I use around F5.6 to F8 for landscapes. Can't say about smaller apertures, I don't think I've used them.  Tend to use bigger apertures (lower f numbers) if anything.


I use the RX as a "walking around" camera though. I have a DSLR as well. Having said that I've not had any problem with images from the RX with iStock or Alamy. I wouldn't expect to have problems with iStock TBH since they lowered their acceptance standards.


I've not tried any add on lenses with the RX, tends to cancel out the "pocketability" IMHO, but I do know that any "add on" lenses are going to introduce their own problems.


If you shoot well composed and exposed images with the right WB using optimal settings, then you shouldn't need to "pull the image around" too much in LR. I'd certainly leave shadow reduction alone as much as possible. Use a reflector(s) to get light into the shadows with still life type stuff.

There's a difference between "art" photography and "stock", although the difference gets pretty fuzzy sometimes.


At the extremes "stock" is flat lit, good depth of field, sharp focus. Good for use as illustrating a point, or as an element in a brochure or whatever. "Art" on the other hand can be whatever is pleasing to the eye, or thought provoking. With few if any technical considerations.


It doesn't really bother me about the lack of a really "long" lens. It's not what I bought the camera for TBH. Whatever camera / lens combination you have you will always a wider angle, or a longer focal length. That's the nature of the beast. Learn to work with the equipment you have.


My DSLR is a Pentax K5 and is getting a bit old in DSLR terms, but yes, it is better noise wise. It also has the advantage of course of being able to change the complete lens when different focal lengths are called for. That's always going to better than putting an add on lens in front of a lens. 

I can send you the Raw file. I even remove noise a little bit for at but not as much as for microstock. At the beginning even the outside ones were rejected for noise. You may not forget that this camera has a small sensor. I had removed noise on one image, DT accepted it, SS didn't because noise . I tell you, I was sitting here searching for that little bit left over noise. I removed more and it was accepted. I get my art images rejected when there is noise in them but they never expect me to remove that much.

My files are saved in 100% quality. Affinity compresses even less than LR. I only had once a complaint about artifacts. That was a photo taken in Jpeg with my old camera. I wonder if SS has humans looking at the images or is that a computer searching for noise.

Hold on a minute, I only shot one Jpeg in bright daylight so far. The one nominated for an award was a RAW file. However, I have only edited one file so far with LR because I bought it only recently. True, all is new for me. I edited my first Jpeg files about 6 months ago and that wasn't for microstock. Changing from Windows and Corel AfterShot Pro to a MAC and yet another software in a short time also wasn't fun. I did get on very well with DXO. I was told not to go into the colour channels for microstock, not to sharpen them because the customers want to do that..... I am using Topaz Detail and Topaz Clarity for art. And that software I only bought recently. I did read yesterday that my camera makes mushy photos. It was a review from a magazine and indeed is a noise maker. I have learned a lot in 6 months. I had a 100% acceptance rate on DT and all were RAW files. The rejected ones were because they didn't want any more handbags... I got accepted at SS when I tried the first time. But like I once mentioned, they only accepted 50% of my images. So far I have only edited photos taken inside for microstock. With outside I am even more unsure how to edit them. I use Topaz Detail for art. Lightroom I need to learn first. And I think the noise removal from DXO is way better.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

I just checked the two images I have taken yesterday. Same images. One in Jpeg, one in RAW. Both shot using Automatic mode and autofocus. Wow, what a difference. There was no colour noise in the Jpeg. Using the colour noise slider made image worse. I pulled noise slider to 30 and noise was gone. Nice looking image. Still sharp. Didn't use Clarity slider nor sharpening slider.
The RAW file: I hate looking at the sky. I stopped at 50. Still not looking good. Colour noise in image. Colour noise slider 64 and noise slider 61. In Affinity I probably would have ended up using 50.
Camera used f5.6, shutter speed 800, ISO 125.

?.

just a thought�. cookies by their very nature, even in real life look like they have noise�. maybe experiment with smoother surfaces?
Another thought the sonya55 is a small lightweight camera and noise at 800 is minimal. since it is an older model, they can be found cheap. I got one recently for only 250 usd. because of its size, it comes with me everywhere i go.
I have also found, with the sonys I have had, the lower the iso the softer the image, especially with the 828�. with the dslr's the lowest you can go is 100 and not 60 (at least with the ones I have used)
And yes many photos shot at 800 iso on the 55 have been accepted and are selling on the major sites.

Not sure if that helps at all but best of luck!

I've just been looking at some shots I've taken with the RX100 Mk1. Some of a grey black sky with a rainbow. Bit underexposed. f4 @ 1/640th ISO 125 Really not that noisy or soft. Town shots of buildings. Winter afternoon, F5 @ 1/80th ISO 125. Bit UUE again. Not that noisy or soft.


They both needed some NR for the shadow areas in post IIRC. Not all over though. And they were taken on aperture priority, hence the bit of UUE, which wasn't really a problem.


I use RawTherapee and The Gimp. So no fancy software (although RawTherapee is a very good converter IMO)


By the way it really isn't a matter of a camera having lower ISO being "better".  It's down the the camera type, the sensor and how it's used.


I'd conclude that you might have a noisy example of the camera.


Otherwise (and no offence meant) you are getting something wrong when taking the shots,
or taking shots which the agencies don't really want, and are therefore applying stricter inspection rules to.

I'd agree that manual focus is pretty difficult. Only ever used it a few times, when doing things like focusing on rain on glass when the camera wants to focus on what's behind.


 

What autofocus area are you using? Don't use "multi" (assuming your camera is the same I know they are very similar) If you do then you are letting the camera decide what the subject is.
Use "Center" focus and then recompose your shot, or use "Flexible" and move the small spot to where you want the focus.


Just to say that while I use the camera on "aperture priority" most of the time, that's only because the manual controls are a bit fiddly IMO. I usually shoot manual with the DSLR for non moving type stuff. Apart from anything else it saves having different exposures through a series. It also allows for correction for things like white backgrounds, which nearly always come out with the subject under exposed due to the camera being "fooled"


Generally when I get a new camera I read the manual (yes really! and then spend time turning off most of the automatic "features".


I want the camera to do what I want it to do.

As I said, I don't use multi. It's letting the camera decide what the subject is.
For preference and for most uses I use the "center" focus and re-compose after half pressing the release.


There should be two parts to the manual (or at least there are with mine), a sort of basic one and a more comprehensive one. Should be on the disc or available from the Sony site.


Working in sunlight is the biggest problem with using the screen on any camera, although I can't say that I've found it a real issue with this one.


 

It doesn't work like that by making "everything in focus" (or at least not as far as I know!). It "decides" where the focus point should be, and "brackets" that area to show you where the focus is.
As I say, it's only my opinion, but I want to decide where the focus is myself. hence my use of the fixed point.


The manual you want is the "Instruction / Operation manual DSC-RX100M3
(I think that's the right one)


The English site is here
http://www.sony.co.uk/support/en/content/cnt-man/DSC-RX100M3/list
but you'll probably want to get it in your own language.

I have the manual in English.

There is a "manual" with 30 pages or so. And an "Instruction operation manual" with 200+ pages.

Do you leave camera on centre setting all the time so that it is faster to take a photo?

Yes, as I have said.


I've nothing more to add really. Good luck!