Should I trade my m43 system for Sony RX-10

Newbie12345 wrote:

I currently have the following equipment (and the price Amazon will pay if I trade them in).

Olympus EPM2: $149

Panasonic 20mm: $213

Olympus 14-150mm: $285

Olympus Fl-14 flash: $50

Total: $697

A used Sony RX-10 is $905 on Amazon.

So, I will pay an additional $208 from my pocket if I trade it in.

Should I trade my m43 system for Sony RX-10?

Portability and excellent picture quality (but no pixel peeping) in following two scenarios is very important to me.

1. Indoor party pictures - EPM2 + Pana 20 mm + Fl14 has served me very well.

2. Concert type situations where I am far away in dimly lit situations: Flash is useless + Olympus 14-150mm is not very fast.

I am intrigued by the Sony 24-200mm F2.8 lens and a decent 1" sensor.

m43 has 225mm^2 sensor and Sony rx10 has 116 mm^2 sensor. Almost half the area.

F2.8 is four times brighter than F5.6. So, in dimly lit situations Sony should produce much better images.

Any opinions/ideas/suggestions/comments?

Thank you.

What is important to you is both low light and long distance capability, something that for compact cameras was only catered for by the Panny FZ200 until this Sony came along with a far bigger sensor, so yes the Sony is a definite possibility but my question is will you be able to get it into concerts, many don't allow cameras?

F2.8 is four times brighter than F5.6. So, in dimly lit situations Sony should produce much better images.

I must say that I have never been tempted to use telephoto in dim conditions. It's the time when 20mm and wide rlens get's most use.  I think it's not uncommon attitude. Therefore I think that comparing 2.8 to 5.6 is very hypotetical situation while 1.7 (panasonic) to 2.8 is much more frequent.

I have had the RX10 for a few months and just got  EM5+Oly 14-150 a few weeks ago (when the one week sale was running on factory refurbished cameras)

Both take very good pictures.   AF speed on the EM5 is clearly faster than the RX10.  The slowness of the RX10 AF is not noticeable in most situations, but it is annoying when taking pictures of the kids playing or the dog running.  And as most reviews have mentioned, the electrically powered zoom on the camera is a bit annoying for being slow, but it is tolerable.  RX10 is quite a bit bigger.   I have read the RX10 has exceptionally good video, one of the few cameras that does not use line-skipping on the sensor.  And it can be completely silent, whereas the EM5 does make some small amount of noise when the shutter is released.

So far I have not had a chance to make good comparisons of low light performance between the two.  Except for some shots of city skylines at night.   Spot metering seems to work better on the EM5 than the RX10.  With the EM5 it is easy, but with the RX10 I have had a hard time simply using spot metering in P or A mode  and avoiding overly bright lights.   But with some more practice and understanding of what the camera is doing I would expect one could solve that.

If you take the sensor size and lens aperture of the 14-150 into consideration, the RX10 has a small advantage at 14 mm.   At full zoom, the RX10 has a about a factor of three advantage in light gathering ability.   But the 14-150 is 35 mm equivalent to 28-300.   The RX10 stops at 200 mm.  So the 14-150 has more reach.

OpticsEngineer wrote:

I have had the RX10 for a few months and just got EM5+Oly 14-150 a few weeks ago (when the one week sale was running on factory refurbished cameras)

Both take very good pictures. AF speed on the EM5 is clearly faster than the RX10. The slowness of the RX10 AF is not noticeable in most situations, but it is annoying when taking pictures of the kids playing or the dog running. And as most reviews have mentioned, the electrically powered zoom on the camera is a bit annoying for being slow, but it is tolerable. RX10 is quite a bit bigger. I have read the RX10 has exceptionally good video, one of the few cameras that does not use line-skipping on the sensor. And it can be completely silent, whereas the EM5 does make some small amount of noise when the shutter is released.

While taking video, all M43 cameras use electronic shutter, thus they are totally silent too

So far I have not had a chance to make good comparisons of low light performance between the two. Except for some shots of city skylines at night. Spot metering seems to work better on the EM5 than the RX10. With the EM5 it is easy, but with the RX10 I have had a hard time simply using spot metering in P or A mode and avoiding overly bright lights. But with some more practice and understanding of what the camera is doing I would expect one could solve that.

If you take the sensor size and lens aperture of the 14-150 into consideration, the RX10 has a small advantage at 14 mm. At full zoom, the RX10 has a about a factor of three advantage in light gathering ability. But the 14-150 is 35 mm equivalent to 28-300. The RX10 stops at 200 mm. So the 14-150 has more reach.

My 10 years old SONY R1 with APS sensor and huge lens has the same weight as newly made RX10. I think this is intolerable - designed as all-in-one, or travel camera, RX is too heavy. I know this because I use to travel with R1

Sony failed with RX10

What you're talking about doing is trading the potential of a system for a fixed lens bridge camera.  Of course, the RX10 is arguably the best bridge camera out there with a fast constant aperture lens with a versatile zoom range.
So it's clear to me that the biggest question you must ask yourself is whether the flexibility of interchangeable lenses is outweighed by the convenience of a one-size-fits-all camera.  There is no one lens for m43 that will give you a constant F2.8 across that zoom range... and even if there were, it would be much more expensive and larger than the RX10.  On the other hand, for individual photographic opportunities, a fast prime will beat the RX10 significantly in image quality and subject isolation.  For concerts (and especially video), the RX10 is going to have a nice advantage.  I have a GH3 and I'd use my Panasonic 35-100 F2.8 for that (though obviously that ain't cheap).  For parties, street photography, portraits, and the like, there's definitely more potential in m43.
The RX10 would be a very nice camera to have, but for me a system camera is still much more versatile.  The nice thing about m43 is that you can just buy a new body when it's time to upgrade.  When you want to upgrade the RX10, you're basically buying an entirely new camera AND lens each time.  Buying lenses for m43 is an investment that compounds as you add more flexibility to your photography.  If I were you, I'd keep the Oly and save up for a nice lens for concerts.
Travis

I would absolutely consider it. I have 5 m4/3 cameras and many important lenses, flashes, but I have been using the RX10 much, much more recently. That's because my priority is equally between video and stills; however, I have a DP2M for stills that I carry along with me. The video on the RX10 is superb and equals that of my GH3.

It is tempting to sell all of my m4/3 stuff but I do occasionally need the unlimited recording ability of the GH3, especially with grip. I might only need it twice a year, but the need is there. So, the GH2s, and EM-5s will go, but I will probably keep the lenses and a GH3, perhaps even pick up a GH4, pending reviews. Of course, the next version of the Sony may negate all of that. Hopefully so, as I have learned with the RX10, it's so much easier to carry just one capable camera with a decent, fast lens. The bag is so light, and time is not wasted on switching lenses.

For someone who is more interested in stills, I can't offer an opinion. As good as the RX10 is, it would be hard to match some of the good primes available for m4/3: Sigma 60mm, Oly 75 and 45mm, etc. And it can't match the reach of the Pany 100-300. Additionally, the wireless flash system of the Panys/Olys is more advanced.

Can't exactly recommend much myself but the Minoltas and Olympus lenses are reportedly good.

Here is the Minolta, but shop around depending on where you live:

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Minolta-MD-Celtic-135mm-f2-8-Zoom-X370-X570-X700-XD-XG1-XG9-XGA-SRT-Excellent-/161169753189?_trksid=p2054897.l4275

The Olympus' go for more but don't pay too much. 50mm/55mm 1.4/7's etc go cheap as well, and may be better for concerts as they are more compact and faster.

Newbie12345 wrote:

Thanks for the link. I am sorry, but I am not qualified to understand your link. This lens would probably need an adapter. Can you suggest the adapter as well.

Also, is there longer zoom range available at fast aperture (but still cheap).

Thanks.

0MitchAG wrote:

Can't exactly recommend much myself but the Minoltas and Olympus lenses are reportedly good.

Here is the Minolta, but shop around depending on where you live:

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Minolta-MD-Celtic-135mm-f2-8-Zoom-X370-X570-X700-XD-XG1-XG9-XGA-SRT-Excellent-/161169753189?_trksid=p2054897.l4275

The Olympus' go for more but don't pay too much. 50mm/55mm 1.4/7's etc go cheap as well, and may be better for concerts as they are more compact and faster.

There is a Minolta 200mm F3.5, but I am not sure of the market value of these lenses, but most sellers with experience do.

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/MINOLTA-200MM-1-3-5-MANUAL-LENS-EXCELLENT-CONDITION-MADE-IN-JAPAN-FOR-SONY-NEX-/201066931502?pt=AU_Lenses&hash=item2ed085e52e&_uhb=1

The Minolta MC/MD is the same mount and so just grab a MC/MD to m4/3 adapter, I've bought the one sold by "Fotga" (it hasn't arrived yet, so no advice on it).

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Soligor-Auto-Tele-200-mm-1-3-5-f-Minolta-MD-Camera-Lenses-/380806853647?pt=AU_Lenses&hash=item58a9db740f&_uhb=1

Soligor from what I understand is just an American trade name of imported Japanese lenses, so it's a Minolta mount as said. There are some other brands that are more budget and shouldn't pay too much for (Hanimex, Tamron, Vivitar). Some of them are just rebrands of other lenses, so for this reason and with good feedback I'm sticking with Minolta lenses.

The best thing to do is google around. I'm pretty new to all of this as well, but I think it is worth buying one of these as your specific issue is with concerts. I don't know about the lighting at these events though so I can't comment on how fast of a lens you need, it will depend between indoor and outdoor etc.

If you can stretch your budget *a bit*, get rid of the 40-150 (possibly the flash as well) and invest in a Panasonic 35-100/2.8. You will end up with two great lenses and a much more versatile set-up (don't forget that a PM2 with the 20 is still pocketable), with a lower overall volume and weight than the Sony beast (813 gr v. 269gr + 100gr + 360gr). And when you upgrade to a different body, the lenses will still be with you!

The RX10 is a nice camera, but bulky (and the lens will be lost when you want to upgrade sensor...) You might sorely miss the compactness and low light ability with the 20/1.7 for indoor parties. What might be your ideal setup for concerts is a 75/1.8 to go with the 20/1.7 (and maybe add a samyang/rokinon/bower fisheye). The 75 is not a cheap lens, unfortunately. There are cheap old manual focus alternatives with similar specs (for a concert manual focus won't be a problem).