neuron

I am an intermediate photographer/amateur, who likes to travel and paint pictures that I take in nature. I like to carry a camera with me at all times, but do not want to carry around a camera in a bag, or have to change lenses. My pictures, if framed, would not be wall-sized, but possibly bigger than 8 1/2"x11". I also do like to take animal close up distance shots, as well as birds and insect pictures on flowers, as well as close up pictures and Macro up-close pictures. This camera has a 1 in CMOS sensor and a ZOOM from 22-200. and 21 Megapixels, and Zeiss lens. I like that it is a camera I can slip in my pants pocket or jacket. I have also seen some videos taken of bees on flowers, both in real time and slow motion with this camera with zoom, and like that option. The camera is expensive at $1200.00, and have not seen any comprehensive reviews, except one in German. Should I wait and see if a less expensive camera would do the same? I thought I saw a report that Cannon is coming out with a compact large zoom camera, but would appreciate any comments or suggestions.
Thanks in advance.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Not a review but an Ad, https://www.adorama.com/isorx100m6.html

AlohaJim Loc: Retired. Hawaii >> N. Arizona.

I have the Sony RX100 MK V. The zoom is from 22-70. The MK VI additional reach of 200 mm. makes it the premiere camera of it's type. Image quality is exceptional considering the size and the 1" sensor. I reviewed about 8 cameras in this class and IMHO the RX100 MK V was the top of the field at the time. It continues to be so.
Check the review at "DPpreview".com on the MK V. It will be very similar. The only significant difference is the change in the ND filter and the slightly slower lens at about 2.8.
You will not be disappointed.
jim

neuron

Thanks Jim. I looked at the Sony M5, and liked it at Best Buy. The M6 has a longer zoom. I thought because I wanted to get closer to the animals and distant shots, I should invest in the more expensive 22-200 Zoom. Is the speed of the M5 faster than the M6? I will recheck the ad.Would taking close-ups have different distances to the subject between the M5 and M6?

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

THe RX100 line is really nice for a pocketable camera that takes incredible images; I carry my RX100M4 with me all the time. However, I think the RX100M6's $1200 price point is a bit ridiculous.
Instead, look at the new Nikon Coolpix P1000 a 24 - 3000 zoom for $998.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

I only use Sony pocket camera's when I travel. I use the RX100 II, because it has a flash shoe (the 6 does not) so I can use my more powerful Sony 60 flash to point up and behind me for outstanding flash indoors.
But my other Sony pocket is the HX90V with 24-720 mm Zeiss lens with pop up viewfinder. It takes very sharp images I have blown to 20X30 without a problem. Less expensive than the RX100VI and more capable in my opinion.
I have belt pouches for both and really like being hands free on a trip that allows me to hold my wife's hand.
I am personally waiting for the RX100VII that is said to have a 24-600 zeiss lens. Can you say WOW.

travelwp Loc: New Jersey

I like toys and have owned the M2, M3, M4 and M5. I decided not to buy the M6 because the lens is slower than on the M5. What most users don’t know is that when the M5 is set for JPG instead of raw, the range is 24-280mm. At the higher zoom range, the megapixels drop to 5, down from 20. If you want a good zoom in RAW than you want the M6. Since my 5 megapixel JPG images are excellent, I’m keeping the M5.

(I do a lot of Street Photography, so I use the M5 instead of my Nikon D850, which is much larger).

Bultaco Loc: Aiken, SC

I think you'll find 200mm short for wildlife.

tomad Loc: North Carolina

Here's your comprehensive review... in English.

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cyber-shot-dsc-rx100-vi-m6

mikegreenwald Loc: Illinois

No single camera/lens can do everything as well as cameras designed for a single purpose. That being said (I owned the original Rx100, and have the Mk 2 & Mk 4 now), the Rx100Mk 6 is in my view, the best you’re likely to find, given the situation you describe. As stated above, the lens is a little short for wildlife, and a little slow for low light, but in return it does those reasonably well, and as an all around pocket camera it’s as good as you can find.

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

A little earlier I saw a B&H review article on this Sony 100 VI camera. Had lots of good to say about it.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

I was looking for a 1" sensor camera with viewfinder that is pocketable. I settled on a Panasonic DMC-ZS100 which is much less expensive. Now there is the Panasonic DMC-ZS200 which goes to 350mm, still less expensive.

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

You can't go wrong with Zeiss lenses. I couldn't afford the RX so I opted for the HX-400v. Also has a Zeiss lens and a longer zoom. It is not quite as pocketable. But at the lower price, it left some change in my pocket to keep the camera company.

neuron

Thank you. Will review it.
Neuron

jonsailhob

Hi Neuron, we have 2 cameras a Nikon P510 which is a 42X bridge camera with about 1000mm maximum zoom and a small sensor. We use it for most things. It is great for birds etc. but not great in dim light. The other camera is a Sony RX100-IV we have had for about a year. The main reason we got it is to shoot in dim illumination, and it is great for that, especially indoor shots which are impossible with the P510. It has a faster lens than the 100-VI, but less zoom. We have used both while traveling, the Nikon outside in good illumination and the Sony in reduced light in and out. It has been wonderful in cathedrals, museums homes etc. It is a wonderful camera, and still available at $800.