Sony RX100 VII vs Sony A6400 plus 18-135 lens

Hi ,

May I please have your considered opinions.

I have had my Sony RX100V for around 2 years and have been very pleased with it. Good IQ etc.

I am attracted to the RX100 VII due to its longer zoom, 4K video factor etc etc.

I note however that I can buy the A6400 plus the well regarded 18-135 lens for the same price.

What would you choose and why ?

Would be very grateful to receive your views.

Thank you in anticipation.

Adam

adam10 said:

Hi ,

May I please have your considered opinions.

I have had my Sony RX100V for around 2 years and have been very pleased with it. Good IQ etc.

I am attracted to the RX100 VII due to its longer zoom, 4K video factor etc etc.

I note however that I can buy the A6400 plus the well regarded 18-135 lens for the same price.

What would you choose and why ?

Would be very grateful to receive your views.

Thank you in anticipation.

Click to expand...

I already had an A6500, but chose to buy the RX100M6, rather than the 18-135 lens. I don't regret the decision.

adam10 said:

I am attracted to the RX100 VII due to its longer zoom, 4K video factor etc etc.

I note however that I can buy the A6400 plus the well regarded 18-135 lens for the same price.

What would you choose and why ?

Click to expand...

Are you never going to buy another lens for the A6400 for alternative uses that the RX can't support? Are you never going to want something smaller and lighter to carry than the A6400 plus that lens? Are you never going to want a sophisticated flash system that the RX can't support? You have to figure those things - and others - out for yourself.

If you're talking only about an 'image quality' comparison between those specific options, that's probably very close either way. In my own experience, my RX100III competes favorably against my APS-C cameras with an equivalent kit lens mounted. However, there are pretty good reasons why I don't try to get along with just one choice or the other.

I tried out both in a camera store a couple of months ago. Absolutely hated the A6400 EVF and decided I would actually prefer a camera I could fit in my pocket.

The new AF of the RX100m7 which is on par to that of the A6400 at least means it is the best shoot everything in single point tracking AF camera you can get which fits in a pocket.

By pocket I mean, large shirt pocket, top or inside pocket of a jacket or trouser pocket.

So I bought the RX100M7. Perfect small travel camera.

--
Cheers, Brandon
FlickR Photostream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brandon_birder/
Flickr D500 gallery
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brandon_birder/albums/72157669659968510
Flickr D810 & D800 gallery
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brandon_birder/sets/72157629726734905/
Flickr AFS- 200-500 AFS VR gallery
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brandon_birder/albums/72157670032771182
FlickR Nikon1 V1 & V3 gallery
http://www.flickr.com/photos/brandon_birder/sets/72157628774050455/

If you think you might want to use other lenses at some point, get the 6400. I had a 6300 and was deciding between the 18-135 or RX100 M6. The 18-135, while not enormous, is a somewhat large lens, and very conspicuous (and not as much reach as the M6/M7). I sold my 6300 and got an M6, and have no regrets. The 6400's sensor is better,but with the 18-135 lens you would be limited for low light shooting anyways.

I have no regrets. Very happy with the IQ of the M6, and it has really changed my shooting style for the better, in no small part because I shoot much more because it is always with me.

gmaass said:

If you think you might want to use other lenses at some point, get the 6400. I had a 6300 and was deciding between the 18-135 or RX100 M6. The 18-135, while not enormous, is a somewhat large lens, and very conspicuous (and not as much reach as the M6/M7).

Click to expand...

Surely the reach of the 18-135 lens is almost identical to the M6/7? And if you allow for the cropability of the 24mp sensor, it's slightly more.

But the RX100 is usefully wider.

gmaass said:

I sold my 6300 and got an M6, and have no regrets. The 6400's sensor is better,but with the 18-135 lens you would be limited for low light shooting anyways.

Click to expand...

Yes, there's little difference in low light capabilities.

gmaass said:

I have no regrets. Very happy with the IQ of the M6, and it has really changed my shooting style for the better, in no small part because I shoot much more because it is always with me.

Click to expand...

Yes, I'm very happy I bought my M6, rather than the 18-135 for my A6500 (which I now normally use with the 10-18 lens, when I don't want to carry my A7Riii with 12-24 lens).

I had the A6500 + 18-135. It was an awesome pocket camera, I could easily fit it in my jacket pocket while walking around town.

I've sold my A6500 + 18-135 after I was gifted an A7iii I absolutely love my A7iii. I recently bought a RX100Va for a scuba diving camera. I can buy the entire scuba diving set up for the price of the A7iii dive housing. I ONLY find myself grabbing my RX100va when I need to keep my weight extra light for backpacking trips or when I want to share a photo on this or other RX100 forms.

If I wasn't gifted an A7iii I would probably stick with the A6500. The scuba diving housing is about the same price as the rx100 scuba diving housing. And I think the camera versatility is superiour to the rx100. But one thing I will reccomend is if you go with an a6xxx line of camera be sure to buy 3-4 spare batteries and expect to use them all on a full day of shooting.

Thank you everybody for your considered replies.

I will almost certainly buy the RX100 VII.

When I decided to replace my NEX-6 and 16-50, I went with the A6400 and 18-135. We have an RX100 in the family and at the time I got my NEX-6, there wasn't a viewfinder for the RX100, just rear panel. I didn't like that. I also have an aps-c dslr kit with a number of lenses and having used slrs/dslrs for quite a few years so am quite used to the flexibility of having a variety of lenses to choose from for specific purposes - or just more general use. Yet, don't really want to carry all or even most of that all that much.

The NEX-6/16-50 was noticeably smaller than the D7200 with most of it's lenses. The RX100s are even smaller. The A6400/18-135 is larger, yet, still smaller than the /D7200 and 18-140.

The RX100s are pretty remarkable for their size. And depending on lens choice for the aps-c cameras, very comparable in performance in some ways. And the newer the RX series versus the older aps-c bodies, perhaps even better in some ways.

But, the RX100s have a smaller sensor and you can't swap lenses. When you want or need the performance of the larger sensor, higher ISOs, dynamic range, or a different focal length, of wider apertures, etc., you are in aps-c or even ff interchangeable lens camera territory. And a broader range of accessories, brackets, flashes, etc. enough to eventually overload the bag again. Also depending on the lenses, like the 18-135, there is less or no delay as the lenses extend/retract on power up/down compared to the RX100s or the retracting "pancake" 16-50,

I wanted that systemic expandability/flexibility more than I wanted the substantially smaller size of the RX100s.

That lens is pretty big. Will the lack of portability matter to you? Would you buy any other lenses in the future for the A6400? The answer is not as simple as you might think. I suspect you might be better off with the RX100vii because you are happy with your existing RX100 and the size of the A6400/lens combo might turn you off. You might consider an RX10iii for the same price instead.

thanks for your replies