RX100M6, speeding trains

Started 10 months ago | Discussions thread
OP Digital Nigel Veteran Member • Posts: 9,070
Re: RX100M6, speeding trains

Digital Shutterbug wrote:

Digital Nigel wrote:

Digital Shutterbug wrote:

KeepCalm wrote:

... there is no pleasing the molecular scientists looking at the results from the microscopic analysis.

I love it. "Molecular scientists", as applied to the pixel peepers. Good one!!!

Talking of which, I've just been doing some pixel-peeping of other images. I've just bought Gary Friedman's book on the RX100M6, and he provides a link to a pair of well-lit, studio images he shot of the same subject, a teddy bear.

One was taken with the RX100M6, and the other with his A7 with 70-200 f/4 lens. He invites people to compare the images and see if they can guess which was which (he forgot to remove the exif data or change the images sizes, so it's easy to cheat).

He makes the point that if you have to resort to careful, 100% side-by-side comparisons, in a sense the RX100 has won anyway, even if its image isn't actually the better one. I duly did the test, and agree that the differences are minimal. In fact, because of the greater DoF with the RX100, more of it is in sharp focus than the A7 image. So, overall, I actually prefer the RX100 image!

I separately did a brick wall test of the RX100M6 and my TZ100. Interestingly, the differences between these two images are much more obvious. At both its 200 and 250mm equiv zooms, the TZ100 images has significantly less resolution than the RX100M6. The RX100M6 is sharper in the centre, and much sharper at the edges. It's what I expected, but it was good to see it confirmed. You didn't have to cheat to spot the soft TZ100 images.

So, the RX100M6 image quality is much closer to that of the full-frame A7 than it is to the supposedly similar TZ100!

I’ve not seen this particular test from Gary, but he has done other similar tests in the past. Of course, he does these tests in good lighting, so the smaller sensor cameras are not struggling to provide their best.

Yes, the lighting is good, and the ISO 125.

Most realize that under adverse conditions the smaller sensor will not be at its best. That’s a trade off I’m generally willing to accept. Under these conditions, it is quite surprising how well the RX10 and RX100 series cameras images hold up to much more expensive gear. I think a lot of the credit goes to the superb lenses Sony has used in all of these cameras.

Yes, that's where the RX cameras stand out. I get better images with my RX10M3 than my A6500, because the lens is better than my E-mount zooms (it's almost the equal of a high quality E-mount prime, which is extraordinary). The A6500 obviously has a superior sensor, but loses out on the lenses.

That choice in lenses probably contributes greatly when comparing to other brands of cameras that would otherwise be considered similar due to their size. Sony has put the best components in these smaller cameras, when other manufacturers might have taken a different approach on the small cameras.

Panasonic certainly cuts corners on its lenses and assembly quality, compared to Sony. I wouldn't have bought the RX100M6 if I was satisfied with the lens on the TZ100 (in other respects, it's a decent camera).

Obviously, that makes for a premium price, compared to the competitors. It all depends on what you expect, and what you’re willing to spend.

Yup. Sony has managed to create a genuine premium 1" sensor category. Panasonic has gone downmarket, Canon seems to have almost lost interest, and Nikon did give up.

 Digital Nigel's gear list:Digital Nigel's gear list
Panasonic FZ1000 Canon PowerShot G7 X Nikon Coolpix P900 Panasonic ZS100 Sony RX10 III +18 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow