A question for photographers

Heedtheadvice

@ukcarper,
See a few of Beanies other pix from another thread at https://framapic.org/gallery#WvzTv9KQ4ohD/p5XX4WXcWoyE.JPG,MkYiGYEWL85c/iQnDFNPUJV5e.JPG,FAlrXALQLLUx/C9GSMElfP3Vf.JPG,vnBISCw0cn8P/5cYua5IswzpU.JPG
with thanks to Carrot for the link.....

chrisbur

beanfarmer wrote: »

Yes ukcarper generally most of the other pictures are OK, they are not always perfect or clear but as a general rule they come out well. It was just this one situation where no matter how many pictures I took it wouldn't work.
I had to actually do them again on a different day. When they don't come out it's a question of focus usually but by standing back a bit or adjusting they are fine

The contrast in your pictures was far greater than your camera (or any camera digital or film) could handle. You had as near as I can tell light coloured areas lit by full sun and a window into an unlit room. I would have expected with a normal auto exposure mode for the overall scene to be exposed about right and the window to be black with no detail. It appears from the pictures though that the window has been exposed fairly close to correct and the general scene is over-exposed. This is something I would have expected in a spot metering mode which looking back was not the case. I suppose it could be that there is a fault with the meter when it encounters a very high contrast scene, but it is OK with a lower contrast scene as most of your pictures are OK.

ukcarper

Heedtheadvice wrote: »

@ukcarper,
See a few of Beanies other pix from another thread at https://framapic.org/gallery#WvzTv9KQ4ohD/p5XX4WXcWoyE.JPG,MkYiGYEWL85c/iQnDFNPUJV5e.JPG,FAlrXALQLLUx/C9GSMElfP3Vf.JPG,vnBISCw0cn8P/5cYua5IswzpU.JPG
with thanks to Carrot for the link.....

There not to bad a little over exposed the first one has a burnt out spot at bottom of image could be light reflecting off something leaning against wall. What still puzzles me is that in original image the bottom half is burnt out while the top is no so bad.

System

ukcarper wrote: »

Are the other photos you've taken OK if so it could just be a one off.

Well actually I would have said yes before this thread until Heedy (Heedhteadvice) mentioned something about the quality of the other ones so I have to say that in general yes they are OK I can get good quality pictures but never have they totally been unviewable as these ones were.

Thanks to all your high level crime scene forensic analysis the result is I'm selling the camera for half it's used value. There's a great site called https://www.uk.bidvoy.com and it tracks the actual sold prices of items on ebay so I'm think 50% reduction of the used price with a note to explain what the suspected fault might be but at the same time emphasizing 95% of all pictures come out perfectly.

Any suggestions as to what to how to describe the suspected fault? Do you think £150 is a fair price?

I've just checked the used selling price of the mk3 and the average sold price on ebay is £318
https://uk.bidvoy.net/Sony_rx100_mk3/31388

That would mean £150 is half price for a camera that is suspected to have a fault probably a factory made fault that only surfaces randomly?

I'm then going to use that money towards buying a lower priced Mk1 brand knew from John Lewis and make up the difference although I'm not sure what the new price is for a Mk1

So a new Mk1 Sony RX100 is £329
https://www.johnlewis.com/sony-cyber-shot-dsc-rx100-compact-camera-hd-1080p-20-2mp-3-6x-optical-zoom-3-lcd-screen-black/p231683057

[Deleted User]

Before you go and sell it, does anyone know if the file properties would show the exposure compensation on this camera?

Come to that @beanfarmer have you perhaps tried either one of the other auto modes (Superior Auto, Intelligent Auto or Program Auto) or try a -2 (maybe) exposure compensation?

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx100-m3/2

ukcarper

beanfarmer wrote: »

Well actually I would have said yes before this thread until Heedy (Heedhteadvice) mentioned something about the quality of the other ones so I have to say that in general yes they are OK I can get good quality pictures but never have they totally been unviewable as these ones were.

Thanks to all your high level crime scene forensic analysis the result is I'm selling the camera for half it's used value. There's a great site called https://www.uk.bidvoy.com and it tracks the actual sold prices of items on ebay so I'm think 50% reduction of the used price with a note to explain what the suspected fault might be but at the same time emphasizing 95% of all pictures come out perfectly.

Any suggestions as to what to how to describe the suspected fault? Do you think £150 is a fair price?

I've just checked the used selling price of the mk3 and the average sold price on ebay is £318
https://uk.bidvoy.net/Sony_rx100_mk3/31388

That would mean £150 is half price for a camera that is suspected to have a fault probably a factory made fault that only surfaces randomly?

I'm then going to use that money towards buying a lower priced Mk1 brand knew from John Lewis and make up the difference although I'm not sure what the new price is for a Mk1

So a new Mk1 Sony RX100 is £329
https://www.johnlewis.com/sony-cyber-shot-dsc-rx100-compact-camera-hd-1080p-20-2mp-3-6x-optical-zoom-3-lcd-screen-black/p231683057

Personally I wouldn't sell a camera on the basis of one bad photo in what looks like very demanding conditions. I am a reasonably competent photographer and have had some very bad results on occasions using the same cameras that have given excellent results. There are some lighting conditions that no camera can cope with.

System

Colin_Maybe wrote: »

Before you go and sell it, does anyone know if the file properties would show the exposure compensation on this camera?
Come to that @beanfarmer have you perhaps tried either one of the other auto modes (Superior Auto, Intelligent Auto or Program Auto) or try a -2 (maybe) exposure compensation?
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx100-m3/2

No I haven't but to be fair the camera does have an automatic feature but I never fully understood the difference. Have you ever used the RX100 series before.

ukcarper wrote: »

Personally I wouldn't sell a camera on the basis of one bad photo in what looks like very demanding conditions. I am a reasonably competent photographer and have had some very bad results on occasions using the same cameras that have given excellent results. There are some lighting conditions that no camera can cope with.

So I've now sold the camera for £195 and I feel that considering the average selling price is £320 for a used camera that's reasonable because it was only one time ever that it failed.

So thank you for all your comments they resulted in someone else getting a good deal and in me having peace of mind. Now I've not got a nice camera but I know that the camera I do have will work as it should

I feel I can put this thread to bed with the words "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED NO FURTHER ACTION" stamped on the file....:o

[Deleted User]

beanfarmer wrote: »

No I haven't but to be fair the camera does have an automatic feature but I never fully understood the difference. Have you ever used the RX100 series before

No, just similar bridge cameras.

Johnmcl7

Colin_Maybe wrote: »

Before you go and sell it, does anyone know if the file properties would show the exposure compensation on this camera?

Come to that @beanfarmer have you perhaps tried either one of the other auto modes (Superior Auto, Intelligent Auto or Program Auto) or try a -2 (maybe) exposure compensation?

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx100-m3/2

The EXIF data does show the exposure compensation which was 0, it was in the general exposure mode (rather than a spot or centre weighted one) and also that the camera was shooting in the main auto mode, you can see the full EXIF here:

Filename - DSC00869.JPG
ImageDescription - 
Make - SONY
Model - DSC-RX100M3
Orientation - Top left
XResolution - 350
YResolution - 350
ResolutionUnit - Inch
Software - DSC-RX100M3 v1.10
DateTime - 2014:01:18 00:52:29
YCbCrPositioning - Co-Sited
ExifOffset - 290
ExposureTime - 1/400 seconds
FNumber - 4.00
ExposureProgram - Normal program
ISOSpeedRatings - 125
Recommended Exposure Index - 125
ExifVersion - 0230
DateTimeOriginal - 2014:01:18 00:52:29
DateTimeDigitized - 2014:01:18 00:52:29
ComponentsConfiguration - YCbCr
CompressedBitsPerPixel - 1 (bits/pixel)
BrightnessValue - 8.56
ExposureBiasValue - 0.00
MaxApertureValue - F 1.80
MeteringMode - Multi-segment
LightSource - Auto
Flash - Flash not fired, auto mode
FocalLength - 8.80 mm
UserComment - 
FlashPixVersion - 0100
ColorSpace - sRGB
ExifImageWidth - 5472
ExifImageHeight - 3648
InteroperabilityOffset - 31652
FileSource - DSC - Digital still camera
SceneType - A directly photographed image
CustomRendered - Normal process
ExposureMode - Auto
White Balance - Auto
DigitalZoomRatio - 1.00 x
FocalLengthIn35mmFilm - 24 mm
SceneCaptureType - Standard
Contrast - Normal
Saturation - Normal
Sharpness - Normal
Lens Info - 8.80  25.70  1.80  2.80

Maker Note (Vendor): - 
High ISO NoiseReduction - Normal
Creative Style - Standard
Dynamic Range Optimizer - Auto
Image Stabilization - On
Color Mode - Standard
Quality - Fine
Sony Model ID - 317

Thumbnail: - 
Compression - 6 (JPG)
ImageDescription - 
Make - SONY
Model - DSC-RX100M3
Orientation - Top left
XResolution - 72
YResolution - 72
ResolutionUnit - Inch
Software - DSC-RX100M3 v1.10
DateTime - 2014:01:18 00:52:29
JpegIFOffset - 31948
JpegIFByteCount - 7019
YCbCrPositioning - Co-Sited

Sony cameras tend to lock out quite a few settings when they're in auto mode and exposure compensation is one of them, the button takes you to picture effects in auto mode and if you dig into the menu exposure compensation is greyed out.

It does certainly look like the camera is set to positive exposure compensation so I had a look to see if bracketing could have been accidentally enabled as I've seen that a few times on some Olympus cameras as the camera takes one shot at a time (so the user needs to press the shutter three times). However the bracketing mode on the Sony starts off at 0 by default and the only option is to have negative exposure compensation first rather than over compensation.

I see the OP has sold the camera now so no point asking any further questions. I still think there was a fault with the camera given it appeared to be in full automatic and completely screwed up those images, in all the photos I've taken with similar cameras I've never seen it make such a mess of a simple shot like that in auto mode. When they have produced similar photos it's because I've been testing settings in non-auto modes and forgotten about it until after.