Great shots

Great shots. I love how you pick up the odd-field “action”

Nice

i have a RX100 VII, and think this model series from Sony would be an excellent choice. I wanted a camera that could fit in my coat pocket and it had to have a pop-up view finder with focus correction as I wanted to be able to shoot without my glasses. While the menu system is complicated, the automatic and semi-automatic modes work very well. I found that using a full rear screen in the bright sunlight was quite annoying, as well as requiring switching to my glasses, so I had a requirement of a viewfinder (electronic or not).

I would not abandon the RX100, but I do think you should look progressively up the model revisions. Each version added/improved certain features. Go “up the chain” until you find the “oldest” model that has what you want. Above, it was mentioned that the III added the pop-up viewfinder.* If that is what you wanted, you are close. Most of the older versions, when I was deciding, were reasonable. I wanted the VII as they had some features that were not in the VI that were important to me, but I was doing more than general touristy photography).

*The pop up was also quite nice to have it back down, and making it easier to fit in my coat pocket

Good luck

Good luck

Very nice, both the athlete and the photos

Nice shots. Really like #2

Great shots. I really like #4 with both players reaching for the ball

Nice shots

There is your answer from a user with your desired solution. Good luck

These are really nice. Not much rust on you. While a bit noisy, your settings were about as good as you could get. Like the framing and focus on the faces. #4 and #6 really good.

Hi. I agree with all of the above that leans from don’t do it to extensive culling. We did some of this for my parents for couple of digital frames to help them with their Alzheimer’s as conversation starters, but it was a huge amount of work - much bigger than we had thought.

A friend had a suggestion: As your skills, time, and equipment are being treated without value, say you will do it, but you need $5 per photo for the equipment and processing costs, divided up among those whom want a copy of the finished files. 15K of photos would be an absurd $75K. Then have them start culling, and see how fast and far that list gets down to below 1000 photos!

If that seems like too much, price out how much 15K of photos would be from a commercial site

On of the reason’s I really like ON1 is that the data management structure is outside of the program - so you can edit any file you want wherever it is in your folder structure, or on a stick, etc.

Why import - I do as I can manipulate some of the info about the file as I do. I can change the name of the file (for me, added a description of the event, date, and sequence number from 001 to XXX), add keywords to enable Smart Folders and search, add copyright info, etc). The biggest reason for me though, as I do non-destructive editing of the RAW file, is that automatically adds the side-car files for each photo file.

So you don’t need to, but it sure is convenient if it fits into your workflow.

good luck

Gene51, as usual, has given a thorough and thoughtful reply.

As for subscription model, I also agree with his comments. While ON1 (and several others) promote that you own the software, ON1 (and others) come out with a major upgrade with new features every year. Yes, you do get to control the timing of the spending, and if you don’t want the new features (and not talking bug fixes, but really enhancements), you can always wait, but if you do want it, it is about 120 (maybe less with discount) and, look at that, about $10 per month. With LR/PS subscription, you get these new features as they roll them out.

Personally, I do like ON1. It is my primary RAW editor. I also use Apply Photos for “quick cleanups” of jpegs (I shoot HS sports (RAW plus jpeg) as I can whip through it faster and get out to the school website. Any more serious work, including anything I want to print, goes through ON1. I also like that ON1 allows me to use the native file/folder structure and just pointing the software at this “root” gets me everything in it, but I am not limited to making every move from within ON1, the way LR does.

So, definitely worth downloading the trial version when you have time to learn and put it through its paces. Then you will know if it is right for you.

Happy Holidays

Hi

Not familiar with these two specific models, but I have own close older cousins of each, and both work well

The pix,a does a food job on photos, but not a high volume office printer. That’s why I have the Epson, though I can’t tell u how it is on photos as I have never tried

All of that said, if you are looking at even a moderate volume of printing, would look at printers with the large refillable tanks. If u do any volume at all, especially of photos, those little cartridges will indeed kill u as mentioned above

Most swimming venues I have been in are quite dark. My gut tells me, if the reach is enough, you may want the 1.8. that said, it will have quite a short DoF so it depends on what type of shots you are looking for. The may be good for individual swimmer shots.

You do so well with the 70-200, that should be good for group shots.

Will be interesting how high you have to push your ISO. Post when you can, along with they setting you ending up finding out were needed. Have fun

david