Mwilliamsphotography Loc: Royal Oak Michigan & Palm Harbor Florida

pnbarne

Aging does come as a shock but if you adapt you can keep going, just slower and maybe, shorter trips. Hang in there, it’s still fun with whatever gear you use. Taking your time frequently leads to more sightings.

a6k Loc: Detroit & Sanibel

I am only commenting on your assertion that the RX10's IQ is better than some other, named cameras including the one I offered above. It's a very good camera I would recommend enthusiastically if it met the user's needs.

The RX10 in my experience (fully extended) is very good at F4 and best at 5.6 or F8.0 but the difference is slight. Remember, I used both cameras on "Auto". One could spend many more hours doing comparison testing. The 500 mm reflex lens is a prime and fixed at F8.0, nominally (closer to F7 in reality). It also has lousy DOF compared to a refractive lens.

Your comment on testing precision is probably accurate. But, more testing and more exacting setting-equalizers won't change the fact that the photo sites on the 𝜶6500 are almost twice as big as on the RX10 and a 500 mm prime lens is very hard to beat with a 220 mm 30x zoom lens. Btw, I verified that the 500 reflex that I have is very close in sharpness to the Tamron 150-500 so it is unlikely that any 220 can be twice as sharp, let alone at under $2k including the camera.

The area of the 𝜶6500 sensor is more than 3x that of the RX10 but the number of pixels is only 1.18x. The size of the pixel sites (assuming equal number per pixel) is thus 2.6x.

For an equal size target at an equal distance, a print with the same resolution will be 1.4x (lenses: 500 mm vs 220 mm). In reverse, the RX10 would have to enlarge 40% more and that's a loss of noise and/or resolution. It has to be 40% better IQ just to be equal on an equal print.

I know you like to shoot JPG-only and are a fan of Clear Image Zoom. In my extensive testing using CLI I was rarely if ever able to get better results than making the same enlargement in post-processing. In order to go beyond 220 (actual)/600 (equivalent) it's necessary to use one or the other or both. Within its optical limits the RX10 is a great camera and I use mine a lot, get lots of keepers, etc. It's also ergonomically the best camera I've ever used, bar none. Beyond its limits, other cameras including the alpha ILCE series will offer noticeably better IQ if used well and with good glass.

In addition, although not for everybody, the raw sensor on the 𝜶6500 has been measured better. See https://www.photonstophotos.net and any other site on the 'net. Since I shoot raw almost exclusively that is an important factor. For the OP, maybe JPG is more important. Ulimtately, the JPG produced by the camera is only as good as the underlying raw from the sensor.

a6k Loc: Detroit & Sanibel

I do have a carbon fiber monopod, a good one. I recently posted about putting an enlarged bottom on it. We agree about the 150-500. I might still buy it if my experiment next month with a SAL70400 G2 doesn't make me happy enough.

Hopping in and out of my Jeep with a monopod has numerous physical drawbacks and my wife & I no long walk from spot to spot. That is why I sympathize with the OP!

DocKnight

Monopod.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

t is unlikely that any 220 can be twice as sharp, let alone at under $2k including the camera."

IMO your assumption here is, in this case UNTRUE ...... I agree it may not be likely - but indeed it IS very much true that it is sharper !

"I know you like to shoot JPG-only and are a fan of Clear Image Zoom. In my extensive testing using CLI I was rarely if ever able to get better results than making the same enlargement in post-processing. "

No one ever said that CIZ is BETTER than stand alone dedicated PP software. But, it is very SIMPLE and EASY to use !

"other cameras including the alpha ILCE series will offer noticeably better IQ if used well and with good glass."

IMO, there is NO glass equal to the lens on the RX10....and NONE of the alpha series APSC can shoot @ 24 FPS and have an AMAZING AF system ! There is no glass for the APSC that will allow for 600mm f4 capability ( yes, that would be a 400 f4 - that is "affordable" and manageable) - so, like I said if you are shooting with a 400 f5.6 - you have lost 1 f-stop of ISO to the RX10.

"In addition, although not for everybody, the raw sensor on the 𝜶6500 has been measured better. See https://www.photonstophotos.net and any other site on the 'net. Since I shoot raw almost exclusively that is an important factor. For the OP, maybe JPG is more important. Ulimtately, the JPG produced by the camera is only as good as the underlying raw from the sensor.



I do not care about photo sites or dynamic range - I care about subjective IQ results !

..

MichaelMcGrath Loc: Ireland

I'm 77 in Ireland, and for our St. Patrick's Day parade through this little city of Kilkenny, called the Marble City and the Medieval Capital of Ireland, I shall be carrying my faithful old Canon 1Ds Mark 111 with Canon EF 70-200/f4L IS, Canon EF 28/2.8 IS my Nikon D800 in case there's a demand for a large blow up together with a few VR lenses.

Ed Commons

I have a unipod. It is telescopic, light weight and helps steady the camera. It's also helps support me when trekking about. Much more compact and lighter than a tripod.

My tripod is carbon-fiber, so is lighter in weight than many tripods. I carry it in a sling across my back.

I generally carry a prime lens and one lightweight medium telephoto

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

What a masterful piece of photography 💎💎💎💎

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

A suggestion for something many of you will hate, I know I do, Exercise!!!
You can go all Jack LaLanne or do what I did years ago. Teaching history isn't a real workout type of activity and I found I was getting to where my briefcase (full of books) and walking was not as easy as it used to be. (this was in my 40s) So I switched from using the lectern to walking around the class room while giving the lesson and using a laser pointer on the screen or board with the info already there. My legs got a bit stronger.
Then I got some small weights (They were 1 and 2lbs) and using them in one hand while the other did what ever I was doing or if just walking around the room checking on students work or answering questions using two of them. My arms got stronger, and my grip. When I used the little 1lb ones, I could hold both in one hand if I needed a hand for something.

And one day I got something else out of one of those little weights. One of the campus "Bad Boys" and his buddies were outside my room ditching class, goofing off and making a lot of noise. I went to the door with a weight in my right hand (I was so used to it I didn't even think of putting it down.) and told them to get to class because I was calling the Campus Cop to come chase them off. "Bad Boy" turned starting to mouth off, then stopped mid-sentence when he was facing me, mumbled some insult and took his little rat pack off somewhere else. The next day, one of my students who sometimes hung with that bunch told me he saw the weight in my right hand, and I was both taller and heaver built than him, and thought I was going to use it to hit him. That is why he shut up and left so fast. And a day later, he and his pack were still talking about it.

I am just about to clean them (stored on a roofed patio for years) and start doing that again. It probably won't work as well/fast as when I was 48 but at 78 I am not ready for the salvage yard yet.

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

My advice as I’m 74 and shoot with micro 4/3 Panasonic G9 and a 100-400 Lens for wildlife and especially birds. Crop factor is 2.0 same as a 100 -600 full frame and so much lighter and fin

a6k Loc: Detroit & Sanibel

I accept that this is your way of judging IQ:
"I do not care about photo sites or dynamic range - I care about subjective IQ results !"

But many others, myself included, would use objective measures. YMMV.

Here are test shots taken by "Imaging Resource" at ISO 100. The RX10 is very good but shows more grain or noise at 100%. Look at the circular slide rule for a difference in sharpness. Look at the dark blue fabric for detail capture. These were downloaded from the raw version and converted to JPG by Pixelmator Pro with no intervention. They were taken with short focal lengths. The RX10 is amazingly good when used this way. It's not very good when long focal lengths are called for and doesn't hold up to severe cropping as well as APS-C let alone full frame at ~60MP. The 4-way view is a screen capture of the raw files as seen in FastRawViewer which looks at the actual raw, not the embedded JPG.

𝜶6500

(Download)

RX10m4

(Download)

two 100% views of each file, the raw download viewed in FastRawViewer

(Download)

bdk Loc: Sanibel Fl.

Im finding myself shooting with a Tri pod more and more. I hate lugging that thing around but my old Photography teacher would be proud.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Where does this statement come from ??? I see it as just the opposite !

jcboy3

A carbon fiber monopod does not require "lugging", and will hold the lens up just fine. However, the z50 is not a good choice because it lacks in-body stabilization.

To cut weight, as others have suggested, consider a switch to micro four thirds.