    wedding photography.

    I think the Sony R1 is just about the ideal wedding photography camera.
    Slap a Metz flash on the bracket with a Sony adapter on the other end of
    the cord and I'm good to go. It isn't just one or two of these features
    either, it's the combination of them.

    No, it's not a do-all and end-all camera. It won't work for all types of
    photography, but no camera really is. So, buy the camera that fits what
    and how you shoot. The Sony R1 is what I've been looking for.

    Clyde
     
    Clyde, Nov 21, 2005
    #15
  16. deryck  lant

    Bill Tuthill Guest

    deryck lant <> wrote:
    >
    > http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/R1/R1A.HTM


    For many years I've had a Sony videocamcorder, bought because it was
    top-rated by Consumer Reports (cough). I hate it. The zoom button
    is mounted sideways and counter-intuitively: I usually zoom in when
    I want to zoom out, because (to me) towards-the-lens means zoom in,
    while Sony designers thought it means zoom out. Nothing about the
    videocamcorder is intuitive.

    Sony has extended their non-expertise in user interface design, I see.
    "Control layout is a bit awkward" says Imaging-resource.

    I can't really tell from the review why, nor does the camera seem
    well designed and easy to use, based on pictures of control knobs and
    menu interfaces. With some cameras, especially Minolta and Pentax
    DSLRs, I often think "that makes sense." Not here.

    Maybe dpreview.com will explain the user interface more clearly.
     
    Bill Tuthill, Nov 21, 2005
    #16
  17. deryck  lant

    Chris Brown Guest

    In article <>,
    MTBike1970 <> wrote:
    >
    >I guess it's all relative. The problem with terms such as "crisp" is that
    >they are subjective and quite impossible to quantify. I've made 13 x 19
    >prints from my 7 MP camera that were "crispy" enough for my taste, but yes,
    >they aren't as crisp as what I can get from my 6*6 transparencies. Perhaps
    >stating that the R1 will give you a 13 x 19 print at 200 dpi, and that those
    >prints look great, would be more accurate.... but still subjective....


    To make it a bit more objective, I try and compare to a print from an E6
    transparency that's printed at a size where the detail is limited by the
    printer. For example, A3 is well within the capabilities of a Mamiya 7 in
    good condistions (tripod, Fujichrome's finest, etc.) and at A3 it makes my
    5D look bad. At A4, the 5D is just as good as medium format, but a 10D
    isn't, and so on.
     
    Chris Brown, Nov 21, 2005
    #17
  18. Clyde wrote:
    []
    > No, it's not a do-all and end-all camera. It won't work for all types
    > of photography, but no camera really is. So, buy the camera that fits
    > what and how you shoot. The Sony R1 is what I've been looking for.
    >
    > Clyde


    Many thanks for your report. I am glad it's living up to its promises.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Nov 21, 2005
    #18
  19. deryck  lant

    deryck lant Guest

    The message <>
    from Bill Tuthill <> contains these words:

    > deryck lant <> wrote:
    > >
    > > http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/R1/R1A.HTM


    > For many years I've had a Sony videocamcorder, bought because it was
    > top-rated by Consumer Reports (cough). I hate it. The zoom button
    > is mounted sideways and counter-intuitively: I usually zoom in when
    > I want to zoom out, because (to me) towards-the-lens means zoom in,
    > while Sony designers thought it means zoom out. Nothing about the
    > videocamcorder is intuitive.


    With the 717 I think the zoom control being electrical is switchable
    direction. Maybe others are as well.

    > Sony has extended their non-expertise in user interface design, I see.
    > "Control layout is a bit awkward" says Imaging-resource.


    > I can't really tell from the review why, nor does the camera seem
    > well designed and easy to use, based on pictures of control knobs and
    > menu interfaces. With some cameras, especially Minolta and Pentax
    > DSLRs, I often think "that makes sense." Not here.


    > Maybe dpreview.com will explain the user interface more clearly.
     
    deryck lant, Nov 21, 2005
    #19
  20. deryck  lant

    l e o Guest

    David J Taylor wrote:
    > Clyde wrote:
    > []
    >
    >>No, it's not a do-all and end-all camera. It won't work for all types
    >>of photography, but no camera really is. So, buy the camera that fits
    >>what and how you shoot. The Sony R1 is what I've been looking for.
    >>
    >>Clyde

    >
    >
    > Many thanks for your report. I am glad it's living up to its promises.
    >
    > David



    Report? I don't think Clyde has one yet.
     
    l e o, Nov 21, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Graham Cross
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    853
    Phil McKerracher
    Jan 27, 2005
  2. HRosita

    Canon 300D in depth review

    HRosita, Sep 6, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    267
    Todd Walker
    Sep 6, 2003
  3. deryck  lant

    Nikon D2X: Full In-Depth Review

    deryck lant, Jun 2, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    352
    Skip M
    Jun 3, 2005
  4. deryck  lant

    Nikon D50: In-depth Technical Review

    deryck lant, Aug 14, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    342
    deryck lant
    Aug 14, 2005
  5. deryck  lant

    Nikon D80: In-depth Review

    deryck lant, Sep 23, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    24
    Views:
    700
    RichA
    Sep 27, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page