Sony RX100 or Fuji X100 for silent street shooting

[bruno_gaurish]

Hello there, i need a silent shooting camera. I was going to buy the fuji x100 but now with the new sony RX100?

I do street photography and quite often with very low light. Of course i look for the BEST IQ and as best as

possible autofocus. I have my eyes on the new Sony NEX 6 but this is another topic. If you have tried both

cameras, your coments are very welcome. Thanks

[philip_wilson]

<p>Significant price difference and specification difference. I have used the Fuji and it is a great camera. The Image quality is very good and it is quiet enough for street shooting. It is built and handles like a proper camera. The AF is a bit slow but fine for street use. I am commenting despite not having used the Sony. For me the Sony would not be acceptable for street use as it lacks a viewfinder and will undoubtedly have lower IQ (lots more pixels on a small sensor - the X100 sensor is 3.2 times the size and has 60% of the pixels). <br>

Obviously there is a significant price difference - plus the Sony has a zoom lens. I would suggest that you try both cameras as I think you will find that the handling, controls and the image quality are the biggest differences. I have never found a compact camera that I liked as i find the handling very poor. I have a M4/3 body but I rarely use it prefering either my Leicas or my Canon DSLRs - there is nothing wrong with the IQ of the M4/3 camera I have - the handling is what I dislike. I would examine the following attributes<br>

Image quality (especially at high ISO - take a couple of cards with you when you test them<br>

Handling - which one feels right in your hands<br>

Viewfinder - do you want one<br>

AF speeds<br>

Build quality</p>

 

[simon_crofts]

<p>About the X100's autofocus, I've found it pretty good. The secret as far as I'm concerned is to switch it to manual focus mode. That way the camera doesn't have to focus before taking the picture, so reaction is near instantaneous. In manual focus mode, you can still use autofocus - you pre-focus using the rear button much the same as I do on my Contax G2, it's just that it disables focus via the shutter button. Used in this way, I found the focussing system on the X100 superior to the likes of the G2, which is a street photography classic.</p>

 

[Brad_]

>>> If you have tried both cameras, your coments are very welcome.

 

I have extensive RX100 street shooting experience, but none with the X100.

[bruno_gaurish]

Thanks for your comments. Well Brad, i shouldn't have said "if you have tried both cameras..." In fact what is interesting is the feedback from user's experience. So welcome Brad to share yours...

[james_symington1]

<p>I have both cameras and whilst the RX100 is a fantastic camera I prefer having a viewfinder and so the X100 gets my vote for street photography use. For sheer portability nothing touches the RX100 though.</p>

[philip_wilson]

Simon I still use my Contax G2s and G1 on occasion. I bought an M4/3 body to use the glass and while the IQ is good the handling is

horrible. In addition on the wide angles (21 and 28) you have to perform surgery to use them on an M4/3 body and I did

not want to cut up my lovely Contax glass.

[frank_skomial]

<p>Your eyes on NEX6 are good.<br>

NEX5N, NEX5R and NEX6 have tilting LCD screen, that would allow you to shoot from the camera at your belly rather than at your eyes. Taking pictures this way will make it less intrusive, and people could not be aware of having picture taken.<br>

I find more and more people objectionable about their pictures taken, even in public places like a street.</p>

[leslie_cheung]

<p>'think they both have leaf shutters...so there shouldn't be a big difference, if any...</p>

[bruno_gaurish]

Yes Frank, a tilting screen is nice... The NEX6 should be a great camera. It has a viewfinder, a big sensor, a superfast autofocus, very good dynamic range i suppose, not too many pixels (so low light / high iso should be decent) lenses are getting available (zeiss 24mm or sigma 19mm). The only problem for me is the shutter noise...

[frank_skomial]

<p>Do not know how loud NEX6 will be.<br /> I used NEX5N, and now NEX7, and it does not seem to be too loud for street shooting, where the ambient noise is usually high. I just tried the NEX7 and the noise is about the level of a medium format central leaf shutter TLR with no moving mirror camera like Mamiya C220/ C330, Rolleiflex, Flexaret, etc.</p>

<p>You need to try for yourself if is not too loud for you, but is definitely much more silent than any DSLR/SLR with flipping mirror.</p>

<p>Noise from a 35mm Halina tiny film camera with in-lens shutter is much lower, almost hard to hear... however, noise from central leaf lens shutter lens from Pentax 90/2.8 LS lens is louder than from NEX7 ( we are not talking about the Pentax 6x7 mirror noise that could easily spook birds or horses on a street :)</p>

<p>Noise from a Smena with built-in central shutter is louder than from NEX7.<br /> I have couple more old cameras to try, but you have some idea already.</p>

[ariel_s1]

 

<p>There is no absolute winner between your two options. The Fuji X100 has far and away better image quality, but the Sony RX100 is noticeably cheaper, faster autofocus, truly pocketable, and it's also a zoom. You really need to weigh those against each other, because as far as cameras go, they're as different as a Porsche vs. a pick-up truck.</p>

<p>One thing that's annoyed me about the Fujis that I've played with, even as far back as the Fuji S2 (based on a Nikon DSLR), is that they never really invest into the usability of the camera. Glitches, slow operation, etc. are never taken care of. It feels to me like the Rolls Royce/Jaguar mentality. When I'm using the camera, it's as if the company is saying to me, "Yes, we made a nice product, and you'll put up with the pleasure of our camera, since you are lucky enough to be allowed to use our precious device." I can forgive a lot if the image quality is worthwhile, but if another camera is almost as good, and doesn't raise my blood pressure by having to put up with its shortcomings, then I'm going to use it. For that reason alone, even though Sony doesn't have the pure lens choices that you get with Fuji, I'd consider the NEX-6. I bought my mother a NEX-3 when they just came out, and loved using it. A friend from the college days needed a new camera, so I steered him towards a NEX-5 and unloaded some of my old film glass onto him, and he's loved it. Sony has realized that a camera can't just produce great images; it also has to be a joy to use. If Fuji doesn't realize this with their X-E1, and if Sony produces some solid lenses for their system, yet another Fuji digital system could go down in flames.</p>

 

[philip_wilson]

Interesting point Ariel - Fujisawa have hallways had handling difficulties my GX 680 bodies have terrible handling - I

would also say the 6x17 is a bit of a pain to operate (great camera). Perhaps Fuji just likes these handling issues. Steve

Huff does good reviews of both cameras from a photographic ( not test chart) point of view

 

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2012/07/26/the-sony-rx100-digital-camera-review/

[simon_crofts]

I don't recognise this - I found the handling of the Fuji X100 one of the best cameras that I've dealt with - certainly the best

in a digital camera. Better than my Nikon D700 for example. Incomparably better than one of the recent Sony NEX's that a friend

let me play with.

 

Having read lots of reviews before I bought the X100 I was also impressed to see that Fuji had dealt with the criticisms that had

been levelled at it in the first reviews - lack of a dedicated ISO button, etc. The manual focus got a lot of criticism, but I've

found it to be excellent, so I can only assume that Fuji must have addressed that too.

 

It did take a lot of tweaking of the settings to customise it how I wanted, but it allowed me to do that and once set up

properly handling is really great.

[leslie_cheung]

<p>Handling/useabilty are all too subjective and tied to the user's shooting history/POV... </p>

[simon_crofts]

<p>Too true, it's certainly aimed at people who are accustomed to the traditional layout of aperture ring, shutter speed dial, compensation dial, and who dislike EVF's (or at least, prefer optical viewfinders). That would be me.</p>

<p>But Fuji did respond very quickly to the teething handling criticisms expressed in the first reviews by making modifications.</p>

 

[Brad_]

I have no complaints with my RX100. Easily fits in my jeans pocket - goes with me everywhere. Produces superb photos. Autofocuses very

quickly. Quiet. Really good high-ISO performance up to 3200. This camera and my iPhone, both

pocketable, have changed the way I approach street shooting. My 5D2 and 35/1.4 have been in my closet for about a year now. <P>

 

<a href=

"http://citysnaps.net/2011%20photos/RX100%20sample%20gallery/">Here's a wide variety of sample pix</a> I put together,

a mixture of street and street portraiture, in color and b&w.

[leslie_cheung]

<p>Thus far, the only criticism of the RX100 is that of the shutter button feel...The pressure difference between half pressed (to AF) and full press (to trip the shutter) is extremely small. As a result, I trip the shutter far more (by accident) than I wanted to. This little cam will likely replace all my other compacts...</p>

<p> </p>

[bruno_gaurish]

So how good (or bad) is the autofocus of the X100 compare to the sony's?

[simon_crofts]

<p>I can't compare the X100 to the Sony's, but can compare it to a Nikon D700. In absolute speed it isn't as fast as the D700 - but it isn't so far behind it, it's much better than I expected.</p>

<p>But these questions about the speed of autofocus can't be answered in a vacuum, they're too closely connected to how you use the camera, and what settings you use.</p>

<p>I would strongly recommend disconnecting the shutter button from AF activation - if you do this you'll get a much more responsive camera. For a start there isn't a pause while it autofocuses before taking the picture, taking the picture is almost instantaneous if you do this. It's also easier to focus on, and meter on, what you want rather than what's in the middle of the frame. For that matter IMHO it's a huge advantage to do this also with the Nikon D700 for the same reasons.</p>

<p>If you use that approach, and do what you would with a Contax G2 - just before taking the picture, set autofocus where you want by pressing the rear button, then you can tweak if you want directly with the focus barrel, and the camera will stay focussed, even if you switch it off, until you want to refocus, you'll find it an incredibly quick and responsive camera - you can whip it to your eye and take a pic in a fraction of a second. Any camera where you focus using the shutter button after pointing it at the subject is going to be slow, and the X100 (and for that matter, the D700) is no exception.</p>

<p> </p>

[leslie_cheung]

<p>If I understand Simon's focus approach and I think I do, there are problems with it. The biggest being that the subject has to be static or moving pretty slow AND you have to be prepared in advance (anticipate). It is a good approach and one ought to anticipate, always. But there are times where you just can't, and that's when fast AF is all the difference. </p>

[simon_crofts]

<p>Leslie, you're right, but with a really fast moving object, no autofocus system is going to keep up completely, whether it's a top end Nikon, Canon, or whatever, and it's usually better to prefocus and tweak as necessary. I'm photographing quite a bit of professional ballet, and much of the time it's the only way to do it - no autofocus system is going to be close to fast enough, especially coping with multiple object moving fast in different directions. And unless you disable that autofocus through the shutter button you're going to get very random results even with a high end DSLR. But you could easily photograph fast moving ballet with an X100 using the technique I describe (subject to limitations of focal length and point of view).</p>

<p>There are some in-between situations where tracking autofocus on a DSLR can keep up with objects, and in these cases you may be able to do things that you can't with any compact camera or rangefinder, whether it's X100, a G2, a Leica, or any compact camera on the market. In that case, if you're using the likes of the X100 you may be at a slight autofocus disadvantage compared to a DSLR, but not really much.</p>

<p>The way I describe is pretty much how you use a Leica, which is of course, a classic street camera (only of course, in that case it's manual focus so slower, but the same principle). With the X100, or any other camera for that matter, I believe it's much better just to accept that. If you do, it's autofocus system is excellent - fast and reliable. If you're looking for complex tracking autofocus on multiple objects, then you'll be disappointed - whatever camera you pick. If you're looking for something that is fast and reliable, with a snappy autofocus that you can use in the same way that you might use a Contax G2 (or a Leica in the manual focus world), then it's excellent.</p>

 

[simon_crofts]

<p>btw, I should add, it's limitation in fast moving situations is not the autofocus - it's how many frames you can take before it temporarily locks up while writing to card, assuming you're shooting in RAW. </p>

[philip_wilson]

<p>Simon - I use the same approach as you on my G2s (I wish the G1 had the same button). In terms of Fuji - it is a relative thing as I said earlier I prefer the X100 handling to cameras like the NEX which I could not get on with at all. Fuji does tend to have some foibles built into the handling of their cameras however. I am not sure about ballet as I have never shot it but with sports such as Ice hockey and ski racing my Canon DSLRs do a pretty good job (Although I sometimes shoot in MF) with keeper rates in the 95%+ range. Despite manufacturer AF claims for M4/3 bodies and similar in my experience there is a big difference in AF capability between an good DSLR and any mirrorless body I have used. By the way I find my Leicas are the best handling Digital bodies as you can ignore the digital bits. I generally just change ISO and re-format cards from the rear screen - the occasional look at a histogram perhaps. I have had no other digital body where you can focus on the photography and ignore the digital interface in this way. Of course you give up a lot of the additional features some bodies offer.</p>

[Brad_]

>>> So how good (or bad) is the autofocus of the X100 compare to the sony's?<P>

 

Can't speak from direct experience on that, but my <a href= "http://travisjensenphoto.com/">project

partner</a> had an x100 for 6-7 months, but recently sold it for that (af performance) and other handling reasons. He gave

it a decent shot before giving up on it...