RX100III +/vs A6000 "Wonder Twins!!!"

Started 4 weeks ago | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
Pepe-Lepue
Senior MemberPosts: 1,735
Like?
RX100III +/vs A6000 "Wonder Twins!!!"
4 weeks ago

I just bought the RX1000 III to compliment my A6000. I use only primes on the A6k and didn't want to weight it down with darker compromised zoom lenses. So I bought the RX100 III for my zoom (as I feel zoom photography is a bit pedestrian).

I absolutely am enamored with my RX100!!! And it's addition to my A6000 tackle box has been everything I was hoping for. Switching cameras verses switching lenses when going for the zoom has benefits.

But I've noted some interesting differences that actually play into each others strengths. If you can recall back in the "Hall of Justice" days the Wonder Twins? That's what these two cameras are together! And now I can share my findings after field testing my new bag.

Where the A6000 surpasses the RX100 III;

1 - Focus Speed - There is no comparison here. The A6k utilizes both phase and contrast sensors (RX100 only contrast) and doesn't have to focus hunt to acquire.

2 - Focus Tracking - Again no comparison. The A6k can track any object moving any direction utilizing both the PDAF and CDAF systems.

3 - Much Larger Sensor - The A6k utilities a much larger APSC sensor to the RX100 1" sensor. I've compared side by side and can prove the A6k low light ability given the same aperture, ISO, and shutter speed.

4 - Shallow Depth of Field - The A6k with a fast portrait lens (SEL 50mm 1.8) can isolate the subject with smooth bokeh. The smaller sensor RX100 when shot at portraiture length (50-70mm) is at f2.8 on that small sensor. It's not a great portrait camera.

5 - About that Bokeh - The RX100 iii produces busy swirly looking bokeh. With the A6k, one can choose lenses that lend themselves well for beautiful bokeh and isolated results.

6 - Camera Speed(While Focusing) - The A6k can shoot 6 frames per second WHILE focus tracking. RX100 can't.

7 - Interchangeable Lenses - This one's obviouse. Need to go 12mm wide or 200mm long? Which camera will get you there?

8 - Flash Shoe - The A6k sports a flash shoe. This is important for lighting options from the small sony 20 guide flash that can bounce to a powerful multi-flash controller for studio shots.

Where the RX100 surpasses the A6000;

1 - Size - Theres no doubt the RK100 is small and much more portable. That's why I own one. Adds easily to my gear bag.

2 - Bright Zoom Lens - While limited to 24-70mm, it gives me access to a lightweight bright high quality zoom for less than $1000. Within it's focal range it is substantially better than anything I've seen on the e mount. This same spec zoom would cost at least $1700 for the A6k (should they ever offer it) and substantially weight it down. Zooms are great to have... but hardly exciting compared to bright exotic primes. So I use zooms for my pedestrian shots.

3 - Quiet Shutter - The RX100 lacks a physical focal plane shutter. This makes it much quieter than the A6k which produces a more traditional DSLR sound.

4 - Much Better for Video - There's no comparison here. The RX100 iii simply outclasses the A6k in video (with the exception of focusing). However if one needs shallw DOF or artistic video then the opposite is true.

5 - Better Image Stabilization - The RX100 iii 5 axis image stabilization is better than anything I have seen on the A6k PERIOD. I can walk while shooting video on the RX100... and you would swear I was using a dolly.

So why do I have both? As I stated previously; The A6000 is my main system. But I found the native e mount zoom lens options VERY compromised. I'm not inerested in a heavy Zeiss or Sony G dark f4 lens WHEN I CAN BUY for less money the much brighter and better performing RX100 iii f1.8-2.8 and get added benefit of the small extra camera with better video capabilities to boot.

This also means I don't have to change lenses whenever I want to shoot a zoom. And the RX100 iii is smaller in the bag than any e mount zoom offering. Having said this I do have an e mount 18-200mm zoom for the rare times I shoot long.

So it comes down to this. If you are buying an e mount (nex type) camera and only intend to put a normal zoom on it (like the Zeiss 16-70, kit lens, or Sony 18-105mm), then you are probably much better off getting the cheaper RX100 iii instead. Because those f4 zooms wont get very interesting shots compared to the more interesting primes.

I took a Zeiss 16-70 out shooting for two days. It wasn't bad. In fact it was good. But not great. The RX100iii lens is great. IMHO the Zeiss 16-70 is too compromised for the asking price.

-- hide signature --

'I am ze locksmith of love, no?'
Stephen Reed

RX100 III Sony a6000 Sony RX100
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow