a6000 vs RX100 Comparison - Bigger Isn't Better

Started Oct 8, 2014 | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
tdkehoe
tdkehoe Forum Member • Posts: 64
a6000 vs RX100 Comparison - Bigger Isn't Better
3

I've had a Sony RX100 for 2.5 years (first generation). I bought an a6000 a month ago.

The picture quality is almost identical, when using the kit lens (16-50mm) on the a6000. The a6000 has a better sensor but the RX100 has a better lens. If you don't have the budget for prime lenses the a6000 won't take better pictures than a good point-and-shoot. To put this another way, cameras get better and smaller and cheaper every year. Lenses don't. Cameras are now so good and inexpensive that you'll spend far more on lenses to match the camera.

Ten days after I bought it, the a6000 went haywire. I returned it to Sony's repair center. They found moisture inside the case, which voided the warranty. They wouldn't fix my camera. Instead, they offered to sell me a "B" stock camera for $407. The a6000 died while hiking on a sunny day. It was in my backpack next to a water bottle, so maybe the water bottle leaked? I was never aware of the camera getting wet.

My RX100 has gotten wet a zillion times, with no problems. If you buy an a6000, also buy a camera case.

I asked Amazon if they'd exchange my dead a6000 for a new camera, and I included Sony's damage report. To my surprise Amazon said yes! So buy from Amazon, not directly from Sony.

My RX100 fits in my pocket. I can easily take it out and shoot pictures. The a6000 isn't a big camera but it's big enough that getting it out of my backpack takes time and effort. Plus removing its new neoprene case takes a minute. Plus changing lenses takes time. I missed a bald eagle flying overhead because of the time to get my 55-210mm telephoto onto the a6000. I would've gotten the pictures if I'd used my RX100.

I never liked the viewscreen on my RX100. It's hard to see in sunlight and my 52-year-old eyes need bifocals to see it. I like a6000's viewfinder, esp. the 4 diopter adjustment (my right eye is -4.25), but the RX100-III also has a viewfinder. (Given that I never use the viewscreen on my a6000 I put a film protector on the viewscreen to prevent wear and scratches.)

I like that a6000's kit lens is the equivalent of 24-75mm, compared to the 28-105mm on the RX100. But the RX100-III has a 24-70mm lens.

I dislike that my RX100 shoots HDR pictures at one picture per ten seconds. The a6000 shoots HDR at one frame per three seconds. I presume that the RX100-III shoots HDR faster than my RX100.

I like the level on the RX100. The a6000 doesn't have a level. IMHO, these cameras should save level data in the EXIF, so that Photoshop could level photos.

All in all, the RX100-III is a better hiking camera than the a6000. The a6000's only advantage is interchangeable lenses, which is mitigated by my lack of a budget to buy expensive lenses, as well as unwillingness to carry heavy lenses and the time to change lenses.

Sony a6000 Sony RX100
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow