RX10 IV vs. microFT

Started Mar 10, 2018 | Discussions
Mattia Valente Forum Member • Posts: 82
RX10 IV vs. microFT
2

A question for anyone who switched to an RX10 mk IV from a micro four thirds setup: are you happy with the performance? Worth it in terms of trade-off?

A bit of background: I mostly shoot wide to normal subject matter. Landscapes. Travel. Low light candid shooting. Way back, I was shooting a Canon 5DII, sold it all for an E-M5 setup due to cost, added a Sony A7r because I missed the resolution and subject isolation at wider focal lengths in particular.

Right now I have an A7rIII for my 'wide to short tele' needs, i.e. 16mm to 85mm. This is a very acceptable size/weight/quality trade-off for me.

For the times I indulge my wildlife shooting (on vacation, mostly, but I do enjoy it a good deal those times I do it) I currently use my Olympus E-M1. Tried the more compact, slow glass, but now using what Are probably the best value and one of the nicest telephotos available (old 43 50-200/2.8-3.5 SWD and the 150/2.0 with teleconverters). I have little to no doubt the quality I can get from these lenses and the E-M1 would be difficult to match with anything in a similar price range. But they are bulky, and I don't use them a whole lot. And the quality of my RX100 mark I sensor is still very impressive. So I'm considering adding an RX10 mk IV as a telephoto replacement to the MFT kit.

Anyone shoot similar systems side by side care to comment on their experience?

Canon EOS 5D Mark II Olympus E-M1 Sony a7 Sony a7R Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Sony RX1 Sony RX10 IV Sony RX100
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
hedleyw
hedleyw Regular Member • Posts: 345
Re: RX10 IV vs. microFT
5

Mattia Valente wrote:

A question for anyone who switched to an RX10 mk IV from a micro four thirds setup: are you happy with the performance? Worth it in terms of trade-off?

A bit of background: I mostly shoot wide to normal subject matter. Landscapes. Travel. Low light candid shooting. Way back, I was shooting a Canon 5DII, sold it all for an E-M5 setup due to cost, added a Sony A7r because I missed the resolution and subject isolation at wider focal lengths in particular.

Right now I have an A7rIII for my 'wide to short tele' needs, i.e. 16mm to 85mm. This is a very acceptable size/weight/quality trade-off for me.

For the times I indulge my wildlife shooting (on vacation, mostly, but I do enjoy it a good deal those times I do it) I currently use my Olympus E-M1. Tried the more compact, slow glass, but now using what Are probably the best value and one of the nicest telephotos available (old 43 50-200/2.8-3.5 SWD and the 150/2.0 with teleconverters). I have little to no doubt the quality I can get from these lenses and the E-M1 would be difficult to match with anything in a similar price range. But they are bulky, and I don't use them a whole lot. And the quality of my RX100 mark I sensor is still very impressive. So I'm considering adding an RX10 mk IV as a telephoto replacement to the MFT kit.

Anyone shoot similar systems side by side care to comment on their experience?

I use both systems. The lens and sensor of the RX10M4 combine to give remarkable image quality for an ultra zoom bridge camera. It doesn’t match my E-M1ii plus 300mm f4 pro lens but in good light and ISO 800 or less it is fairly close if not cropped too much, certainly very acceptable to my picky standards. I do have to use a higher shutter speed as the IBIS is not as good. When I have time I will compare it with the 40-150 2.8 pro cropped to the same size.

I tried two other cheaper bridge cameras (including the Lumix F2000) and the Sony has by far the best image quality. As a walk around camera with flexibility of FL to capture anything that crops up I love it. If you want to make the most of wildlife shooting though I would invest in either the Pana LEICA 100-400 or the M.Zuiko 300 pro which is the finest long lens I have ever used.

-- hide signature --

Hedley

 hedleyw's gear list:hedleyw's gear list
Olympus Tough TG-4 Olympus PEN-F Olympus OM-D E-M1X Olympus E-M1 III Canon EOS R5 +21 more
tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 48,286
Re: RX10 IV vs. microFT
3

I use my A99ii side by side with an RX 10iii. There are many times I prefer the RX10iii for convenience. Since you own an A7Riii the RX10iv would be a better choice than M43 because the IQ is 95% as good and it’s impossible to get 24-600 fov with a single lens in that format.

-- hide signature --

Tom
Look at the picture, not the pixels

 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX10 IV Sony a99 II Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD +7 more
dr jim Veteran Member • Posts: 6,751
Re: RX10 IV vs. microFT
4

I've shot with the G85 with the PL100-400 and currently have the E-M1 II with the 40-150 pro with a 1.4x tc. I love the IQ that the Oly gives me, but it's bulky and really not long enough for birds. Pretty much, the Oly stays in the drawer now and the RX10IV goes with me. I must admit though, I just purchased a new A6500 and will be picking up a FE 100-400 with 1.4x tc, (as soon as I sell the Oly) because at times I want a really serious birding rig. One suitable for pixel peeping. ;-).  I regularly take trips to the local wildlife reserve specifically for the purpose of photographing birds.

For me, the big rig is a tool that allows me to do something I enjoy and do it well. The RX10IV is a companion. I shoot birds, flowers, wide or long landscapes, and the grandkids with it. Sometimes all in the same day. Basically anything that strikes my fancy.  And it does it pretty darn well.

So, I'd say, if you want wildlife to be an incidental part of your vacation, the RX10IV is your best bet. If the wildlife is an important part of your trip, maybe stick with your Oly gear. Wanna buy a slightly used E-M1 II? LOL

-- hide signature --

Just my opinion and just for fun!
Jim

 dr jim's gear list:dr jim's gear list
Sony RX100 III Sony RX10 IV Sony RX100 VI Sony a6400 Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS +7 more
FriskyMoose New Member • Posts: 8
Re: RX10 IV vs. microFT

I am contemplating pretty much the same at present. I am going to Korea and Japan next month and I don't feel like carrying my D800, big lenses etc on my trip. I have a FZ1000 which has done a great job in the past except low light and dim places.

I have been researching microFT as well as the RX10IV. I am torn shelling out for the new G9 with the Leica 12-60 2.8-4.0 and take my FZ1000 if I need more reach or go and buy a RX10IV.

I was first thinking of the OMD E1.2 but I am sure they release a MK3 soon to compete with the G9.

such a hard decision. the advantage of the larger sensor vs the stacked 1" sensor are slim from what I have read.

Sadly the A7R3 is too much money and when adding the proper lenses I could almost take the D800 instead.

decisions decision....

 FriskyMoose's gear list:FriskyMoose's gear list
Sony RX100 Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 Nikon D70 +9 more
OneLeggedCat Forum Member • Posts: 69
Re: RX10 IV vs. microFT
2

I find myself in a similar situation. I'm renting an RX10 IV this weekend to compare it with my m43 stuff, which includes the Oly 12-100 and the Panny 100-400, both great lenses. I have both attached to Oly OMD-10 II's, because those are very capable and light (although one has a grip extension because that Panny 100-400 is quite front heavy). I backpack a lot, and greatly desire a camera that can do everything, or instead 2 cameras that are as light as possible. I will NOT consider swapping lenses on the trail, as much of the things I photograph are birds or bears or what not, and animals appear and are gone again within seconds. I had decided a while back that m43 was the physically smallest sensor to what I could tolerate in noise, but here I am, trying this RX10 IV with a significantly smaller sensor. 10 pounds of camera junk hung off my neck and torso is just brutal when I've already got 45 pounds on my back and hiking many miles through mountains.

Mattia Valente wrote:

A question for anyone who switched to an RX10 mk IV from a micro four thirds setup: are you happy with the performance? Worth it in terms of trade-off?

This is hard. I'll say that if you don't use it for wide landscapes, then maybe. See below.

Right now I have an A7rIII for my 'wide to short tele' needs, i.e. 16mm to 85mm. This is a very acceptable size/weight/quality trade-off for me.

Good, because the RX10 IV is too soft at 24mm at the edges. In addition to that loss of resolution, there is also a falloff in contrast toward the edges. It cleans up some above f5, but not enough for me.  Some people will be more tolerant of this than others, but it really bothers me.  Also consider that the f2.4 is really not much help in subject isolation, as zooming to 35mm already drops that to f3.2  Also consider that I am judging it against the level of equipment that I see that you already own, and not against other super zooms.  Against other super zooms, the RX10 IV is easily superior.

And the quality of my RX100 mark I sensor is still very impressive. So I'm considering adding an RX10 mk IV as a telephoto replacement to the MFT kit.

I'm noticing about 1.5 more stops of noise than my Oly's. It's... Well it's a lot better than all the other super zooms (except the 1" Panny's). The luminance noise is tolerable to me. But the chroma noise is bothering me. HOWEVER, you also say you are happy with the sensor in your RX100. So I say, yes, I think overall, your plan is solid.

Do keep in mind that this camera is neither small nor light.  It's loaded with glass.  Consider that you may not be saving much weight vs your current Oly's setup.

I'm somewhat disappointed at my trials with it this weekend, because I wanted this camera to truly do everything, and it doesn't.  I've got some thinking to do. 

 OneLeggedCat's gear list:OneLeggedCat's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Sony RX10 IV Olympus E-M1 II Olympus 12-100mm F4.0 +1 more
ThePhilosopher Junior Member • Posts: 47
Re: RX10 IV vs. microFT
15

I do not post very often if at all, but thought I would give my conclusion after having gone through the same decision recently.

First some background: I am not a pro, just an enthusiast and parent looking for an ideal camera. I mostly take pics of kids/family, dogs, and nature pictures when hiking. I latched onto the M4/3 format as I did not want huge lenses and have been very impressed with the overall capabilities of the Panasonic cameras. Typically I have used the 12-35 2.8 indoors and 14-140 outdoors. I hate changing lenses, but will do it when necessary. I have had every single one of the GHx cameras up to the GH4, and was debating if it was worth upgrading to the GH5 or changing to the RX10 IV if it was good enough for my needs. I typically use JPG SOOC unless I know I will need to fine tune. However, my time is more valuable.

INITIAL RX10 IV :

I managed to get access to a RX10 IV and take it out for some shots at an indoor soccer game. I became frustrated with a few things:

1) I was so used to the outstanding touch interface on the GHx cameras that it was a pain not being able to hit the quick button and just choose settings using the touch screen.

2) I disliked not having the fully articulating screen. It has been useful in several situations in when dealing with crowds and taking shots from odd angles

3) I HATED not being to adjust zoom during burst shooting. When play was moving towards me my typical method involved burst shooting and adjusting zoom to keep the person in the frame approximately the same size. Cant really do this with the RX10 IV and can only stop and restart shooting. Makes it a bit difficult and disables one of the great features of the camera

4) Tracking for kids in the game did not work as well as I hoped. However, I have always found the tracking (even on the GHx line) to be lacking.

5) Focus was found to be slow on black labs

6) I initially thought the ISO performance was worse than the GH4/5.

My Initial Conclusion after two days of use - camera could not meet my needs, but this was the wrong conclusion so keep reading.

GH5 REACTION:

My next thought was go with a GH5 or G9. I hated not having the in built flash and have needed unlimited recording . Hence, chose to go with the GH5 as they are now the same price and bought the mini olympus flash. As an aside, I really like that flash for simple bounce for family pictures and kept it for my GH4 (after making the modification so it fits and works). Its great not needing extra batteries and the thing is soooo small. It is not for pros, but works well for a hobbyist.

Was surprised when testing the GH5 that the ISO performance was NO BETTER than the GH4. I setup some tripods and a simple test setup with books, dolls, and other household items. For the life of me I could see no real difference in what ISO I would consider using for everyday shots (3200 being roughly the max). What was worse, I was surprised that the RX10 IV seemed to perform pretty equally with the GH5. The only difference is the GH5 applies a bit more NR and the RX10 IV more sharpening. I could tweak the images after and get them to look nearly identical when zoomed on a 60" TV and zoomed out. My initial belief was that in the real world the GH5 would shine.

I took both cameras on an outing with the family to the zoo. I brought the 12-60 and 45-200 for the GH5 and the RX10 IV. I wanted to see if I could match shot for shot and then compare later to see how each performed. The day was a mix of clouds / sun. Lighting is often hard at the zoo as animals can be in everything from exposed sunlight to hidden in trees / caves / indoor exhibits / behind glass / etc...

I started the day and immediatly hit the first snafu with the GH5. I wanted to compose a shot of the kids, but needed to stop and change lenses. Then needed to change back to get some shots of the animals I wanted. This continued throughout the day. As the day progressed my pictures went from 50/50 with each camera taking approximately the same images to 90/10 in favor of the RX10 IV because I found I could compose such a wide variety of shots without changing the lenses.

When I got home I was sure the GH5 images would outshine the RX10 IV and I would need to make a tough decision. Versatility versus image quality. I was extremely surprised when I compared images side by side / zoomed / not zoomed to find that I overwhelming liked the RX10 IV pictures better. I often found myself looking at the images thinking "I really like this one, it must be the GH5", only to find it was the RX10 IV.

FINAL CONCLUSION:

I got the RX10 IV. Yes, it is not perfect and there are things that I really miss on the Panasonic cameras. However, as a do it all camera for a dad and enthusiast it works pretty well. The biggest weakness being indoor sports with not the best lighting. However, after going through roughly 15-20 cameras over the last 10 years I can say it is the closest thing to the all in one that I have found. I am really hoping Panasonic upgrades their all in one offering.

If the M4/3 system had a 14-200 2.8-4.0 I would probably have stuck with the M4/3 system. However, it does not and probably never will.  To achieve the same range as the RX10 IV you need multiple lenses. For those of us who are just enthusiasts and family oriented it is a pain to be changing lenses to try to get the shot you want.  Kids dont wait for lens changes.  I imagine as the bridge cameras and the associated sensors get better there will be more in the same boat as me.

Will you love the RX10 IV coming from M4/3?  No, you will miss the quick zoom, changing zoom while taking pictures, touch interface of the Panasonic, fully articulated screen, and bit more.  However, you will NOT miss the multiple lenses if primarily you use the M4/3 for travel photographs and family.   Sorry for the long answer, but thought it might help someone else trying to make the decision.

OneLeggedCat Forum Member • Posts: 69
Re: RX10 IV vs. microFT
1

I managed to get access to a RX10 IV and take it out for some shots at an indoor soccer game. I became frustrated with a few things:

1) I was so used to the outstanding touch interface on the GHx cameras that it was a pain not being able to hit the quick button and just choose settings using the touch screen.

Sony is just so weird about some things like this.  They dig in their heels and just refuse to budge.  They're years behind on these touchscreens.  How can a modern camera not even have touch-to-shoot?

3) I HATED not being to adjust zoom during burst shooting.

In 2003, my Minolta DiMage A1 had a manual 7x zoom on it (absolutely fantastic camera for its time).  I've not seen a manual zoom on a bridge camera since.  The RX10 iv would be much better if it had that.

I started the day and immediatly hit the first snafu with the GH5. I wanted to compose a shot of the kids, but needed to stop and change lenses. Then needed to change back to get some shots of the animals I wanted. This continued throughout the day. As the day progressed my pictures went from 50/50 with each camera taking approximately the same images to 90/10 in favor of the RX10 IV because I found I could compose such a wide variety of shots without changing the lenses.

A lot of photogs just don't appreciate how much of an advantage this is!  And especially if you are with other people, and you don't want to be slowing them down.

When I got home I was sure the GH5 images would outshine the RX10 IV and I would need to make a tough decision. Versatility versus image quality. I was extremely surprised when I compared images side by side / zoomed / not zoomed to find that I overwhelming liked the RX10 IV pictures better. I often found myself looking at the images thinking "I really like this one, it must be the GH5", only to find it was the RX10 IV.

What software do you use, if you please?  I'm noticing the noise to be worse than my Oly's when I look at RAW files with all NR turned off.  But I would definitely like to use the best software I can with the RX10 iv.

If the M4/3 system had a 14-200 2.8-4.0 I would probably have stuck with the M4/3 system.

Me too.  Although I've noticed too many situations where I really need 12mm.  So mine would need to be 12-200.

However, it does not and probably never will.

A few such lenses exist in the APSC world (made by Tamron), so they are certainly possible.  The problem is that they produce some of the softest pics you've ever seen.  Truly not worth having.  I feel that a quality m43 12-200 could be made and sold for about $3,000, but it would weight something like maybe 4 pounds.  I don't know that there would be a market for such a lens, although I personally would be the first to buy one.

Kids dont wait for lens changes.

Neither do in-laws.  Nor my friends.  Nor my wife.  Neither does the bear I just saw, nor the pine grosbeak that just visited the feeder.  Nor the rain and snow.    It's a truly huge advantage to not have to stop everything that's going on just to change a lens.

 OneLeggedCat's gear list:OneLeggedCat's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Sony RX10 IV Olympus E-M1 II Olympus 12-100mm F4.0 +1 more
tsammyc Contributing Member • Posts: 659
Re: RX10 IV vs. microFT
3

I have both the RX10 IV and the EM1 Mk2/300mmF4/TC.

The EM1 Mk2 with TC gets me to 840mm F5.6 and still has sufficient detail to see the ridges on feathers. The RX10 IV is slightly less sharp and only goes to 600mm F4. For wildlife, you want the reach. However, the RX10 is much more compact and I use it when I travel.

The Em1 Mk2 has low yield with Birds in Flight (BIF). It's ok and I do get the occasional shot. The RX10 IV tracks focus much better than the Em1 Mk2, especially on subjects moving across the frame (rather than towards or away) and the zoom gives you the flexibility for quickly adjusting back if the bird is big. High yield on BIF. As good as Canon or Nikon for tracking.

In summary, I prefer the Em1 Mk2 for a static shot, while the RX10 IV has the lens flexibility, focus and 24fps continuous autofocus for moving subjects. I wish there was a M43 camera that could do it all like the Nikon D500, but I would not want to carry the weight of a Nikon 600mm lens. Perhaps the Em1 Mk3 with a Olympus version of the Panny 100-400.

tsammyc Contributing Member • Posts: 659
Re: RX10 IV vs. microFT
1

One of the huge changes in the RX10 IV has been the ability to assign different focus modes to different buttons for back button AF. It's a huge advantage to switch from S-AF to C-AF to C-AF with wide tracking on a camera that can continuous focus at 24fps. No other camera DSLR or mirrorless comes close.

MedicineMan999
MedicineMan999 Senior Member • Posts: 2,296
Re: RX10 IV vs. microFT
5

For any who doubt the Oly M1ii's ability for BIF please glance through my better-half's BIF album via M1ii+300Pro.

It will be obvious BIF is very possible with the Olympus.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/114407047@N06/albums/72157686225817362

That said I'v found the RX10iv outstanding for BIF in decent light. I too have Oly M1ii and there is no doubt the RX10iv's tracking is better....truth is the AF-C tracking of the 10iv is almost as good as the a9's.

OK with all of that the inability of the 10iv to rack zoom quickly like can be done with say the Pan-Leica 100-400mm is a sad feature of the 10iv.....why didn't they think of their own Sony 18-200mm with the manual override switch on the lens barrel ?????

More to ponder. The IQ possible with the 10iv is amazing. I've embedded this image of an eagle here before so won't again but rarely have I exceeded that with mFT-

https://www.flickr.com/photos/medicineman4040/37889469155/in/album-72157687987476912/

Still I use and love the Oly M1ii because it has the best ergonomics of any camera I have or have owned (and that is quite a few)....I just enjoy shooting it.

Bottom line decision between the Oly and the 10iv is convenience vs. need to switch lenses vs. size and weight of the kit needed for your goal(s).

 MedicineMan999's gear list:MedicineMan999's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X Olympus Tough TG-3 Panasonic FZ1000 Sony RX100 V Sony RX100 VI +61 more
Foto4x4 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,431
Re: RX10 IV vs. microFT
2

I have a RX10III and A6300 but most of my photography is currently shot with an EM1.2 and 12-100 Pro augmented by a handful of other μ4/3 lenses.

While the RX10III is a wonderfully flexible camera, and has good image quality, it’s simply not the best IQ at any focal length. Between the 12-100 and the pretty humble 75-300II, I have the full range of the RX10III covered with better IQ and a much more enjoyable setup ergonomically albeit with some lens swapping from time to time. In all seriousness, at 24-200mm eqv, I really don’t find I need to change out for longer focal lengths all that often.

Don’t get me wrong, I used my RX10III very successfully on a 2 month trip last year and was pretty satisfied with the results. But I knew there were some issues with a 1” sensor that left me wanting even more. And my A6300 didn’t have a lenses at the time to satisfy my needs. The move to μ4/3 has on the other hand been a rewarding experience in every respect, not the least of which is “fun”.

 Foto4x4's gear list:Foto4x4's gear list
Sony RX100 VI Sony a7R III Sony a7R IV Sony 50mm F2.8 Macro Sony Vario-Tessar T* FE 16-35mm F4 ZA OSS +8 more
tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 48,286
Re: RX10 IV vs. microFT
7

You are exaggerating the shortfalls of the RX10iv lens IMO but that said I think the compromises are worth it. I personally am willing to put up with those minor shortcomings because I want a highly portable all in one solution for everything from landscapes to sports and wildlife and good IQ without needing to change lenses. As a point of comparison I would never own an M43 camera because I would have to change lenses to cover the range of the RX10iv and, compared to my Full Frame camera and lenses, the IQ is mediocre. In addition no M43 camera has PDAF AF that can compete with the RX10iv. If someone ever produces an M43 camera that has a single 12-300mm f 2.4 - 4 lens (24-600 equiv) as good as the RX10iv, has on sensor PDAF as good as the RX10iv and is about the same size and price, then you would have a good argument. Until then it's apples and oranges.

-- hide signature --

Tom
Look at the picture, not the pixels

 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX10 IV Sony a99 II Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD +7 more
tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 48,286
Re: RX10 IV vs. microFT
2

Your experience is a good argument for the fact that no single camera can satisfy all needs. I came to that conclusion so I actually own 3 completely different cameras that will satisfy any situation. RX100 for maximum portability, RX10iii for maximum single lens range with adequate for me IQ and Full Frame for maximum IQ and low light use.

For me having an M43 system wouldn't hit any of those needs.

-- hide signature --

Tom
Look at the picture, not the pixels

 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX10 IV Sony a99 II Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD +7 more
tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 48,286
Re: RX10 IV vs. microFT

BIF is possible with any camera if you know how to overcome the shortcomings. People did BIF with manual focus in the old days. However there's no doubt that the RX10iv would give you more keepers easily.

-- hide signature --

Tom
Look at the picture, not the pixels

 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX10 IV Sony a99 II Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD +7 more
Horacecoker Veteran Member • Posts: 3,317
Re: RX10 IV vs. microFT
3

Foto4x4 wrote:

Don’t get me wrong, I used my RX10III very successfully on a 2 month trip last year and was pretty satisfied with the results. But I knew there were some issues with a 1” sensor that left me wanting even more. And my A6300 didn’t have a lenses at the time to satisfy my needs. The move to μ4/3 has on the other hand been a rewarding experience in every respect, not the least of which is “fun”.

Yes I agree that a 1" sensor does indeed leave me wanting more sometimes but for me that 'more' does not come from M4/3 or even APS-C, it can only come from FF. That's how good I think the Rx10iv is.

David

 Horacecoker's gear list:Horacecoker's gear list
Sony RX100 III Sony RX10 IV Sony a6600 Sony E 16-55mm F2.8 G
Geekapoo
Geekapoo Senior Member • Posts: 2,439
Re: RX10 IV vs. mFT
4

I own an E-M1 (previously an E-M5 and a Panny G3) have used the Oly 40-150 f2.8 (plus 1.4x TE), the 12-40 f2.8 and the 9-18 f4-5.6. I also own an RX10 IV (previously an FZ200 and FZ1000).

If your interest is wide to normal subject matter, landscapes, travel and low light shooting..my advice is to use a m43 kit. The advantages re wide shots (especially <24mm, which is not possible with the RX10 IV unless you consider panning an option) and low light are considerable. Of course if you dislike carrying a kit, changing lenses or have long zoom shots as a priority, the RX10 IV is the way to go.

With respect to comparisons, I think the RX10 IV matches my m43 gear using the 40-150 f2.8 and the 12-40 f2.8 across the shared focal ranges. The key differences are the  better low light performance of of m43 (which I think is considerable) and that the m43 sensor files tolerate cropping better than the 1" sensor files. Also, there is the UI to consider...I like the Oly and Panny UI's much more than Sony's (note that I also own an RX100). Just my opinion based on my preferences. I know there are others who have the opposite opinion about UI and appreciate their views.

For myself, I would never switch from m43 to just owning the RX10 IV.. the RX10 IV low light performance is not great, one cannot zoom while shooting, the UI is inferior and it's not possible to shoot WA/UWA. That said, I love owning the RX10 IV. The lens is spectacular, as is the AF.

The good news? You can assemble a m43 kit pretty cheaply these days, there are some great Panny and Oly bodies that are just a few years old and can be had for 30-60% less than when first on the market. Also, there are some really great m43 lenses! I like owning both 1" and m43 systems and have FF equipment as well for good low light/DoF performance. Cheers.

 Geekapoo's gear list:Geekapoo's gear list
Sony RX100 Fujifilm XF 16mm F1.4 R WR Sony RX10 IV Fujifilm X-T20 Fujifilm X-T3 +13 more
tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 48,286
Re: RX10 IV vs. microFT
1

Horacecoker wrote:

Foto4x4 wrote:

Don’t get me wrong, I used my RX10III very successfully on a 2 month trip last year and was pretty satisfied with the results. But I knew there were some issues with a 1” sensor that left me wanting even more. And my A6300 didn’t have a lenses at the time to satisfy my needs. The move to μ4/3 has on the other hand been a rewarding experience in every respect, not the least of which is “fun”.

Yes I agree that a 1" sensor does indeed leave me wanting more sometimes but for me that 'more' does not come from M4/3 or even APS-C, it can only come from FF. That's how good I think the Rx10iv is.

David

I agree 100%.

-- hide signature --

Tom
Look at the picture, not the pixels

 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX10 IV Sony a99 II Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD +7 more
JPEG Shooter Senior Member • Posts: 1,252
Re: RX10 IV vs. microFT

OneLeggedCat wrote:

In 2003, my Minolta DiMage A1 had a manual 7x zoom on it (absolutely fantastic camera for its time). I've not seen a manual zoom on a bridge camera since.

Fuji made them all the way into 2013.

I had an HS50EXR (1/2" sensor) that had a 24mm- 1000mm manual zoom, and I still have an X-S1 (2/3" sensor) that has a 24mm - 624mm manual zoom.

-- hide signature --

JPEG Shooter

 JPEG Shooter's gear list:JPEG Shooter's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ50 Fujifilm X-S1 Olympus Tough TG-3 Sony RX10 IV Sony Alpha DSLR-A550 +3 more
tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 48,286
Re: RX10 IV vs. mFT
2

The problem with what you are saying is I don't think M43 is all that much better than the RX10iv in the areas you are comparing. You have to go to FF to see a considerable improvement. If you ever get to use a FF system you will see that the IQ is much closer to 1" than FF. The only advantage M43 or even APS-C has over FF is size. At least with the RX10iv you eliminate the need to change lenses.

-- hide signature --

Tom
Look at the picture, not the pixels

 tbcass's gear list:tbcass's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX10 IV Sony a99 II Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD +7 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads