Which setup is theoretically better in low light?

Started Jul 8, 2013 | Questions thread
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
Jeremydgreat
New MemberPosts: 14
Like?
Which setup is theoretically better in low light?
Jul 8, 2013

I'm considering 2 very different cameras. My main goal is to have a versatile setup that fits in my pocket (or comes very close.) I have been shooting with DSLR's for years, but I realize that on my recent adventures, I opted to leave the large camera home (or at the hotel) because I didn't want the burden.

My question: which of these setups is theoretically better in low light?

Sony RX100 (or the forthcoming RX100 II ) with it's native lens.

  • 28-100mm (equiv), f/1.8-4.9 Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* lens
  • The RX100 II is sopposed to get a 40% better in low light (?)
  • Smaller sensor (see below)

Sony NEX 6 with a 16mm f/2.8 lens

  • Larger sensor (see below)
  • I know I can get an E-mount adapter that would allow me to mount any other super-fast low light prime lens. However, this would make the barrel larger and wouldn't allow me to put the entire unit in my pocket. For E-Mount lenses, this is the fastest one I could find.

So, what matters more (at least as far as these 2 setups are concerned)? Does the much larger sensor of NEX 6 outweigh the better lens of the RX100 II?

ANSWER:
Sony RX100 Sony RX100 II
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
RXNew
RXNew
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow