Owners: Sony RX100 M5 vs M6?

[viper699]

I have a DSLR- love it, but sometimes long distance trips make me wish I had a smaller camera, that is pocket sized.

An EVF is a must, and I love the Sony design, esp the m6 design which is one action, not two to close/open it.

I'm aware the lens are different between the 2.

I shoot mostly landscape and city scenes, and I do like shooting at night, even though I'm horrible at it hah.

Better light gathering w/the M5, longer focal length with the M6.

Does anyone own both of these? IF so, I'd VERY curious to know if you think the M6 sacrifices too much on light gathering ability of its lens to give you a better focal length.

And yes, I know I can get a Sony or "any" other large sensor format for the same price- trust me not keen about about the Sony prices for such a small camera and a fixed lens.

 

[Guy Parsons]

I have a DSLR- love it, but sometimes long distance trips make me wish I had a smaller camera, that is pocket sized.

Same for me. In my case already small M4/3 gear but wanted smaller and fuss-free camera in a small belt pouch, so got the M6.

An EVF is a must, and I love the Sony design, esp the m6 design which is one action, not two to close/open it.

As a screen only user for a long time the EVF is of no concern, but handy if needed, it is a small view and I find the screen always better to use under all conditions - but that's just me.

I'm aware the lens are different between the 2.

I shoot mostly landscape and city scenes, and I do like shooting at night, even though I'm horrible at it hah.

Better light gathering w/the M5, longer focal length with the M6.

The "better light gathering" of the M5 turns out to be a minor consideration compared to the way better and more useful zoom range of the M6. The silly finicky EVF of the M5 causes pain compared to the smooth operating EVF of the M6.

Does anyone own both of these? IF so, I'd VERY curious to know if you think the M6 sacrifices too much on light gathering ability of its lens to give you a better focal length.

A few here have posted about returning the M5 as the M6 turned out to be so much better for general photography, it's all about the lens and wide open at "200mm" is its best aperture. I find myself at "200mm" often, picking off details and some sneak portraits.

And yes, I know I can get a Sony or "any" other large sensor format for the same price- trust me not keen about about the Sony prices for such a small camera and a fixed lens.

I bought the M6 for my wife to replace her 1/2.3" sensor Casio where low light meant failed shots. All shots good now if you don't mind some noise with the occasional ISO 6400 shot.

Anyway my intent was M6 for her and an M5 for me, but the M6 worked so well that I bought a second M6 for myself and am enjoying photography again - not having to carry a (small) shoulder bag at all.

So far in near a couple of weeks in Singapore the M6 pair have got every shot we wanted in day or night time. The M6 is indeed the recommended travel camera by DPReview and I agree.

Any shot fails always turn out to be our fault, such as fiddling adjusts and forgetting to change back. Best to leave it in P mode and auto ISO and use maybe occasional program shift and it's all good.

The only thing I miss is the "15mm" of my fisheye. That's the 7.5mm lens on my M4/3 gear that can be de-fished for very wide shots.

Maybe some careful overlapping shots and careful stitching could get me happy, but yet to try that.

Summary: If a pixel peeper by habit then stick to carrying the big outfits, if just wanting photographs then the M6 is the answer.

Regards...... Guy

 

[elliottnewcomb]

what Guy said.

I leave my m3 home, and use m6, love it, just shot waterfalls, nature preserves, pond, and close ups at a museum, got great results, never missed my m3.

m6 has two things, 1 helps with both RAW and Jpeg (more aggresive IS (needed for 200mm), and, JPEG only, more aggresive noise reduction.

IS allows me to shoot at lower shutter speeds than m3 handheld (reduces m3 brighter lens/lower ISO expected advantage).

NR allows higher ISO to be used with m6, matching, even exceeding the results achieved with brighter m3 lens.

do you need the super AF (PDCD)? and/or 24 fps of the m5 or m6? If not, and not needing 4K movies, I think you could consider m3 against m6.

I shoot continuous low speed 3fps (think about that, amazing), ten or 24 is soooo many shots to edit. I am not shooting for Sports Illustrated, and even BIF, the shutter speed is as fast as you want, separate from the fps.

 

[vallecano]

I am following recent threads about the RX100 VI, and appreciate the posts by several members who are demonstrating tremendous knowledge and common sense, yourself included.

In the referenced post you said: “do you need the super AF (PDCD)? and/or 24 fps of the m5 or m6? If not, and not needing 4K movies, I think you could consider m3 against m6.”

This has confused me somewhat. It seems the primary advantage of the m6 over the m3 is it’s reach, which gives a shooter more flexibility in opportunities.

Can you clarify a bit because I’m sure your statement is accurate.

Earl

Madrid

 

[Digital Nigel]

I am following recent threads about the RX100 VI, and appreciate the posts by several members who are demonstrating tremendous knowledge and common sense, yourself included.

In the referenced post you said: “do you need the super AF (PDCD)? and/or 24 fps of the m5 or m6? If not, and not needing 4K movies, I think you could consider m3 against m6.”

This has confused me somewhat. It seems the primary advantage of the m6 over the m3 is it’s reach, which gives a shooter more flexibility in opportunities.

Can you clarify a bit because I’m sure your statement is accurate.

There are three generations between the cameras, each with a major enhancement:

• The M4 introduced the new, high speed stacked sensor, which allowed high frame rate and 4k video
• The M5 introduced on-sensor PDAF high speed focusing and tracking
• The M6 introduced the new 24-200 mm equiv lens, single-action pop-up EVF and 270° flip screen.

 

[elliottnewcomb]

I am following recent threads about the RX100 VI, and appreciate the posts by several members who are demonstrating tremendous knowledge and common sense, yourself included.

In the referenced post you said: “do you need the super AF (PDCD)? and/or 24 fps of the m5 or m6? If not, and not needing 4K movies, I think you could consider m3 against m6.”

This has confused me somewhat. It seems the primary advantage of the m6 over the m3 is it’s reach, which gives a shooter more flexibility in opportunities.

Can you clarify a bit because I’m sure your statement is accurate.

Earl

Madrid

I meant, instead of choosing/comparing rx100m5 to m6, IF the advanced features of m4 or m5 are not needed, then, an alternate comparison could be: m3/m6.

I wanted the m6 for it's reach, and discovered I can get some very nice shallow focus depth using 100-200mm so loving that, and it's more aggressive IS and NR truly move the f2.8 lens closer to a brighter lens via slower handheld shutter speed and via acceptable higher ISO. (I hesitate to say improved, more is not always better, it's better for me).

I don't use rx100 for video, for live sound the mics are tiny, tinny, and omni-directional, so no need for 4k of m4,5

I don't do BIF, will try for fun, but it's not my thing, and I have my Oly with more reach and 7fps anyway, so no real need for super AF.

I use Continuous Slow 3fps. I tried 24fps when it was new, for me, ridiculous. Kids coming down a water slide: 4 secs 100 frames to edit, no way. Even my Oly 7fps for kids sports is a bit too fast. I do not like editing if I can avoid it. I'm not shooting Sports Illustrated, and I only want a few decent shots of each game, I get that with 3fps easily. It's the reach that makes it usable for kids sports (smaller fields, you are closer when shooting. Forget m1,2,3,4,5 for that. I'm using SZ toggle to jump from 200mm to 280mm or 400mm, back to 200mm, that is plenty of reach for Soccer, Hockey, Softball, Wrestling, any other doggone thing they take up that I have to drive hours to!

I will learn to benefit from the PDCD AF, but I have been doing quite well with my rx100m3, and, I am a big fan of using Manual Focus.

In the back of my mind is always: get the m6, and add a used m3 if you really need f1.8 for low light, (better be close because you will be 24mm wide to get the f1.8)

 

[vallecano]

Nigel: Thank you. I too am working Retired, but in Spain not England. Both are great places to work in!!

Earl

Madrid

 

[vallhall]

I have a DSLR- love it, but sometimes long distance trips make me wish I had a smaller camera, that is pocket sized.

An EVF is a must, and I love the Sony design, esp the m6 design which is one action, not two to close/open it.

I'm aware the lens are different between the 2.

I shoot mostly landscape and city scenes, and I do like shooting at night, even though I'm horrible at it hah.

Better light gathering w/the M5, longer focal length with the M6.

Does anyone own both of these? IF so, I'd VERY curious to know if you think the M6 sacrifices too much on light gathering ability of its lens to give you a better focal length.

And yes, I know I can get a Sony or "any" other large sensor format for the same price- trust me not keen about about the Sony prices for such a small camera and a fixed lens.

Just a tip!. For the price of a RX100Va or VI, you can buy a very good smartphone with zoom and great low light ability

 

[Digital Nigel]

I have a DSLR- love it, but sometimes long distance trips make me wish I had a smaller camera, that is pocket sized.

An EVF is a must, and I love the Sony design, esp the m6 design which is one action, not two to close/open it.

I'm aware the lens are different between the 2.

I shoot mostly landscape and city scenes, and I do like shooting at night, even though I'm horrible at it hah.

Better light gathering w/the M5, longer focal length with the M6.

Does anyone own both of these? IF so, I'd VERY curious to know if you think the M6 sacrifices too much on light gathering ability of its lens to give you a better focal length.

And yes, I know I can get a Sony or "any" other large sensor format for the same price- trust me not keen about about the Sony prices for such a small camera and a fixed lens.

Just a tip!. For the price of a RX100Va or VI, you can buy a very good smartphone with zoom and great low light ability

Presumably they offer great 200mm equiv optical zoom, a high quality EVF, a tilting screen, 20mp raw files…

 

[vallecano]

Elliott: Thank you for such a thorough response and I now understand.

You are living in "The Queen City" and I am in a city where Kings ruled, but not anymore.I have many family members in Pennsylvania so I'm not a stranger to the area.

Thanks again for helping me.

Earl

Madrid

 

[vallhall]

I have a DSLR- love it, but sometimes long distance trips make me wish I had a smaller camera, that is pocket sized.

An EVF is a must, and I love the Sony design, esp the m6 design which is one action, not two to close/open it.

I'm aware the lens are different between the 2.

I shoot mostly landscape and city scenes, and I do like shooting at night, even though I'm horrible at it hah.

Better light gathering w/the M5, longer focal length with the M6.

Does anyone own both of these? IF so, I'd VERY curious to know if you think the M6 sacrifices too much on light gathering ability of its lens to give you a better focal length.

And yes, I know I can get a Sony or "any" other large sensor format for the same price- trust me not keen about about the Sony prices for such a small camera and a fixed lens.

Just a tip!. For the price of a RX100Va or VI, you can buy a very good smartphone with zoom and great low light ability

Presumably they offer great 200mm equiv optical zoom, a high quality EVF, a tilting screen, 20mp raw files…

My phone does almost everthing of that exept a tilting screen!. the zoom is very good at 250mm, and so is the raw files.....at 40MB, and the beutiful sharp 6.4 OLED screen.

The best thing, you only carry 1 device!

 

[Digital Nigel]

I have a DSLR- love it, but sometimes long distance trips make me wish I had a smaller camera, that is pocket sized.

An EVF is a must, and I love the Sony design, esp the m6 design which is one action, not two to close/open it.

I'm aware the lens are different between the 2.

I shoot mostly landscape and city scenes, and I do like shooting at night, even though I'm horrible at it hah.

Better light gathering w/the M5, longer focal length with the M6.

Does anyone own both of these? IF so, I'd VERY curious to know if you think the M6 sacrifices too much on light gathering ability of its lens to give you a better focal length.

And yes, I know I can get a Sony or "any" other large sensor format for the same price- trust me not keen about about the Sony prices for such a small camera and a fixed lens.

Just a tip!. For the price of a RX100Va or VI, you can buy a very good smartphone with zoom and great low light ability

Presumably they offer great 200mm equiv optical zoom, a high quality EVF, a tilting screen, 20mp raw files…

My phone does almost everthing of that exept a tilting screen!. the zoom is very good at 250mm, and so is the raw files.....at 40MB

250mm optical zoom? An EVF?

 

[vallhall]

I have a DSLR- love it, but sometimes long distance trips make me wish I had a smaller camera, that is pocket sized.

An EVF is a must, and I love the Sony design, esp the m6 design which is one action, not two to close/open it.

I'm aware the lens are different between the 2.

I shoot mostly landscape and city scenes, and I do like shooting at night, even though I'm horrible at it hah.

Better light gathering w/the M5, longer focal length with the M6.

Does anyone own both of these? IF so, I'd VERY curious to know if you think the M6 sacrifices too much on light gathering ability of its lens to give you a better focal length.

And yes, I know I can get a Sony or "any" other large sensor format for the same price- trust me not keen about about the Sony prices for such a small camera and a fixed lens.

Just a tip!. For the price of a RX100Va or VI, you can buy a very good smartphone with zoom and great low light ability

Presumably they offer great 200mm equiv optical zoom, a high quality EVF, a tilting screen, 20mp raw files…

My phone does almost everthing of that exept a tilting screen!. the zoom is very good at 250mm, and so is the raw files.....at 40MB

250mm optical zoom? An EVF?

Its 5* optical and 10*hybrid zoom, almost as good as the optical

 

[vallhall]

No offence, but i think the RX100 series and thery rivals is some sort of obsolute these days

 

[viper699]

I have a DSLR- love it, but sometimes long distance trips make me wish I had a smaller camera, that is pocket sized.

An EVF is a must, and I love the Sony design, esp the m6 design which is one action, not two to close/open it.

I'm aware the lens are different between the 2.

I shoot mostly landscape and city scenes, and I do like shooting at night, even though I'm horrible at it hah.

Better light gathering w/the M5, longer focal length with the M6.

Does anyone own both of these? IF so, I'd VERY curious to know if you think the M6 sacrifices too much on light gathering ability of its lens to give you a better focal length.

And yes, I know I can get a Sony or "any" other large sensor format for the same price- trust me not keen about about the Sony prices for such a small camera and a fixed lens.

Just a tip!. For the price of a RX100Va or VI, you can buy a very good smartphone with zoom and great low light ability

Presumably they offer great 200mm equiv optical zoom, a high quality EVF, a tilting screen, 20mp raw files…

My phone does almost everthing of that exept a tilting screen!. the zoom is very good at 250mm, and so is the raw files.....at 40MB

250mm optical zoom? An EVF?

Its 5* optical and 10*hybrid zoom, almost as good as the optical

I'm a film person, then a DSLR person. I already own a pricey phone. I don't need a second one.

Anything less than film or a good sensor size DSLR is a compromise. I have no photographic needs that involve a camera phone.

Lastly, I require an EVF, perhaps you missed that. If you didn't then I'm not sure you responded.

 

[Foto4x4]

No offence, but i think the RX100 series and thery rivals is some sort of obsolute these days

I’m pleased for you, but I won’t be swapping my M6 for a phone anytime soon. The ergonomics, lack of EVF and use of computational imaging isn’t there yet as good as they are for some.

 

[viper699]

I have a DSLR- love it, but sometimes long distance trips make me wish I had a smaller camera, that is pocket sized.

Same for me. In my case already small M4/3 gear but wanted smaller and fuss-free camera in a small belt pouch, so got the M6.

An EVF is a must, and I love the Sony design, esp the m6 design which is one action, not two to close/open it.

As a screen only user for a long time the EVF is of no concern, but handy if needed, it is a small view and I find the screen always better to use under all conditions - but that's just me.

I'm aware the lens are different between the 2.

I shoot mostly landscape and city scenes, and I do like shooting at night, even though I'm horrible at it hah.

Better light gathering w/the M5, longer focal length with the M6.

The "better light gathering" of the M5 turns out to be a minor consideration compared to the way better and more useful zoom range of the M6. The silly finicky EVF of the M5 causes pain compared to the smooth operating EVF of the M6.

Does anyone own both of these? IF so, I'd VERY curious to know if you think the M6 sacrifices too much on light gathering ability of its lens to give you a better focal length.

A few here have posted about returning the M5 as the M6 turned out to be so much better for general photography, it's all about the lens and wide open at "200mm" is its best aperture. I find myself at "200mm" often, picking off details and some sneak portraits.

And yes, I know I can get a Sony or "any" other large sensor format for the same price- trust me not keen about about the Sony prices for such a small camera and a fixed lens.

I bought the M6 for my wife to replace her 1/2.3" sensor Casio where low light meant failed shots. All shots good now if you don't mind some noise with the occasional ISO 6400 shot.

Anyway my intent was M6 for her and an M5 for me, but the M6 worked so well that I bought a second M6 for myself and am enjoying photography again - not having to carry a (small) shoulder bag at all.

So far in near a couple of weeks in Singapore the M6 pair have got every shot we wanted in day or night time. The M6 is indeed the recommended travel camera by DPReview and I agree.

Any shot fails always turn out to be our fault, such as fiddling adjusts and forgetting to change back. Best to leave it in P mode and auto ISO and use maybe occasional program shift and it's all good.

The only thing I miss is the "15mm" of my fisheye. That's the 7.5mm lens on my M4/3 gear that can be de-fished for very wide shots.

Maybe some careful overlapping shots and careful stitching could get me happy, but yet to try that.

Summary: If a pixel peeper by habit then stick to carrying the big outfits, if just wanting photographs then the M6 is the answer.

Regards...... Guy

Guy- thank you very much for the details, most helpful. It seems whether one is buying a small volume of milk or a small camera, one is paying for size as usual. Some things never change.

The m6 it is then.

 

[Foto4x4]

I have a DSLR- love it, but sometimes long distance trips make me wish I had a smaller camera, that is pocket sized.

An EVF is a must, and I love the Sony design, esp the m6 design which is one action, not two to close/open it.

I'm aware the lens are different between the 2.

I shoot mostly landscape and city scenes, and I do like shooting at night, even though I'm horrible at it hah.

Better light gathering w/the M5, longer focal length with the M6.

Does anyone own both of these? IF so, I'd VERY curious to know if you think the M6 sacrifices too much on light gathering ability of its lens to give you a better focal length.

And yes, I know I can get a Sony or "any" other large sensor format for the same price- trust me not keen about about the Sony prices for such a small camera and a fixed lens.

I’ve not owned the M5 or M5A, but have owned a M2, M4 and now the M6. I sold my M4 to buy a Lumix TZ110 (ZS100) for its 25-250 range for a trip to Canada in 2016 intending it to be backup for my A6300. It ended up taking 70% of my photos. When the M6 was announced I decided that I would at some point get one as the lens on the RX100s have all been very good for their size.

I do think the M5’s f1.8 would have an advantage at night but with the improvements in the sensor since I owned my M2 I see no reason the M6 couldn’t equal or better night shots like these. Note these have been downsampled from the originals. I’ve not owned my M6 long enough to have any similar night shots at this point.









I have no hesitation in recommending the M6 over other models when used as a travel camera. The EVF is a vast improvement functionally as is the menu system. The addition of My Menu is welcomed. But it’s that range that seals the deal. It’s not like 24-70 is no good nor that you take all that many images at 200mm, but when you can’t zoom with your feet, it is simply so handy. About 30% of all images I shoot are over 70mm so for me it’s been a no brainer.

--
Cheers, John
Quote: “If your pictures aren’t good enough, you’re not close enough.”, Robert Capa

 

[Foto4x4]

The m6 it is then.

I was drafting my answer when you posted this. Good choice... I’m quite sure it’s the right one.

 

[vallhall]

I have a DSLR- love it, but sometimes long distance trips make me wish I had a smaller camera, that is pocket sized.

An EVF is a must, and I love the Sony design, esp the m6 design which is one action, not two to close/open it.

I'm aware the lens are different between the 2.

I shoot mostly landscape and city scenes, and I do like shooting at night, even though I'm horrible at it hah.

Better light gathering w/the M5, longer focal length with the M6.

Does anyone own both of these? IF so, I'd VERY curious to know if you think the M6 sacrifices too much on light gathering ability of its lens to give you a better focal length.

And yes, I know I can get a Sony or "any" other large sensor format for the same price- trust me not keen about about the Sony prices for such a small camera and a fixed lens.

I’ve not owned the M5 or M5A, but have owned a M2, M4 and now the M6. I sold my M4 to buy a Lumix TZ110 (ZS100) for its 25-250 range for a trip to Canada in 2016 intending it to be backup for my A6300. It ended up taking 70% of my photos. When the M6 was announced I decided that I would at some point get one as the lens on the RX100s have all been very good for their size.

I do think the M5’s f1.8 would have an advantage at night but with the improvements in the sensor since I owned my M2 I see no reason the M6 couldn’t equal or better night shots like these. Note these have been downsampled from the originals. I’ve not owned my M6 long enough to have any similar night shots at this point.





I have no hesitation in recommending the M6 over other models when used as a travel camera. The EVF is a vast improvement functionally as is the menu system. The addition of My Menu is welcomed. But it’s that range that seals the deal. It’s not like 24-70 is no good nor that you take all that many images at 200mm, but when you can’t zoom with your feet, it is simply so handy. About 30% of all images I shoot are over 70mm so for me it’s been a no brainer.

I quess you had to use atleast iso 6400 for the same pics as shown here?