Question for RX100 owners. Which model?

[Sultanpepa]

Question for RX100 owners. Which model do you believe is best suited to stock or just better overall?

[Nigel Kirby]

I Have the RX100 III which I bought two years ago and my wife bought the RX100V a year ago. We find both cameras are good for stock ie close up and cityscapes etc they are our carry round cameras for everday use as they are light and fit in our pockets easily.  For commercial work etc that need higher res we tend to use our D850s with 2.8 lenses.

But overall we cannot fault both the RXs. I know others like Ed have commented on here about the RX - I think its because of him l bought one.

[wiskerke]

This is a side by side comparison at dpreview.

Every iteration gets a little bit better at small details. Especially AF and speed improve a bit with each model.

The big jumps are the optics:

Models 1 & 2: 28-100mm (35mm equivalence) and 1.8-4.9;

3-5 and VA: 24-70mm and 1.8-2.8;

6 & 7: 24-200mm and 2.8 -4.5.

There is extensive computing going on to correct the hefty distortion and vignetting especially with the 24-200mm. If your editing software does not support baked-in profiles, editing will be very hard. (Which makes for a less desirable choice for stock.) Otherwise the result is really good, discernible only if you have to do more editing in those regions. Though mostly correctable. In general editing does take more skill & time compared to full frame (but no dust bunnies!).

Except for video, the other major leap is wireless connectivity from model 2 on. But getting better in the recent 2 or 3 models. However support for downloadable apps stopped with model 5. With it went certain bracketing options and time-lapse.

If you need it (and like with most functions you'll know when you do) the fps is now at 90 in model 7. I find myself using the 24 fps in the M6 surprisingly often. (Which is why my 128Gb card last week was full at mid afternoon already.)

I have the models 1; 2; 5 and 6. Bought the first one used, the latter 3 new. 2 and 6 as soon as they became available because of the extra functions (wifi and 200mm resp).

Model 7 has faster and better AF still, but the main attraction is that video isn't time limited anymore.

Initially model 6 had serious bugs in the remote control function where the camera would not pair with a phone in 98% of cases. But all that has been resolved with firmware updates (after about a year) and it has now the stablest of connections. During that year I used my M5 with wifi and M6 in my hand. And mostly I still do, because how I use it on wifi there's very little benefit of the 200mm over the 70mm while the wide is better and also the larger opening allows for shorter exposure and/or lower ISO. (With wifi it's on a sort of long selfie stick.)

Re dust bunnies: if you do get them, initially repair prices were very reasonable: around 50-70 GBP/Eur reported. However it seems that there's now a strict policy of a unified price for all repairs. Which at currently around 350-375 means a lot of the cheaper models are total loss in case of just one piece of dust or hair. And those can get in.

For those not faint of heart, there are repair videos on youtube.

 

So as usual it's very hard to be conclusive in this without knowing exactly what you will want to do with it. For instance In my case I found out I wanted wifi very quickly. And then I wanted 200mm, but I had just bought the model 5 because I had a dust bunny and the repair price had just gone up. So I bought model 6 within a couple of months. And then I was very glad I hadn't traded in the model 5 when it turned out the wifi didn't work and the support for the uploadable apps had been scrapped.

And I recently found out I use 24 fps a lot. So a lot can change when you find new ways of using it. (Or when you get better in post - like me with the help of ginormous computing power 😂)

 

wim

 

 

[sb photos]

After thoroughly researching it I bought my RX100 Mk7 during the first lockdown. It is ideal for stock, and I have also shot a few protests as reportage with it. I often hand hold shoot at dusk, have something similar coming up soon. Wouldn’t dream of shooting that with the RX100, as with queuing cars for petrol dusk/early evening. Understanding it’s limitations it’s good for stock in good light. I certainly don’t regret buying it. It’s with me in my jacket pocket right now.

[Betty LaRue]

I have the original and the 3. I feel no push to get the later ones. The 3 does what I want.

[Allan Bell]

I also have the original and the 3. Mk3 gets most use but it is sometimes useful to have the extra reach of the original's lens.

 

If I were buying a new RX100 I would most likely go for the mk7.

 

Allan

 

[John Mitchell]

3 hours ago, wiskerke said:

And I recently found out I use 24 fps a lot. So a lot can change when you find new ways of using it. (Or when you get better in post - like me with the help of ginormous computing power 😂)

 

wim

 

 

 

Just wondering, what do you use 24 fps for?

 

I still seem to be a frugal one-shot-at-a-time person, a holdover from film days I guess.

[Shergar]

I have the 6.  

Beware the dreaded E:91:01 flashing error. It claimed the flash and from what I read Sony want $300 to fix it . 2 months out of warranty. 

So I soldier on without the little flash.

 

Cheers and gone Shergar

[Ed Rooney]

I have an RX100/5, a 6, and a 7. The auto-focus on the 7 is a big improvement. I started with the 3 and sold my Nikon DSLRs. I also own an a6000 and an RX10. I handhold all my pics made with the tiny Sony, using the IS and flexible ISO instead of a tripod. The noise controller in LR Classic helps.  The 5 has a wider aperture, but I've never needed it with the 6 and 7. And their 24-200 zoom range can prove helpful. 

 

Lately I've been revisiting subjects with the 10-18 zoom on my a6000. The RX10 is my backup and fun to use sometimes . . . cause it reminds me of a real camera. I would have sold the RX100/6 but I dropped it and the rear-screen has a crack.

[Sultanpepa]

Much appreciate the insightful replies with a special mention for Wim for that detailed rundown. I bought my wife the M1 some years back and it's showing its age now. (She doesn't look after it the way I would 😬) I'm toying with the idea of renewing and upgrading it as I borrow it as and when the dslr wouldn't be practicable.

Edited October 26, 2021 by Sultanpepa
spelling

[wiskerke]

5 hours ago, John Mitchell said:

Just wondering, what do you use 24 fps for?

 

I still seem to be a frugal one-shot-at-a-time person, a holdover from film days I guess.

Those film days are long gone for me. Except for the odd teaching or consulting and assisting job.

It's mainly for stacking in either low light situations or when tripods are not allowed. Occasionally for stuff moving around when I do want to catch the exact moment. It's one of those things that once you've used it and it works plus there's no penalty, you keep using it more and more. 😁

The penalty is storage space in general and with stacking memory and processing power. 80 layers (= 3 seconds) do take some doing.

 

wim

[Bryan]

Having tested a number of Sony zoom lenses to use with my a6500 and not finding one that cut the mustard, 

I decided to play safe and went for the V with the limited zoom range. The combination of this lens with the smaller sensor 

Is very impressive, noticeably better than any of the other Sony zooms that I tried with the a6500. It's not perfect, occasionally edge sharpness is not 

good enough, while, in difficult situations, there is some CA getting past the software corrections, but the majority of shots are usable

for stock.

 

I do appreciate the compact size and light weight of the camera, it will fit into a coat pocket, but that very advantage is also a drawback, 

as I find the controls a bit fiddly to deal with. I still prefer the experience of shooting with the a6500, but I don't like carrying a bag full of lenses.

 

If only the Zeiss zoom with an equivalent 24-105 mm range I tried with the A6500 had been half decent !

 

In good light the V produces very acceptable files, but noise is an issue if you push the ISO or subsequently manipulate the images to get richer 

colours. It's sometimes fixable in LR/PS, but occasionally not. 

 

Overall I'm happy with my V that was bought used. 

[Ed Rooney]

 

Bryan, I'm surprised that you are unhappy with most of the lenses for your a6500. All the lenses I have for my Sony a6000 perform very well. That's the 10-18, 50f1.4, 24-105f4, and Sigma 56f1.4. I'll be selling the 24-105 and the 50. Even the bargain-priced 28-70 that Wim suggested when I was in Montreal is plenty sharp. ISO 1600 is as high as I go and LR-C deals with that. I only capture common-access editorial stock now so I have little interested in shooting in dark corners. 

 

I think that if people are finding the RX100s awkward, they should use the popup finder and not the back screen and avoid leaning forward with the small cameras. I lean slightly back so the camera is centred over my body.

 

 

[Allan Bell]

12 hours ago, Bryan said:

Having tested a number of Sony zoom lenses to use with my a6500 and not finding one that cut the mustard, 

I decided to play safe and went for the V with the limited zoom range. The combination of this lens with the smaller sensor 

Is very impressive, noticeably better than any of the other Sony zooms that I tried with the a6500. It's not perfect, occasionally edge sharpness is not 

good enough, while, in difficult situations, there is some CA getting past the software corrections, but the majority of shots are usable

for stock.

 

I do appreciate the compact size and light weight of the camera, it will fit into a coat pocket, but that very advantage is also a drawback, 

as I find the controls a bit fiddly to deal with. I still prefer the experience of shooting with the a6500, but I don't like carrying a bag full of lenses.

 

If only the Zeiss zoom with an equivalent 24-105 mm range I tried with the A6500 had been half decent !

 

In good light the V produces very acceptable files, but noise is an issue if you push the ISO or subsequently manipulate the images to get richer 

colours. It's sometimes fixable in LR/PS, but occasionally not. 

 

Overall I'm happy with my V that was bought used. 

 

Bryan I have the Sony 18 - 135mm lens (29 - 202.5) permanently fixed on my a6500 body and find it very good for all sorts of imaging. When I say "permanently fixed" I mean I do not change it for another lens on that body.

I also have an a6000 with the 10 - 18mm lens (15 - 29mm ) permanently fixed. I do have problems sometimes with not being sharp at edges and corners though but it still does a good job for stock.

 

Allan

 

 

Edited October 26, 2021 by Allan Bell

[Joe Gaul]

Also looking for a new (or almost new) RX100 as my Mk 11 battery cover has disintegrated. Will probably go for the V11 for focal range; if I didn't value the range would have gone for the Va due to faster  lens and ND filter. I seem to be getting by downloading and charging via USB so not in any hurry but will have to change.

 

[John Mitchell]

16 hours ago, wiskerke said:

Those film days are long gone for me. Except for the odd teaching or consulting and assisting job.

It's mainly for stacking in either low light situations or when tripods are not allowed. Occasionally for stuff moving around when I do want to catch the exact moment. It's one of those things that once you've used it and it works plus there's no penalty, you keep using it more and more. 😁

The penalty is storage space in general and with stacking memory and processing power. 80 layers (= 3 seconds) do take some doing.

 

wim

 

That makes sense. Guess I'll always think like a frugal film photographer. I do often take multiple frames to ensure focus. However, I freak out if I have a lot of similar images to weed through. In low-light situations, I generally choose the handheld twilight mode and let the camera do the stacking. Also, my computing power and post-processing patience are both limited to say the least.

 

 

Edited October 26, 2021 by John Mitchell

[John Mitchell]

14 hours ago, Bryan said:

Having tested a number of Sony zoom lenses to use with my a6500 and not finding one that cut the mustard, 

I decided to play safe and went for the V with the limited zoom range. The combination of this lens with the smaller sensor 

Is very impressive, noticeably better than any of the other Sony zooms that I tried with the a6500. It's not perfect, occasionally edge sharpness is not 

good enough, while, in difficult situations, there is some CA getting past the software corrections, but the majority of shots are usable

for stock.

 

I do appreciate the compact size and light weight of the camera, it will fit into a coat pocket, but that very advantage is also a drawback, 

as I find the controls a bit fiddly to deal with. I still prefer the experience of shooting with the a6500, but I don't like carrying a bag full of lenses.

 

If only the Zeiss zoom with an equivalent 24-105 mm range I tried with the A6500 had been half decent !

 

In good light the V produces very acceptable files, but noise is an issue if you push the ISO or subsequently manipulate the images to get richer 

colours. It's sometimes fixable in LR/PS, but occasionally not. 

 

Overall I'm happy with my V that was bought used. 

 

Sorry if this is a bit off-topic, but I thought it might be of interest. My Sony 55-210 lens developed fungus, so I picked up a used (barely, if it all) replacement at my local camera store for a very reasonable price. It's like a totally different lens from my old one -- considerably sharper and the IS works much better. It also appears to be better made, with tighter tolerances. Both were assembled in Thailand, so I don't know what the story is with Sony. There is obviously a lot of inconsistency in their manufacturing processes.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 26, 2021 by John Mitchell

[John Mitchell]

7 hours ago, Allan Bell said:

 

Bryan I have the Sony 18 - 135mm lens (29 - 202.5) permanently fixed on my a6500 body and find it very good for all sorts of imaging. When I say "permanently fixed" I mean I do not change it for another lens on that body.

I also have an a6000 with the 10 - 18mm lens (15 - 29mm ) permanently fixed. I do have problems sometimes with not being sharp at edges and corners though but it still does a good job for stock.

 

Allan

 

 

 

My solution with zoom lenses is not to look too closely at the edges. That way I save a lot of cash that I don't have. 😎

[Allan Bell]

17 hours ago, John Mitchell said:

 

My solution with zoom lenses is not to look too closely at the edges. That way I save a lot of cash that I don't have. 😎

 

So long as images do not fail A's QC because of too much of the image is not sharp.

 

I do have a solution which I use in LRC to reduce it without affecting the already sharp areas of the image.

 

Allan

 

[John Mitchell]

5 hours ago, Allan Bell said:

 

So long as images do not fail A's QC because of too much of the image is not sharp.

 

I do have a solution which I use in LRC to reduce it without affecting the already sharp areas of the image.

 

Allan

 

 

I've never had an image fail because of a little fuzz around the edges, which is usually only visible at 100%.

 

My world is a little fuzzy around the edges anyway. 😎

[Allan Bell]

16 hours ago, John Mitchell said:

 

I've never had an image fail because of a little fuzz around the edges, which is usually only visible at 100%.

 

My world is a little fuzzy around the edges anyway. 😎

 

Me too.😳

 

Allan

 

[anna182016]

i have the sonyRX100 M3