Sony RX100, a6000 and Lumix LX100 questions

[MizBrown]

On 11/19/2017 at 00:55, John Mitchell said:

I prefer the original Sony E 18-55 (F/3.5 - 5.6) to the 16-50 for my 16MP NEX-6 because it has a manual zoom and much less distortion. I get very good results with this lens at most focal lengths. No problems at all with QC. Main downside is that it is much bulkier than the 16-50. Also not sure how it would be on the higher resolution 24MP a6000.

 

Did just fine on both the a3000 (20MP) and the a6000.   It is bulkier than the 16-50.  My other suggestion would be to look at the Sigma APSC lenses for e-mount, and try one of those.  They get high marks for sharpness in reviews I've seen, but I haven't tried either of the three.   The native lens that isn't ferociously expensive but is quite good is the Sony E 35mm f/1.8, which has in lens optical stabilization.  If I had it to do over again, I might have only bought it rather than it and the Sony/Zeiss 24mm f/1.8.  The S/Z is better but not remarkably better and the Sony 35 does low light photos better (OSS).  

 

[Travelshots]

The Panasonic DMC LX100 takes fabulous RAW mages and excellent 4k Video. Its demanding to use and a bit fiddly but has  an excellent Leica lens.

[John Mitchell]

32 minutes ago, MizBrown said:

 

Did just fine on both the a3000 (20MP) and the a6000.   It is bulkier than the 16-50.  My other suggestion would be to look at the Sigma APSC lenses for e-mount, and try one of those.  They get high marks for sharpness in reviews I've seen, but I haven't tried either of the three.   The native lens that isn't ferociously expensive but is quite good is the Sony E 35mm f/1.8, which has in lens optical stabilization.  If I had it to do over again, I might have only bought it rather than it and the Sony/Zeiss 24mm f/1.8.  The S/Z is better but not remarkably better and the Sony 35 does low light photos better (OSS).  

 

 

Problem with the Sigma lenses is that they don't have OSS, plus they are only partially compatible with Sony's hybrid contrast/phase detect AF system. The Sigma's do get some very good reviews, though. However, I'm not convinced that they are any sharper (in the real world) than the Sony 18-55 at f/5.6 to F/8. The 18-55 is usually sharp across the frame at those f-stops and at most focal lengths with my 16MP Sony NEX-6. I have the Sony E 35mm f/1.8 and like it very much, especially in low light.  No money for the more expensive glass, so I have to make do with what I have.

[Colin Woods]

1 hour ago, Travelshots said:

The Panasonic DMC LX100 takes fabulous RAW mages and excellent 4k Video. Its demanding to use and a bit fiddly but has  an excellent Leica lens.

 The LX100 is high on my shortlist. No QC issues I imagine. What do you like and dislike about it? I am comparing it to a used GF7 which I see often at around $400 (LX100 is $900). For the $500 I get a 2 stop faster lens, which is important, and he whole panoply of 4k shooting, which isn't. Do you have any info about the GF7. Its 16MP MFT and the kit lens is well reviewed so I imagine its fine for acceptance here.