The 'All Canon EF-M lenses' club

MAC wrote:

Sittatunga wrote:

Sittatunga wrote:

Maxmolly7 wrote:

Your aperture calculation is about DOF equivalence, the light capturing remains as stated on the lens.

You need 2 zooms on the RP to cover the range of the Sony. On R7 or 10 it already take 3 lenses to cover wide setting at 24mm. 🤷

It's also about the total number of photons captured to make the image. That governs the total (random) photon and electronic noise, and hence the noise of the total image. The intensity of the light per square mm is governed by the f/number, but there will be less average random noise over a larger area than a smaller area at the same intensity. The noise is roughly proportional to the square root of the number of photons, so also to the square area of the sensor, and also to the crop factor.

By definition, an APS-C outfit will be bigger and better than a 1" sensor superzoom camera, but a ⅔" travel camera will be still smaller and not as good as a 1" sensor. TANSTAAFL.

But of duff proofreading there - I should have said

The signal to noise ratio is roughly inversely proportional to the square root of the number of photons, so it's also inversely proportional to the square root of the area of the sensor, and also inversely proportional to the linear dimensions of the sensors. But somebody knows what I meant.

in laymen's terms, the 1 inch Sony RX10IV doesn't interest me

I'd use the latest iphone instead of a 1 inch RX10IV and get the R7 + RF 100-400 to go long instead

but for me, on trips, going long isn't where I use my cameras.

so long stays at home

important trips would get the iphone, the RP + RF 24-105L + M6II + M11-22 + M32 = easy to carry in a relatively medium sized bag on trips and plenty of backup

And there's the rub.  No good f/2.8 zoom for EF-M and no good and affordable 50mm for RF means you are stuck carrying two bodies from two incompatible systems.