Do you miss larger sensors?

Started 8 months ago | Discussions
Ab S
Ab S Senior Member • Posts: 1,119
Re: Do you miss larger sensors?

CaliforniaDave wrote:

[..]

The primary reason is because they must create a big enough image circle to cover a FF sensor, and perform well over that area.

[..]

That is how I understand it too.

-- hide signature --

Ab

 Ab S's gear list:Ab S's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10
richarddd
richarddd Veteran Member • Posts: 3,416
Re: Do you miss larger sensors?

Jerry R wrote:

Ab,

By going to longer focal lengths to reduce DOF you are also reducing FOV.

To get the equivalent DOF at f/4 and 200mm FF I think you would need to be at about f/1 on a 1" sensor.

Jerry

The crop factor of a 1" sensor is 2.7, so you'd only need about f/1.5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crop_factor#Common_crop_factors

 richarddd's gear list:richarddd's gear list
Sony RX100 III Canon G5 X II Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F4-5.6 R +5 more
tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 54,512
Re: Do you miss larger sensors?

Jerry R wrote:

Tom,

I would be giving up DOF, S/N, dynamic range, and the smooth backgrounds of FF and also to some extent APSC.

You wouldn't be giving those things if you still owned the FF and APS-C Cameras. Just use them when DOF, S/N, dynamic range, and the smooth backgrounds of FF are important in the photograph you are taking. Use the 1" when convenience is more important than absolute IQ. That's why I own 2 sensor sizes.

In a recent mini challenge of images with bokoh there were some ok images from 1" sensors but none to match FF.

Jerry

-- hide signature --

Tom

 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
Jerry R
Jerry R Forum Pro • Posts: 11,698
Re: Do you miss larger sensors?

Thats about right.

-- hide signature --

Sony R1, NEX C3 & 5R ,Sony A7.
Lenses: 24mm, f/1.8, FE 24-70, f/4, & FE 70-200, f/4.
Nikon V1 + 10-30 & 30-110 lenses.

Foto4x4 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,009
Re: Do you miss larger sensors?
5

I haven’t read through the thread but the subject peaked my interest because I shoot FF mostly but also have a RX100VI along with some other “toys”.

I’m not going to ditch my FF gear for the RX, period!

Not long after I for my RX100VI, I did two fairly long road trips. It wasn’t a bother to take my gear as it was always easily accessible, but even so, I was quickly aware that for travel, the little RX was shooting about 50% of my images due to its convenience. But while post processing I soon became acutely aware that its images were nowhere near the quality of the A7RII I had then.

Then last year when Covid interrupted my travel, I spent some of my savings that would normally have gone on tripping on upgrading my FF to first an A7RIII then earlier this year adding an A7RIV. Realising that the RX100VI’s 24-200mm range was a key to why I used it so often, I purchased a Tamron 28-200 last year.

I’ve since done two more road trips and the convenience of the 28-200 attached to the sharpness and other benefits of FF+resolution means I hardly used my RX100VI on those trips. PLUS I have the additional benefit of being able to use fast primes for low light, Astro, portraits (I love capturing friends and separating them from the background), or adding my 100-400 plus TC for birds and wildlife etc.

I had a RX10III for awhile and it didn’t take long to realise that if I was going to carry around something that big I may as well use FF gear. I know many here love their RX10s but seriously the RX100VI is every bit as good image wise and they ARE good, but nowhere on par with FF.

So… like I wrote before, I would miss my larger sensors. And I’m not knocking the RXs but it’s all a matter of priorities I guess.

-- hide signature --

Cheers, John
Quote: “A good photograph is knowing where to stand.” - Ansel Adams

 Foto4x4's gear list:Foto4x4's gear list
Sony RX100 VI Sony a7R III Sony a6400 Sony a7R IV Sony 50mm F2.8 Macro +12 more
Scott Larson Veteran Member • Posts: 7,275
Re: Do you miss larger sensors?

If I just take my RX10 IV into good light by itself then I have a good time with it if I don't use it very much. If I bring a DSLR along then I really see the little camera's limitations. Even in good light I've never been able to get good colors from it. Some colors are grey and muted, some are too red, and some have weird yellow splotches. Getting the exposure correct is nerve-wracking because it's so easy to blow out the exposures or lose shadow detail. I feel like I'm shooting slide film again.

Looking into the viewfinder of a DSLR is so much nicer and easier on my eyes than the dim electronic approximation viewfinder of the RX10 IV. I can look through a DSLR all day, but the RX10 IV viewfinder bothers my eyes after a couple of hours and has given me headaches a couple of times.

 Scott Larson's gear list:Scott Larson's gear list
Sony RX10 IV Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EOS-1D X +17 more
ChuckB Contributing Member • Posts: 748
Re: Do you miss larger sensors?

Foto4x4 wrote:

I had a RX10III for awhile and it didn’t take long to realise that if I was going to carry around something that big I may as well use FF gear. I know many here love their RX10s but seriously the RX100VI is every bit as good image wise and they ARE good, but nowhere on par with FF.

I'm not going to argue with you about your experience with image quality, but I have to say the to call the RX10 "that big" is interesting, to say the least. Perhaps the prime reason I have to use the RX10 iii is that it comes with a 600mm f4 (yes, equivalent I know) lens and weighs a couple of pounds. A FF camera with a 600mm f4 lens and tripod requires a sturdy manservant to accompany you as you search for rare birds. If one travels and photographs for pleasure the difference in image quality is much less than the difference in almost everything else.

So… like I wrote before, I would miss my larger sensors. And I’m not knocking the RXs but it’s all a matter of priorities I guess.

Exactly.

 ChuckB's gear list:ChuckB's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX100 III Sony RX10 III Sony a77 II Sony 70-400mm F4-5.6 G SSM +6 more
ChuckB Contributing Member • Posts: 748
Re: Do you miss larger sensors?

Scott Larson wrote:

If I just take my RX10 IV into good light by itself then I have a good time with it if I don't use it very much. If I bring a DSLR along then I really see the little camera's limitations. Even in good light I've never been able to get good colors from it. Some colors are grey and muted, some are too red, and some have weird yellow splotches. Getting the exposure correct is nerve-wracking because it's so easy to blow out the exposures or lose shadow detail. I feel like I'm shooting slide film again.

That camera has to be defective. I've not heard this complaint before and it certainly is not true of my Mark iii.

Looking into the viewfinder of a DSLR is so much nicer and easier on my eyes than the dim electronic approximation viewfinder of the RX10 IV. I can look through a DSLR all day, but the RX10 IV viewfinder bothers my eyes after a couple of hours and has given me headaches a couple of times.

It's certainly possible that an electronic viewfinder bothers people in this way but again, this is the first example I've heard. But dim? Check your settings. If anything the EVF gives a false sense of brightness in dim light.

 ChuckB's gear list:ChuckB's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX100 III Sony RX10 III Sony a77 II Sony 70-400mm F4-5.6 G SSM +6 more
nigelbb Contributing Member • Posts: 694
Re: Do you miss larger sensors?

Jerry R wrote:

Tom,

My FF is 1 to 2 stops better than my APSC cameras.

I have a Nikon V1, 1" sensor" and it is good in day light but the S/N deteriorates if the light is not good.

Jerry

Considering that this is the Sony Cybershot forum & most everyone else on this thread has a Sony 1" sensor camera with either a 24-200mm or 24-600mm FF equivalent lens then your experience comparing a Nikon 1" sensor camera interchangeable lens camera with FF & APS-C doesn't seem very relevant to the conversation.

 nigelbb's gear list:nigelbb's gear list
Sony RX100 VI Olympus E-M1 II Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.4G +3 more
richarddd
richarddd Veteran Member • Posts: 3,416
Re: Do you miss larger sensors?

ChuckB wrote:

Foto4x4 wrote:

I had a RX10III for awhile and it didn’t take long to realise that if I was going to carry around something that big I may as well use FF gear. I know many here love their RX10s but seriously the RX100VI is every bit as good image wise and they ARE good, but nowhere on par with FF.

I'm not going to argue with you about your experience with image quality, but I have to say the to call the RX10 "that big" is interesting, to say the least. Perhaps the prime reason I have to use the RX10 iii is that it comes with a 600mm f4 (yes, equivalent I know) lens and weighs a couple of pounds. A FF camera with a 600mm f4 lens and tripod requires a sturdy manservant to accompany you as you search for rare birds. If one travels and photographs for pleasure the difference in image quality is much less than the difference in almost everything else.

The RX10 iii's 600mm equivalent has a much smaller aperture than the FF camera's 600mm. The RX10 has an aperture of 220/4 = 55mm, while the FF camera's is 600/4 = 150mm. The FF equivalent with the same aperture would be 600mm, f/11.

If you care about DOF and noise, that's a major difference.

 richarddd's gear list:richarddd's gear list
Sony RX100 III Canon G5 X II Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F4-5.6 R +5 more
tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 54,512
Re: Do you miss larger sensors?

Scott Larson wrote:

If I just take my RX10 IV into good light by itself then I have a good time with it if I don't use it very much. If I bring a DSLR along then I really see the little camera's limitations. Even in good light I've never been able to get good colors from it. Some colors are grey and muted, some are too red, and some have weird yellow splotches. Getting the exposure correct is nerve-wracking because it's so easy to blow out the exposures or lose shadow detail. I feel like I'm shooting slide film again.

Strange because I find the colors from my RX10iv excellent. Sure a camera with a 1" sensor has limitations but they are nowhere as bad as you claim. I find I simply have to be more careful with exposure. Maybe you like photos with increased saturation and contrast. Those can be achieved with an RX10iv with some in-camera or post-processing adjustments. Personally, I tend to prefer more muted and realistic colors.

Looking into the viewfinder of a DSLR is so much nicer and easier on my eyes than the dim electronic approximation viewfinder of the RX10 IV. I can look through a DSLR all day, but the RX10 IV viewfinder bothers my eyes after a couple of hours and has given me headaches a couple of times.

That of course is a personal preference. I used SLRs and then DSLRs for decades and had no problem with the switch. While I agree a good Full Frame viewfinder is nicer to look through it in no way limits my ability to take a photo so I just don't care.

-- hide signature --

Tom

 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
Jerry R
Jerry R Forum Pro • Posts: 11,698
Re: Do you miss larger sensors?

The thread is about missing FF vs 1".

I did get some very good images with the V1. No its not an RX10. However, if you look at the images posted with the V3 and 600mm equivalent lens they are comparable to RX10 pics. I think the 1" sensor cameras are very good but not as good as FF and APSC sensors.

A V1 pic:

-- hide signature --

Sony R1, NEX C3 & 5R ,Sony A7.
Lenses: 24mm, f/1.8, FE 24-70, f/4, & FE 70-200, f/4.
Nikon V1 + 10-30 & 30-110 lenses.

Ed B
Ed B Forum Pro • Posts: 12,021
Re: Do you miss larger sensors?

Jerry R wrote:

The thread is about missing FF vs 1".

I did get some very good images with the V1. No its not an RX10. However, if you look at the images posted with the V3 and 600mm equivalent lens they are comparable to RX10 pics. I think the 1" sensor cameras are very good but not as good as FF and APSC sensors.

A V1 pic:

I have a full frame camera that I love, but I think the main reasons I love it are because of the lens (it's a fixed prime lens) and because of the overall look of the images. It's hard to explain.
I also like the lower light ability of the camera, but, I also think the Sony one-inch sensor cameras are excellent in a lot of different situations.

But, you're right, they aren't as good in some situations as larger sensor cameras.

Jerry045
Jerry045 Forum Pro • Posts: 13,480
Re: Do you miss larger sensors?

It all depends upon what you are shooting and why you are shooting it. Every camera has its strengths and weaknesses. No camera can do everything.

Are you shooting something destined to be a work of art? How is the lighting? Do you need that fast prime lens? What will you do with the resultant photo? Or maybe you are just taking a snapshot of Aunt Minnie in front of Costco? Are you tired of hauling that big camera and lens from a day of trekking and just want something small to maybe grab a shot of your fellow diners or the evening entertainment?

And, very importantly, what are you going to do with the resultant photo. Posting a shot on Facebook needs nothing more sophisticated than a cell phone. But making a large wall hanging will require a bit more resolution.

Another factor is your budget. The rule tends to follow that "better" cameras typically carry bigger price tags. We all have a limit as to how much we can invest in our toys. And that will vary significantly person to person.

There is always the "good enough" limit. One does not need a 64MP camera to display photos on a 4K monitor.

A FF camera is typically bigger, heavier, requires larger (pricier) lenses than say a 1" sensor camera. It will typically have better light gathering capability, less noise and possibly more dynamic range and a narrower depth of field than the same f-stop on a smaller sensor camera.

There will certainly be those times when something smaller and lighter can produce an adequate image for the purpose.

So which tool in your toolbox will work for whatever specific task you are about to accomplish?

There is no rule that says you can only own just one camera.

 Jerry045's gear list:Jerry045's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-ZS20 Sony RX10 IV +2 more
Ab S
Ab S Senior Member • Posts: 1,119
Re: RX10 compared to Sony A7Riv with Tamron 28-200mm f/2.8-5.6 Di III RX?

Somewhere in thread of this very interesting topic I read the about the combination of Sony FF with the Tamron 28-200mm f/2.8-5.6 Di III RXD lens (unfortunately I cannot recall who posted).

A sony A7Riv in combination with this lens would not be significantly larger than the RX10iv (I don't look at the price tag here). Okay, you don't have 24 mm on the lens and also no 600 mm, but with the 61 mp of the A7Riv you can do some cropping (to 350 mm equiv @ 20 mp - the resolution of the RX10iv).

Since cropping will most of the time be in the center of the FOV you will have optimal sharpness of the lens.

It would be very interesting if someone here on the forum has both the a Sony FF with this Tamron and an RX10 camera, to see a sharpness/resolution comparison (with enough light allowing base iso value of the RX10 camera).

Somebody?

I always had in mind that the successor of my RX10 will be the RX10iv, now I am doubting..

PS: For resolution arguments I would not change a RX10 camera (20 mp) with a FF of 24 or even 30 mp (except for low light), but the A7Riv with its 61 mp would be interesting: a combination with this Tamron lens for travel and all the freedom to use other lenses for specific situation.

-- hide signature --

Ab

 Ab S's gear list:Ab S's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10
Ab S
Ab S Senior Member • Posts: 1,119
Re: Do you miss larger sensors?

richarddd wrote:

ChuckB wrote:

Foto4x4 wrote:

I had a RX10III for awhile and it didn’t take long to realise that if I was going to carry around something that big I may as well use FF gear. I know many here love their RX10s but seriously the RX100VI is every bit as good image wise and they ARE good, but nowhere on par with FF.

I'm not going to argue with you about your experience with image quality, but I have to say the to call the RX10 "that big" is interesting, to say the least. Perhaps the prime reason I have to use the RX10 iii is that it comes with a 600mm f4 (yes, equivalent I know) lens and weighs a couple of pounds. A FF camera with a 600mm f4 lens and tripod requires a sturdy manservant to accompany you as you search for rare birds. If one travels and photographs for pleasure the difference in image quality is much less than the difference in almost everything else.

The RX10 iii's 600mm equivalent has a much smaller aperture than the FF camera's 600mm. The RX10 has an aperture of 220/4 = 55mm, while the FF camera's is 600/4 = 150mm. The FF equivalent with the same aperture would be 600mm, f/11.

If you care about DOF and noise, that's a major difference.

DOF, agree; noise? there is very good software available to correct for noise. Moreover, it is the pixel size that determines noise, f/4 is f/4. Or am I wrong here?

Best is always, compare the same scene in practice...

-- hide signature --

Ab

 Ab S's gear list:Ab S's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10
richarddd
richarddd Veteran Member • Posts: 3,416
Re: Do you miss larger sensors?

Ab S wrote:

richarddd wrote:

ChuckB wrote:

Foto4x4 wrote:

I had a RX10III for awhile and it didn’t take long to realise that if I was going to carry around something that big I may as well use FF gear. I know many here love their RX10s but seriously the RX100VI is every bit as good image wise and they ARE good, but nowhere on par with FF.

I'm not going to argue with you about your experience with image quality, but I have to say the to call the RX10 "that big" is interesting, to say the least. Perhaps the prime reason I have to use the RX10 iii is that it comes with a 600mm f4 (yes, equivalent I know) lens and weighs a couple of pounds. A FF camera with a 600mm f4 lens and tripod requires a sturdy manservant to accompany you as you search for rare birds. If one travels and photographs for pleasure the difference in image quality is much less than the difference in almost everything else.

The RX10 iii's 600mm equivalent has a much smaller aperture than the FF camera's 600mm. The RX10 has an aperture of 220/4 = 55mm, while the FF camera's is 600/4 = 150mm. The FF equivalent with the same aperture would be 600mm, f/11.

If you care about DOF and noise, that's a major difference.

DOF, agree; noise? there is very good software available to correct for noise. Moreover, it is the pixel size that determines noise, f/4 is f/4. Or am I wrong here?

Best is always, compare the same scene in practice...

Total light on the sensor determines noise. Pixel size is of limited importance. https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5365920428/the-effect-of-pixel-and-sensor-sizes-on-noise

F-number represents exposure, which is light per unit area, not total light. f/4 is f/4, but that doesn't tell us any more than 220mm (RX10) is 220mm  (FF). f/4 on a 1" camera will have a different effect than f/4 on a FF.

If you can get acceptable results with software, it doesn't matter.

 richarddd's gear list:richarddd's gear list
Sony RX100 III Canon G5 X II Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm F4-5.6 R +5 more
Ab S
Ab S Senior Member • Posts: 1,119
Re: Do you miss larger sensors?

richarddd wrote:

Ab S wrote:

richarddd wrote:

ChuckB wrote:

Foto4x4 wrote:

I had a RX10III for awhile and it didn’t take long to realise that if I was going to carry around something that big I may as well use FF gear. I know many here love their RX10s but seriously the RX100VI is every bit as good image wise and they ARE good, but nowhere on par with FF.

I'm not going to argue with you about your experience with image quality, but I have to say the to call the RX10 "that big" is interesting, to say the least. Perhaps the prime reason I have to use the RX10 iii is that it comes with a 600mm f4 (yes, equivalent I know) lens and weighs a couple of pounds. A FF camera with a 600mm f4 lens and tripod requires a sturdy manservant to accompany you as you search for rare birds. If one travels and photographs for pleasure the difference in image quality is much less than the difference in almost everything else.

The RX10 iii's 600mm equivalent has a much smaller aperture than the FF camera's 600mm. The RX10 has an aperture of 220/4 = 55mm, while the FF camera's is 600/4 = 150mm. The FF equivalent with the same aperture would be 600mm, f/11.

If you care about DOF and noise, that's a major difference.

DOF, agree; noise? there is very good software available to correct for noise. Moreover, it is the pixel size that determines noise, f/4 is f/4. Or am I wrong here?

Best is always, compare the same scene in practice...

Total light on the sensor determines noise. Pixel size is of limited importance. https://www.dpreview.com/articles/5365920428/the-effect-of-pixel-and-sensor-sizes-on-noise

F-number represents exposure, which is light per unit area, not total light. f/4 is f/4, but that doesn't tell us any more than 220mm (RX10) is 220mm (FF). f/4 on a 1" camera will have a different effect than f/4 on a FF.

If you can get acceptable results with software, it doesn't matter.

I read the article, which makes sense to me, so you are fully right: "The key thing to note is that the shot noise difference (from sensor size) plays a role at all ISOs, and usually has more impact than is made by difference in pixel size or technology enhancements."

Thanks,

-- hide signature --

Ab

 Ab S's gear list:Ab S's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10
Foto4x4 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,009
Re: RX10 compared to Sony A7Riv with Tamron 28-200mm f/2.8-5.6 Di III RX?

Ab S wrote:

Somewhere in thread of this very interesting topic I read the about the combination of Sony FF with the Tamron 28-200mm f/2.8-5.6 Di III RXD lens (unfortunately I cannot recall who posted).

A sony A7Riv in combination with this lens would not be significantly larger than the RX10iv (I don't look at the price tag here). Okay, you don't have 24 mm on the lens and also no 600 mm, but with the 61 mp of the A7Riv you can do some cropping (to 350 mm equiv @ 20 mp - the resolution of the RX10iv).

Since cropping will most of the time be in the center of the FOV you will have optimal sharpness of the lens.

It would be very interesting if someone here on the forum has both the a Sony FF with this Tamron and an RX10 camera, to see a sharpness/resolution comparison (with enough light allowing base iso value of the RX10 camera).

Somebody?

I always had in mind that the successor of my RX10 will be the RX10iv, now I am doubting..

PS: For resolution arguments I would not change a RX10 camera (20 mp) with a FF of 24 or even 30 mp (except for low light), but the A7Riv with its 61 mp would be interesting: a combination with this Tamron lens for travel and all the freedom to use other lenses for specific situation.

It may have been my post. I can't completely supply what you wanted but the following may help you and others when considering the options.

1. Camera Size.

I always found the RX10III or IV rather bulky for a "compact". Clearly the A7RIV + 28-200 sent much different in many ways.

2. Image Quality.

I don't have the RX10III anymore, so I can't take an exact same scene but I did find two similar images taken some time apart. Unfortunately I don't have water dragon shot with my 28-200 in anything like similar conditions. However these two are both taken at 600mm eqv focal length though the FF one is taken with a 100-400GM so it does resolve very well. For the record, both have been post processed with some sharpening and noise reduction.

A7RIII:

I took this with an A7RIII in crop mode so the resulting image is about 20Mp

RX10III:

I considered this at the time I shot it as one of the sharpest images I ever took with the RX10III. It still pleases me and certainly show off the lens and sensor pretty well

Tamron 28-200:

Here is an example of what the 28-200 is capable of. For a superzoom, it's about as good as it gets in my view. Since I took this photo, I have updated to an A7RIV but really there isn't that big a gap between the two.

In your PS, you make a completely valid observation. I tried M4/3 for a time, an EM1.2 plus a couple of pro lenses which at the time easily were better than Sony's APS-C offerings. When I started to consider FF, I realised that like your comment, why switch systems unless I gain some significant advantage. To try out my theory, I bought a secondhand A7RII and I quickly realised the advantage of extra MPs. So much so that I sold all my M4/3 and APS-C gear to fund the transition. I have so enjoyed the move that I've bought several G and GM lenses (see my gear list) but wanting a very flexible lens I bought the Tamron and it has not disappointed me. I use it mainly for travel but there are times I need faster due to light and background blur and either wider or longer. Although a RX10III of IV provide some range advantages, they cannot go wide enough, fast enough and even though they're not bad at 600mm, they cannot compete with Sony's 200-600G for wildlife (I am happy with the 100-400GM with a T/C because of size and close focus advantages).

Again, I am not knocking the RX10s or RX100s for that matter, I love having the RX100VI and will keep it until it dies since it's so darn versatile for its size, but I was simply not satisfied enough (FOR ME) with them to be my only camera and once I started shooting with FF, I completely stopped using the RX10III so it got sold. About the only thing I may look at in the future is a successor to the A7C. Right now, the first version has too many compromises to warrant investing. But the compactness with decent lenses does have some appeal. whether it's worth getting while I have the RX100VI is something I would grapple with.

Take the foregoing with a grain of salt if you disagree. that's fine by me.

-- hide signature --

Cheers, John
Quote: “A good photograph is knowing where to stand.” - Ansel Adams

 Foto4x4's gear list:Foto4x4's gear list
Sony RX100 VI Sony a7R III Sony a6400 Sony a7R IV Sony 50mm F2.8 Macro +12 more
tbcass
tbcass Forum Pro • Posts: 54,512
Re: RX10 compared to Sony A7Riv with Tamron 28-200mm f/2.8-5.6 Di III RX?

Foto4x4 wrote:

It may have been my post. I can't completely supply what you wanted but the following may help you and others when considering the options.

1. Camera Size.

I always found the RX10III or IV rather bulky for a "compact". Clearly the A7RIV + 28-200 sent much different in many ways.

That's not a valid comparison because you should show the A7RIV with lenses necessary to cover 24-600mm. As far as bulky. I actually prefer the feel and handling of bulky cameras and consider the RX10IV a bit on the small side.

-- hide signature --

Tom

 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