Normally I prefer color to any variant of B&W. However, your #3 sings to me so much better than #1&2. It’s outstanding.

Ron

Wow - wish I could do so well with my RX10iv. That face says so much.

ron

I think everyone has hit the main issue of there simply being way too much info for the eye/brain to process in a usable manner.
#1 is obviously the only one with most everything in focus, and I guess that's the problem with separating the front dancers as everything competes for the eye equally. Essentially there is no depth of field. But, it's the only keeper in my opinion. At least you can continue to make other attempts toward your goal.
#3 is your most obvious attempt to do something that leaves the front dancers still in focus but almost obliterates the rest by turning them into bias relief or something similar. So, no good in my eyes.
#2 is better than #3 but still doesn't work for me.

I suppose what you're striving for is to reproduce what a shallower depth of field (larger lens opening) would have done. Monday morning quarterbacking is so easy...

ron

Love #5.

ron

I've worn aids since around '90. I think I'm on my 4th or 5th pair. Each time the technology is much better. The last (current) set are Oticon OPNs and costs an arm and a leg but initially did wonders for my understanding of speech. They are the first aids I've had that go in first thing in the morning and are taken out the last thing at night. They're that good. Think I've had them 4 years now and my brain is doing the same thing that always happens with a new set. Basically, the new sounds that make speech intelligible are foreign to the brain and over time the brain begins to filter them out, just like background noises for a normal-hearing person. Once that happens the wonderful understanding that you experienced with a new set of aids begins to diminish and that isolation starts creeping back into your life. Having already given up an arm and a leg for these I'm not sure what I can saw off for the next pair of revolutionary aids.

Still, without them I'm in a sound vacuum.

ron

I definitely see the Black Panther in #2. Or whatever his super-hero name is...

ron

Tremendously satisfying to look at. Whether it’s all natural light or you supplimented for the wagon, you did a magnificent job!

Ron

I either have that gimbal or one very similar. It works for moonshots and such but not nearly smooth enough for panning motions like you’d need shooting model planes.
I have the A6000 and definitely would not hang that lens on the front while on a tripod. But, yours has a metal body. Still, I’d want some lens support.

Excellent shot!

Ron

Magnificent formations, and the history you related was most interesting.

Ron

All four are great shots.
Ron

Fantastic shots! Something to be proud of the rest of your life.

ron

For sure I respect your capabilities. I was astounded to see what my RX10M4 was capable of in the right hands.
ron

Somehow I suspected as much. 😋
Ron

I have both the a6000 and the RX10m4, as well as an A77ii. Since getting the rx10m4, I’ve not used the A77ii. And the a6000 doesn’t get used much, but I still get better shots with it when the Sigma 1.4 30mm is mounted. But, that’s the only lens I have for it that I think exceeds the RX10m4. And, it is naturally limited to 30mm. Otherwise. I always grab the super capable, one-lens-does-it-all RX10m4.
However, my shots with anything don’t come up to the quality and sharpness of Gene’s examples. Those are fantastic!

ron