I am also interested to see the image quality during normal circumstances (daylight). How do Fuji APS-C, Sony RX100, Nikon Z5, Olympus/Panasonic M4/3 perform?
In daylight at full screen, any darn camera with any size sensor made in the last 10 years or so does well, but, as the pixel peep increases and/or the light levels get lower, then it is bleedingly obvious that the larger sensors do better.
Zoom range ... I do not have a clear idea of what zoom ranges are used to capture what kind of subjects. For example, I heard mentioned a 16-80 mm lens, but also a 24-120 of 24-200 mm lens. Can you explain what these zoom ranges are typically used for? Are there advantages or disadvantages that come with a smaller or longer zoom range?
Years back in my film era days and with various camera clubs we used to discuss what what was a useful camera for a traveller and general photos. It was decided that 28-200mm was ideal as the zoom for 35mm film was not too big for all day carrying and really that was the only lens needed for most occasions. Chasing wildlife and birding of course was another matter altogether and no tele lens was ever long enough for that.
Every bird that exists has already been photographed and up on the web somewhere, so why repeat that? For me it is far more enjoyable to simply sit and watch the birds behaviour, no need to freeze them into a photo, maybe a video would be better but then, I just like to observe birds and wildlife and let it stick in my memory. Others will disagree.
Many years later I settled on the Sony RX100M6 for my compact and that (or the RX100M7) is ideal for a traveller with its "24-200mm" lens that is good even wide open despite its small maximum apertures. Compared to what I get from my M4/3 gear it all looks the same in daylight shots but as light falls I had better be using my M4/3 gear as the difference then is obvious.
I'm getting too old now to bother but really I should move to Full Frame gear to get what I really want in those occasional low light situations. But all that money and size just for a few low light shots when by far the most of my shots are in daylight or maybe slightly subdued light interiors.
Or if it falls in the budget, upgrade to a Z6II (even used) for improved autofocus (though if mostly shooting static scenes, like I do, it's overkill).
Can you explain why/how you find the results from APS-C or FF more satisfying? What makes the difference?
