Bison Bud

The Sony RX100 series is by far the best compact camera system available today, but it is pricey to say the least! I recently purchased a used RX100 VA and like it very much, but I doubt that it will ever replace my full sized DLSR for serious photography. It is great for day to day events, travel where size really matters, and because of it's small size it generally goes with me even when I would probably do without rather than carry the full sized DLSR, which is a very good thing. While it is indeed a very capable camera, it's small size can be a negative as well as a positive and at least for me it makes a good compliment to my primary DSLR rather than any sort of replacement. Can't really have too many toys anyway! Good luck and good shooting to all.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

I have full frame Sony and Canon APSC. The image quality of the RX10 has blown me away !

My current thinking is - if possible -I will use the FF for very high quality images in the 24-300mm range. The APSC for quality/fast macro images and the RX10 for fast action 300-600mm range. But if all else fails, the RX10 can do ALL this.
.

ORpilot Loc: Prineville, Or

Why both the RX100xx and RX10XX... The RX10xx is for when I don't want to cary 40lb of full frame equipment. The RX100xx is for a pocket camera when I don't need 600mm zoom, or I need the low light ability of the f1.8. Bot😊h are excellent cameras.

markwilliam1

Yup! I have the RX100M7 and the RX10M4 plus the RX100M2 with it’s f1.8 lens and hot shoe for low light photography. I can carry all 3 of these Wonderful cameras just about everywhere for way under 3 lbs! Haven’t used my Sony SLT a77ii with my Legacy Minolta lenses in what seems forever. Not missing anything except the Minolta Macro 100mm f2.8 but the RX10M4 Also does Macro Photography quite well but not 1:1. ENJOY!

whitehall Loc: Canada

On vacation I carry two cameras. A DLSR with a 24-105 f4 and the Sony RX 100vi with a 1.8 lens on the wide side for indoor images.

whitehall Loc: Canada

On vacation I carry two cameras. A DLSR with a 24-105 f4 and the Sony RX 100vi with a 1.8 lens on the wide side for indoor images.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

The disadvantages of the HX99 are a smaller sensor and slower lens. The big advantage is the longer reach, and clear image zoom gives the 35mm eq. of 1440mm. As far as the slower lens goes, if you only use the camera outdoors in decent light, it’s no big handicap, and even with the small 1/2.3” sensor, prints up to 11x14 are possible and still retain high image quality, as we can see with Bill’s images he posted.

tcthome Loc: NJ

a6k Loc: Detroit & Sanibel

I still have my HX50 (ancestor of HX99). When I travel I put in my rear right pants pocket or the cell phone holster that I found that fits it perfectly. The tiny sensor has limits and I do miss both raw shooting and a VF. I also keep in my my bag under the ɑ6500 with large lens. It really takes almost no extra effort or room compared to my cell phone and can actually zoom quite well. It can't really do big blowups but I almost never print anyhow.

My bigger Sony cameras (RX10m4, ɑ6500) make better pictures but I would never leave it home for any trip. I have carried it into places where cameras are not actually allowed. I have attached an example. It was taken at dusk while walking to a place in Australia (Phillip Island) where a rare, tiny penguin is viewed from a bunker as they come ashore. Photos are not allowed because people cannot be trusted to keep their flashes off. This picture did not violate the rules but I was not allowed to carry a normal camera from the parking lot to the bunker. The best camera is the one you are allowed to have with you.

For those who are familiar with Sony EXIF, note the Brightness Value which is around 5. Ten is normal daylight. So it was five stops darker than Sunny 16. The equivalent lens length on this shot was about 650 mm.

(Download)

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

Good job, nice detail, and it handles the light well. These small cameras are underrated.

Lynn 1509 Loc: Northern Illinois

I have those 2 cameras just like you.The Rx 100 vii is with me every time I leave the house. It's my my perfect pocket camera. When we go out on "Photo day", every Wednesday, I carry the Rx10 iv. They do everything I could ask for. They make nice 16x20s. No. They will not equal an A7Riv, but who cares. I don't do 48 x 60 prints any more. I don't use my Canon Pro 1000 much any more.I usually print 8.5 x 11s with my Canon Pixma G620. It makes delightful prints and cost almost nothing to print with the large ink tanks. It all comes down to how good is good enough, for me I don't shoot weddings or portraits any more & these delightful little cameras are good enough. I love em & think you will too.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

I think you’ve summed it up nicely. That’s how I feel about my RX100M7, affectionately referred to at “the M7.”

sgomboz Loc: Chicago

I couldn’t agree with you more.. thanks for your input.

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

I've had the RX10 III and now have a RX10 IV as well as an A7S, A7 III, A7R III, A6000 and A6100. I find the RX10 IV is my grab n' go camera at least 75% of the time. The selling point for the RX10 IV is the fabulous 24-600mm ZEISS Vario-Sonnar T* f/2.4-4 zoom lens.

bwa

jimmol

I've been interested in the RX10 IV because of the excellent reviews it's received. I recently compared it with my Panasonic FZ300 at 1200 mm effective focal length. The Sony was slightly better, but not much. I'm not sure it's worth 4 times the price. Also, there is a gotcha: Sony puts the wrong value in the EXIF field for Focal Length in 35 mm Film. Like the FZ300, it can double the effective focal length in generating the JPEG image, but it always shows 600 mm when it does so. The FZ300 shows an accurate effective focal length all the way to 1200 mm.