OK - It's making more sense to me now. The main thing that was throwing me off was not realizing just how much smaller the 1-inch sensor is than either APS-C or Full Frame Sensor. I did a quick calculation and estimate the APS-C to be about 3.6 x the area of the 1-inch and the full frame approximately 7.4 x the area. So, assuming sensor size alone as a factor, and assuming the lens portion of the RX10 is about $1.000, the price of comparable APS-C lens would run $3,600 and full frame $7,400. I'm sure a lot of other factors besides sensor size would also come into play.

Lots of great advice here. I also mainly shoot in natural light. I also recommend Picasa, FastStone, and Lightroom for editing. And Bryan Peterson's "Understanding Exposure" for reading material.

One of the things I have found is that my most liked photos are almost always taken with a "fast lens" with a maximum aperture ranging from f/2.0 all the way to f/1.2. I'm not familiar with the lenses that fit your camera. I'm guessing that ABJanes suggestion is for a lens that would fit and work well. Personally, I prefer longer focal lengths - especially for people shots.

Just throwing this out there for thought/discussion ...
I know there must be a scientific reason based on physics & economics, but it's over my head -
So, if Sony/Zeiss can create a 24-200 mm f/2.8 lens and fix it to a great body with a 1 inch sensor in the RX10 (both Mark I and II) and sell the whole package for $1,300 -
Then why can't an interchangeable lens with those same specs be created by one of the major manufacturers and sold for a reasonable price?

Agreed - defaults are WAY too much. But a great program for creating beautiful portraits - especially if you don't know how to do edits in another program. I would guess that advanced Photoshop users probably scoff at it.

Love it!

If you are looking for low light photography, I agree with others' suggestions about looking at the Sony A7 line - in particular the new A7R II. I haven't seen anything in the rumor mill about an A7S Mark II. I hope they do that one. That one could really venture into new territory of high-quality low-light photography / videography.

I see you also asked about fast glass. A lot depends on your budget and focal length preferences. My favorite fast glass, more on the telephoto end, is:
Canon 70-200 mm f/2.8L IS II (my most used lens)
Canon 135 mm f/2.0L
Canon 50 mm f/1.4
Canon 200 mm f/2.0L IS (very pricey)
Canon 85 mm f/1.2L II (slow focus but amazing)
Zeiss 135 mm f/2.0 (manual focus only)

I do have a couple of rescued dogs. My wife's miniature dachshund and my mystery mix. My thought on his breed mix have changed. I'm sort of sticking with Min Pin / Basenji ((hence the BushDog moniker).

Jack

(Download)

Hi Ron, I see you're in Floresville, not too far from me in SA.
I love, love, love my 5D Mark III. I use it for about 90% of my photography. The other 10% is with 1DX, 7D Mark II, SL1, Sony RX100 Mark III, or Fuji X100T. I list those not to brag but to accentuate how much I love the 5D III. I bought it full price when it first came out and have never regretted it.

I had planned to get one of the 50 MP models but have decided to wait for the 5D Mark IV. I think it will be more suitable for me. I will keep the Mark III though even if I get the Mark IV. What I'm expecting/hoping for in the Mark IV:
- more resolution - I've heard a rumor about 28MP, which suits me fine
- slightly higher frames per second
- better sensor technology (not that I'm dissatisfied with the Mark III sensor; more that sensor technology keeps improving)

Good luck with your decision. I think you'll be happy with either choice.
Mike

I too love my Sony RX100MIII. If I did a lot of video, I'd get the IV.

:thumbup:

Thank you for posting your thoughts on the Sony A7ii & Zeiss lenses. I've been seriously considering adding a similar Sony/Zeiss combination to my Canon arsenal. I'm keeping an eye out for experiences with the new A7Rii and am drooling over possible low light capabilities of a future A7Sii.

When I first got a camera with dual slots, I was still shooting JPEG only. I'd have them switch automatically when one filled up.

Then when I got interested in RAW, I'd record JPEG to one card, RAW to the other.

Then, when I got used to editing RAW, I went to shooting in RAW only, again automatically switching to the other card when one fills up.

If I ever encounter a situation where I lose images on a card, I will probably record RAW to both cards simultaneously -- especially on important shoots.

Two more thoughts I'll pass along: 1) it is nice to have card switch to other card automatically while in the middle of something so that you don't miss a shot. 2) I now wish I had all my old photos in RAW form so I could rework the really good images.

Congratulations on your 5D Mark III. That's my favorite & most used body - even over 1DX.

I have three 16-35 Canon lenses - the f/2.8L versions I and II and the f/4L IS. None of them have a lot of use. If you're interested in the f/2.8L I, send me a pm.

Scratch - I just saw that you need wider than 16. You better do like me and save up for the 11-24 ;-)

I have about a half dozen Domke bags including the F-6. One thing to know about the Domke bags is that they don't have a lot of padding. The sides have virtually no cushioning other than the insert. I love them nonetheless. I know you didn't ask about the F-2 bag but I like it better. I have 3 of those. When the side pockets are empty and patted down, it's not a whole lot larger than the F-6 (in my opinion). And I like the way my iPad fits in the back pocket of the F-2. When fully expanded and filled with stuff, it does become quite a bit larger than the F-6. If your system is small, the F-6 is a nice attractive choice. I think the brown ruggedwear has a masculine look.

When I travel, my two carry-on items are the Domke F-2 and a Lowepro Pro Runner 200 AW. Also, I routinely use one of my F-2's for other stuff besides camera gear, though there is always at least my Sony RX100III in it.

I can't comment on the Tenba since I have no experience with it.

http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Landscape-Photography-Barbara-Gerlach/dp/0240810937

IMHO, the RX100 (any version) is no ordinary point and shoot. I had version 1 that I gave to a relative last year, then purchased version 3 for myself to replace it. I have other P&S cameras but this is my "go to" P&S when I want portability.

I also have multiple high quality DSLRs like the Canon 1DXm 5Diii, 7Dii and I previously had 5Dii and Nikon D800.

I've attached some sample photos I took at a Spurs playoff game with the RX100iii. I did use manual settings and shot in RAW and then edited in Lightroom so they are NOT straight out of the camera.

Shot w RX100iii in Raw, then edited in LR

(Download)

Shot w RX100iii in Raw, then edited in LR

(Download)

Shot w RX100iii in Raw, then edited in LR

(Download)