rcarol

I have the Lumix FX1000 which also uses a 20 mp 1" sensor and I can easily make tack sharp 12" X 18" prints.

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

I have both the RX10iv and the RX100v. They are both Pro Quality cameras. They both take excellent images. The RX100xx is shirt pocketable. Therefore it makes a great travel camera. It can easily make prints to 16x20. It takes a little getting use to the small size but I still have my little Rollie 35-S From film days and it is about the same size.

tgreenhaw

If you want 300dpi for high quality the maximum size would be roughly 12X18 as long as you don't crop. The resolution is 5,472 x 3,648 pixels native. A little bigger than 12X18 would work as long as you're OK with a loss of quality, especially with subject matter that doesn't have a lot of high contrast detail.

Zeiss makes fantastic lenses so image quality should be excellent.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

It should be enough for producing 8X10. I think a better option would be a used Olympus E-M1 mkII or mkIII with a 12-40 f2.8 or 12-45 f4. Or even a similar Panasonic 4/3rds system camera. The advantage is you can change or add to it in the future (like an OM-1) and narrower DOF. But the RX-100 is a very good camera and will meet your indicated needs.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

I purchased the Sony RX10IV maybe 5 months ago and absolutely love it. It will do about 99% of what my Nikon D800 and 3-4 lenses would do, all in the same camera. It does not do true macro as well but at 600mm it does come very close. The lens is about as sharp as anyone could ask for. It sounds like exactly the camera for your needs in my opinion.

Dennis

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

I’ve been shooting a Sony RX10MIV for a couple of years now and it’s great for my purposes and it’s easily capable of 8x10. I’m guessing the RX100VII is also a very capable camera and which would be right for you really depends on what you shoot. I use the RX10MIV when I’m shooting wildlife from a kayak, so the 600mm reach, focus tracking and frame rate drove my choice. If you’re looking for more general purpose photography then the RX100MVII might be a better choice. It’ll save you about $400 and is easily pocketable.
All that being said, there are reasons I only use the Sony from a kayak. I don’t love the menus and I’m not a big fan of the ergonomics, (definitely not a fan of electronic zoom). I also shoot Nikon full frame and M4/3 and for general photography, if pocketability isn’t important, I’d look at something like the Olympus E5 Mark III with the 14-150 and split the difference in cost.

CKAlbion Loc: Mendocino, CA

I hauled mine all over Brittany, and it was a fantastic vacation camera. I was very impressed with the image quality in low light situations while on its fully automatic setting. I haven't printed anything on paper, just admired the results on my monitor.

My husband liked the results so much that he's "borrowed" the Sony. I may never get to shoot it again at this rate. Might have to buy a second one for me.

Doc Mck Loc: Terrell,Texas

I use an RX10 4 a lot. I also have a number of DSLR cameras and an R6 mirrorless camera. The Sony would be an excellent general use camera. If I could only take one camera with me , it would probably be the Sony.

Doc Mck Loc: Terrell,Texas

I use an RX10 4 a lot. I also have a number of DSLR cameras and an R6 mirrorless camera. The Sony would be an excellent general use camera. If I could only take one camera with me , it would probably be the Sony.

stevefrankel

I've made 20x30s with mine. Unfortunately, the weight got too much for me, so I'm now using a Leica CL with 3 lenses, none of which weigh more than 12 ounces. However, none of them approach the advantages of a 600mm setkup.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

I got mine in November of 2017 as soon as it became available. I opted to get the IV over the III because of the improved sensor and the huge number of phase-detect focus points on the sensor - which much improves the focus acquisition speed, accuracy and tracking. The only negatives are poor high ISO performance, no anti-flicker feature, very short (400 shots) battery, and no included battery charger. Sony and others make them. I would suggest getting a charger and an extra battery. Image quality is excellent, as are prints. I've made prints of uncropped and lightly cropped pictures up to 20x30 and they look fine. You only "need" 181ppi for an 8x10, and 64 ppi for a 20x30, and this camera provides much more than that. The image resolution required is related to print size only in that smaller prints are often viewed at shorter distances and bigger ones at greater distances. The human eye loses acuity as the distance increases, so a 20x30 at 100 ppi looks just as good at 5 ft as one that is printed at 200 ppi.

http://www.photokaboom.com/photography/learn/printing/resolution/1_which_resolution_print_size_viewing_distance.htm

topcat Loc: Alameda, CA

I got an 11X14 print ut of a 6 MP camera. You have to practice good photographic practices and take care of what you are doing.

I have the RX100 iii, and it is a very capable camera. Just watch what you are doing.

cucharared Loc: Texas, Colorado

My keep rate skyrocketed when I got the RX10IV, and no more situations of having the wrong lens for the shot, to say nothing about lugging extra lenses around.

Ron