Just picked up a Sony A6000

tjuster1 wrote:

Aaron801 wrote:

I'm intrigued wit the A6000 and actually the whole NEX series camreas. The bigger sensor and now much bigger resolution in the very small (as small as m4/3 package) seems pretty ideal.

Remember, 24Mp isn't "much better resolution"; it's 22% more pixels horizontally and vertically. That's certainly better, but I'd quibble with "much better".

It 50% more pixels. it's clearly much better. If it's not better then also 36mpix FF (nikon D800 / sony A7R) ar not much better than 24 mpix FF like canon 6D.

Or maybe you should opt for 11mpix camera, since 16mpix u4/ is not much better.

As far as the larger sensor goes, the reality is that perceptible difference in IQ between the two sensors is very, very small.

Resolution advantage - meh, IQ advantae - meh, 100g wieght advantage - an enourmous difference, my back does not hurt anymore, I can hike mountains while previously I was barely able to climb my bed.

This is a fact that has been reported ad nauseum by people who own both APS-C and m43 cameras, including me. If you go over to the Sony/NEX forum you'll read post after post boasting of Sony's enormous sensor (often ridiculing m43 for its "tiny" one), but when you actually look at images the difference is imperceptible. I know because I have.

Buy RX100. It's even less difference between it and u4/3. And this camera actually has weight or sdize advantage over u4/3 (pocketable vs not pockateable).