Any member using the Sony RX100 M6 yet?

[John Walker]

Just wondering if any of you have opted for the RX100 M6 yet and if so, what's your verdict so far?  I've been using the RX100 cameras for a number of years now and nearly all of my 5000+ Alamy images were taken with them.

 

Second question - which version of Elements has RAW support for the M6 yet  (if any   ) ? 

 

John

[Betty LaRue]

Can’t answer your questions, but I detect money getting ready to be spent. 

Betty

[wiskerke]

Yes. Since 2 weeks.

To my horror no Adobe Camera RAW yet.

Adobe has refused to give a date, but most Adobe watchers expect the first half of August. (1/3 left.)

There is a Sony converter and editor: Imaging Edge.

The Dpreview review claims to have converted the images in ACR. AFAIK nobody else got that lucky. There seems to be a workaround by changing the EXIF so that ACR thinks it's a mkV file, but that would not be very useful re the probably horrible distortion in the corners on the wide end.

I have not tried the DNG route.

So only jpgs so far. The corners and edges in general are a bit to a lot worse than the V and the II. (I do not have III and IV.)

The reach is pretty much a real 200mm eq. The stabilization is probably a bit better than on the V, but it needs it too on the long end: I had a few blurred ones, but that's with extreme handling.

The menu is different again from the previous one, so using them side by side is not very pleasant. Stuff is not just in a different place with different tabs, but there are also different names.

Good things: it's a bit faster in everything. Especially starting up the first time.

Con: no apps anymore. Smart remote is build in. No Smooth Reflection or Bracket Pro.

So far I have struggled with the wifi connection more than with the mk V. Could be user error, because there is a new setting I have not tried yet. Plus I'm on a different phone.

On wifi I did manage to go through 3.5 batteries in 4.5 hours. At least one more than before.

Samples on Alamy: 200mm; 24mm. From jpg not from RAW.

 

wim

[Michael Ventura]

Those are some nice samples Wim!

 

[Ed Rooney]

Like our smarter tech pal, Wim, I too have had my new 100/6 for two weeks. I decided to go for that rather than a street zoom for my a6000. The budget zoom Wim suggested for the larger Sony was hard to get since I'm still living out of a suitcase without an address.. 

 

I agree with everything Wim says, but have not yet tried out all the things he's mentioned. And I probably won't need to. 

 

Very disappointed that Adobe is preventing us from shooting RAW. For now, I'm using Fine jpegs, and they look . . . fine. My main problem with the RX100/3 was/is the spotty, unreliable autofocus -- and the 100/6 is a great improvement.  The backscreen is now touch sensitive, and that has taken a little getting used to with the focus area selection. The slower (or less fast) zoom will not be a problem with the subjects I normally aim for when shooting stock.  Common-access editorial stock for Alamy is all I do. The IQ also looks better. The 120 to 200 reach may be needed where ever I go next, although I had little need for it in NYC.

 

John, I would definitely recommend the 100/6 to you for village England. 

 

Edo

[Marianne]

Can you convert in Capture One? You can get the free download for Sony. 

I was thinking about finding something to replace my Nikon P7000 eventually since even though it has great reach from ultra wide (6mm) to zoom (not sure haven't used it in a while but maybe 150 or 200mm) it's only great in daylight. Very noisy for night photography. How is the 100/6 at night? 

 

Edo, any news on your NYC apartment? Is it being fixed/rebuilt so you can move back or is it gone for good? 

[wiskerke]

I think the combination of a (III to )V plus a VI would cover all bases. Better IQ at the wide end plus a wider aperture for the previous models. The reach, slight increase of speed and maybe the touch screen on the VI.

If you're using one of the apps other than the remote app, there's no choice.

The better AF and the incredible FPS from the V onward are a reason to leave the III and IV be. However a good deal on one could be tempting especially when it's a second camera.

 

3 minutes ago, Marianne said:

Can you convert in Capture One? You can get the free download for Sony. 

I was thinking about finding something to replace my Nikon P7000 eventually since even though it has great reach from ultra wide (6mm) to zoom (not sure haven't used it in a while but maybe 150 or 200mm) it's only great in daylight. Very noisy for night photography. How is the 100/6 at night? 

 

You could try renting a V. The image quality is probably the same. Just the menus and the reach are different. (Well for evaluation purposes: the optical quality will be different.)

Sony sensors are good at night, but still need good editing skills. People report very good results with DXO (see workaround link below).

However there always have been two special settings at jpg only: hand held twilight and night scene. The first time you try it, it's like magic. However jpg only. It works with merging multiple images. The V and the VI now can do 24 fps. That's quite enough to get grainless images with merging. Again with some editing skills.

 

AFAIK Capture Pro also has no support yet.

I couldn't find my Capture Pro anymore and could not find any deal either. I must have gotten a free one with the A7R2.
 

Here's the workaround btw.

 

wim

[Ed Rooney]

2 hours ago, Marianne said:

 

Edo, any news on your NYC apartment? Is it being fixed/rebuilt so you can move back or is it gone for good? 

 

I sold my lease to the landlord, Marianne. No sign of the building opening anytime soon. I'm gone from NYC, just don't know where I'm gone to yet. 

 

Edo

[John Walker]

5 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

Can’t answer your questions, but I detect money getting ready to be spent. 

Betty

 

Thank you to everyone for your replies.

 

I bought two used RX100 M3 cameras a while back.  My wife isn't really using hers and is quite happy with the results from her phone .

My thinking is to sell one or both of them toward the purchase an RX100 M6.   I have seen the M6 advertised for around £900 so I wouldn't need to find a lot to make up the difference.

 

The hold up will be the lack of RAW support from Adobe.  I had to upgrade my version of Elements just to get the RAW driver for the M3.  I find the DNG route adds more hassle.

 

The other annoying thing is that if I have to upgrade my version of Elements I'll be getting options that I won't use.

Bottom line is that the M6 will be ideal for my needs but I'll hang fire until a RAW convertor is available.

[Martin P Wilson]

Has anyone get images from the Mk 6 through Alamy QC yet? I worry about the extra zoom range creating more distortion and less sharpness than Alamy will accept; after all pocket cameras are sort of on the edge of acceptability,

[Betty LaRue]

24 minutes ago, Martin P Wilson said:

Has anyone get images from the Mk 6 through Alamy QC yet? I worry about the extra zoom range creating more distortion and less sharpness than Alamy will accept; after all pocket cameras are sort of on the edge of acceptability,

Looking st John’s work, (stellar) and my humble offerings from these cameras, this pocket camera is head and shoulders above most of them.  But it will be interesting to see how the new one stacks up.

Betty

[wiskerke]

Let me throw some stuff in a dropbox folder.

Here it is.

3 images with their OOC JPGs and RAWs.

The jpgs I've uploaded as Live News are a lot lighter than I would normally upload. Around quality level 8 I'm guessing. No idea why. Too many new variables I guess.

 

wim

[Ed Rooney]

Unfortunately, my situation of not being able to upload anything to Alamy, any type of file from any camera, persists. Since Alamy have embraced files sent to them from countless contributors using all previous Sony 100 models, why would they have a problem with the improved 100/6?

 

Edo

[wiskerke]

Oh wow the Dropbox viewer shows the RAWs uncooked! The 24mm looks awful OOC! And it's quite a bit de-centered too. Oops.

Remember to download them, because the Dropbox viewer does all sort of things with the files as well.

There should be a download button or three dots in the upper right hand corner. Don't use right-click.

Irfan show the RAW files cooked btw.

Meaning using the in-camera settings.

Very uncharacteristic. Maybe it's just a setting somewhere.

 

wim

 

[John Mitchell]

11 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

Can’t answer your questions, but I detect money getting ready to be spent. 

Betty

 

No doubt you're right. Wallets are being opened as we speak. The M6 is $1600 CAN (plus 12% taxes) in Vancouver. Looks like a useful little toy though.

Personally, I'll just be reading the reviews.

 

 

[Ed Rooney]

I could have gone with the street zoom for the a6000 you have, John, but neither lens I was looking for was available here the East. After two weeks, the flap for the USB cord connection is still working. 

[John Mitchell]

3 hours ago, Ed Rooney said:

I could have gone with the street zoom for the a6000 you have, John, but neither lens I was looking for was available here the East. After two weeks, the flap for the USB cord connection is still working. 

 

Yup, stuff isn't always easy to find in Canada. You were spoiled in NYC.

 

I've always had good luck at Henry's for online shopping. They usually have a good Sony selection. They also accept trade-ins.

[Martin P Wilson]

8 hours ago, Ed Rooney said:

Unfortunately, my situation of not being able to upload anything to Alamy, any type of file from any camera, persists. Since Alamy have embraced files sent to them from countless contributors using all previous Sony 100 models, why would they have a problem with the improved 100/6?

 

Edo

Hi Edo

 

Sad to hear you are still havcing issues with uploading.

 

I appreciate the Mk1-5 are well established by Alamy contributors. I was just wondering if the longer zoom range of the MK6 might make the lens quality marginal; seem possible judging by WIm's comments. Zooms over about 5x are a quality challenge even on FF sensors. I use an 18-135 on Fuji APS-C and while good enough it has more challenges than say the 18-55 or 16-55; squeezing a similar zoom range into small package must be a major design challenge.

[Ed Rooney]

I'm spoiled in NYC no more, John. And in fact it's been about 5 years since I've added anything to my kit. Never tried Henry's. Hmm. MPB is where I traded my NEX-6 for the a6000; great people to deal with. I sold them all my Nikon digital stuff too. I have the 10-18 zoom and a 50 f/1.8 prime for the a6000. Basta!

 

Even though I sold my lease in NYC, I couldn't bring myself to buy two costly items. The choice between a 24-105 f/4 zoom for the a6000 and the newest mini was made easy -- the 100/6 was what the store on McGill had (Wim's kit zoom he suggested is the older 28-70).

 

And Martin, I would always defer to Wim on tech matters (and he works at his stock and has a great eye).  I would rather wait until Adobe lets us shoot RAW before making statements about the new 100/6 zoom. Right now, general sharpness and IQ look very good. I don't do bench tests. I've always been unhappy with the autofocus on my 100/3. Sony has solved that problem on the 100/6, or maybe on a model or two earlier. 

 

One must adjust physical technique when working with long lenses. In the future, depending on where I go, I may be using a longer lens more often. How often is the question. And it's something I'm not going to worry about. 

 

Edo

[Martin P Wilson]

52 minutes ago, Ed Rooney said:

...

 

And Martin, I would always defer to Wim on tech matters (and he works at his stock and has a great eye).  I would rather wait until Adobe lets us shoot RAW before making statements about the new 100/6 zoom. Right now, general sharpness and IQ look very good. I don't do bench tests. I've always been unhappy with the autofocus on my 100/3. Sony has solved that problem on the 100/6, or maybe on a model or two earlier. 

 

One must adjust physical technique when working with long lenses. In the future, depending on where I go, I may be using a longer lens more often. How often is the question. And it's something I'm not going to worry about. 

 

Edo

I agree Edo, Wim seems to have replaced David K (he is still publishing his magazines btw) as our resident expert on matters photographic.

 

I will wait until people (especially Wim) have had experience of the 100/6 RAW processing (my Capture 1 Pro does not support 100/6 yet) and consider other options (Canon G5X, LZ100) . At the moment I have other priorities as my photographic direction is changing towards academic research, I will be joining my local university to do PhD research in October. So,  I will now shoot for myself rather than worrying about stock as an income source. If I can generate a modest second income that will always help. As result I want a small go anywhere camera for occasional stock and to support any writing, something that can go in whatever bag I am using for school or travel, perhaps even in a coat pocket or a small belt pouch. I will keep, and possibly even update, my full Fuji outfit for my more serious work, my personal art, or whatever it is .

 

Martin

[John Mitchell]

4 hours ago, Ed Rooney said:

I'm spoiled in NYC no more, John. And in fact it's been about 5 years since I've added anything to my kit. Never tried Henry's. Hmm. MPB is where I traded my NEX-6 for the a6000; great people to deal with. I sold them all my Nikon digital stuff too. I have the 10-18 zoom and a 50 f/1.8 prime for the a6000. Basta!

 

Even though I sold my lease in NYC, I couldn't bring myself to buy two costly items. The choice between a 24-105 f/4 zoom for the a6000 and the newest mini was made easy -- the 100/6 was what the store on McGill had (Wim's kit zoom he suggested is the older 28-70).

 

And Martin, I would always defer to Wim on tech matters (and he works at his stock and has a great eye).  I would rather wait until Adobe lets us shoot RAW before making statements about the new 100/6 zoom. Right now, general sharpness and IQ look very good. I don't do bench tests. I've always been unhappy with the autofocus on my 100/3. Sony has solved that problem on the 100/6, or maybe on a model or two earlier. 

 

One must adjust physical technique when working with long lenses. In the future, depending on where I go, I may be using a longer lens more often. How often is the question. And it's something I'm not going to worry about. 

 

Edo

 

I mentioned Henry's mainly because they have free shipping, which might be useful while you're in Canada. Shipping costs from the US tend to be draconian.

 

Of course, you can always downsize images taken at the long end if they look a bit iffy. I do that fairly often with images captured with the original Sony SEL 55-210 kit lens that I still use. I figure that it beats spending a pile of money that I don't have on an expensive lens that I probably wouldn't use much. To my surprise, images taken with the 24MP a6000 and 55-210 at the long end actually look better better than those shot with the 16MP NEX-6. I thought the opposite would be true. No QC problems (touch wood).

 

[Ed Rooney]

We all miss David K, Martin. Not that he's gone, just busy with other things. 

 

John, now if only Sony would make a better USB flap, all would be right with the world. 

 

 

[Betty LaRue]

I really can’t see a problem with 200mm. I regularly use telephoto lenses with good results, hand-held. But there’s always a first time for things to go wrong.

I would think it won’t take Adobe to catch up on new cameras.

 

While the M6 is slower, those of us who own the faster ones can shoot those indoors. The reviews do say the M-6 works well at higher iso, so we’ll see.

The bulk of my shooting is outdoors in good light. And I have my Fuji xt-2 and a tripod for tabletop. And it’s my main for regular shoots.. I use the Sony as a have with me while running around camera. Although it was perfect for the tropical beach. I can see 200mm being quite useful in many circumstances. I actually loved the 100mm reach of the original and shot at that end a lot and wished for more.

Betty

[Allan Bell]

I have the mk1 and mk3 and along with all the other Sony bodies and lenses I think this is all I need so will not be investing in the mk6.

 

My problem is that I do not always know which camera/lens I need to take with me on general shoots. If I am going for a specific purpose then it is no problem.

 

Allan

 

 

 

[Ed Rooney]

Allan, If I had stayed in New York, or if I lived in Cambridge or Oxfordshire, like you, I would not have gone for the 100/6. But if I end up on the Spanish coast, more reach will be welcome. 

 

Betty has spent a lot of time shooting birds, so she's comfortable using long lenses, with or without a monopod. That is not the same as using lenses up to 135mm. Every time you double the focal length you need to move to the next fastest shutter speed. With film I had a 180, 200, 300 and 500 with extenders. No more of that for me. There are very few 'must' shots in editorial stock and fewer still that call for a telephoto.

 

Edo, waiting for Adobe and Sony to sort things out