Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Photography
Reload this Page >

Sony RX-100 Mk IIi or Alpha 6000B?

Sony RX-100 Mk IIi or Alpha 6000B?

Old Nov 21, 16, 9:20 pm
  #1  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Programs: statusless these days
Posts: 19,342
Sony RX-100 Mk IIi or Alpha 6000B?

My wife would like a compact camera to replace her Canon S100 which, though nice when it works, has suffered all sorts of problems (lense cable disconnected on trip to Easter Island and Machu Picchu, and now shutter trigger has oxidized - no replacement parts available) and is no longer reliable.

The main desired criteria are 1) she can carry it in her purse, 2) it can shoot RAW, and 3) easy to use but can easily use manual override when desred.

I've been looking at a Sony RX-100 Mk III but deals on these where I am are hard to come by (equivalent of ~USD750).

This week, it would appear that I can buy a A6000 with the basic lense for under ~USD500 and with a 55-210mm lense for USD 750, less than a RX-100 Mk III.

While I appreciate the RX 100 has a Zeiss lense and is much more compact than the A6000, what else would we be trading off?

She originally did want a simple snapshot camera but a Lumia 640 has taken care of that.
YVR Cockroach is offline  
Old Nov 22, 16, 10:27 am
  #2  
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,480
A6000 with kit lens (16-50) performs similarly to RX100. kit lens isn't that great, so the larger APS-C sensor on A6000 can't perform that well

(would suggest getting a better lens if you're going on the A6000. if not, A6000 basically just offers more tele reach)


as you mentioned, A6000 offers more flexibility (can switch lenses) at the expense of larger size and having to swap lenses

I would recommend looking at the ZS100. that would be the best travel pocketable camera. 1" + 25-250mm (at the expense of slower lens, unfortunately)

Last edited by paperwastage; Nov 22, 16 at 10:43 am
paperwastage is offline  
Old Nov 22, 16, 12:10 pm
  #3  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,517
What kind of photos does she like to take?

I find the wider angle on Sony RX-100 III to be handy. Wider angle is also my personal preference and the focal length is also good for pictures of food. The RX100 fits in my coat pockets (Women's small) and purses which are slightly wider than clutches. If I'm going to carry A6xxx or A7 size, I have to carry a larger bag.

Weight might also be a consideration if she doesn't like to carry a heavy purse. Some of the Sony lenses can weigh a good bit.
freecia is offline  
Old Dec 30, 16, 1:34 am
  #4  
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 567
Hello all,

bumping to see if there are any other opinions on this?

I'm also having a difficult time choosing between these two. My only experience so far has been shooting with a Canon T5, which was fun to use to slowly learn.

However moving forward, I'd like to get something that will be just as fun to use, but less bulk. The a6000 is smaller than the T5, but I'd be only using the single kit lens. The rx100 iii is smaller than the a6000 but the cost is substantially higher and I lose out on future upgradability. That being said, I would not be investing in new lenses for at least 3-4 years (probably ages in the camera-tech world).

Thanks for any input!
eeflyer is offline  
Old Jan 1, 17, 4:09 pm
  #5  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,904
I have been looking at the RX100, A5000, A5100 and the A6000 at Best Buy. The A6000 is quite a bit bigger and much heavier than the rest. The RX100, on the other hand, feels really tiny. I like the feel of the A5000/A5100 in the hand. As far as pic/video quality I could only read them on reviews. It seems like on every day stuff, they would be about the same. I am thinking the A5000 as it is quite a bit cheaper than the rest and probably the best value.
Need is offline  
Old Jan 1, 17, 8:35 pm
  #6  
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 567
Originally Posted by Need View Post
I have been looking at the RX100, A5000, A5100 and the A6000 at Best Buy. The A6000 is quite a bit bigger and much heavier than the rest. The RX100, on the other hand, feels really tiny. I like the feel of the A5000/A5100 in the hand. As far as pic/video quality I could only read them on reviews. It seems like on every day stuff, they would be about the same. I am thinking the A5000 as it is quite a bit cheaper than the rest and probably the best value.
Too bad the Best Buys near me don't have all the models out. I hadn't considered the A5x00s because of the lack of EVF.
eeflyer is offline  
Old Jan 1, 17, 8:46 pm
  #7  
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,480
Originally Posted by eeflyer View Post
However moving forward, I'd like to get something that will be just as fun to use, but less bulk. The a6000 is smaller than the T5, but I'd be only using the single kit lens. The rx100 iii is smaller than the a6000 but the cost is substantially higher and I lose out on future upgradability. That being said, I would not be investing in new lenses for at least 3-4 years (probably ages in the camera-tech world).
However, if we factor back in the difference in lenses, the difference narrows. As we saw above, the RX100M3 produces sharper looking images than the A6000 with the lens set to maximum aperture. Recall that the RX100M3 lens is opens from f/1.8-2.8 through it's range (though it's mostly f/2.8, with f/1.8 only at the widest position) and the A6000 lens is f/3.5 to f/5.6. This means that you can shoot with the RX100M3 roughly 2 stops faster than the A6000 with the kit lens... which balances out the advantage of the larger sensor.

In other words, under most casual shooting situations where the light isn't a limiting factor, both cameras will produce excellent images, but that's once again largely due to the fact that the A6000 kit lens is the limiting factor. We're talking about rough equivalencies here, though. Even if the brighter lens balances out the larger sensor, the A6000 will produce crisper images given half a chance.
http://1000wordpics.blogspot.com/201...ony-a6000.html

you can keep researching, but as I've said, A6000+kit lens ~= RX100M3

and if you really aren't looking to get a new lens anytime soon, the portability of RX100 is unmatchable

(depending where you live, but in USA)
RX100 M3 is $650, maybe less

A6000+kit lens is maybe $600? I see deals for $400 body-only + get a better lens.. this might be better? A5000 body-only is maybe $350?

lenses are an investment (if you're sticking with APSC E-mount for the next 10-30years). 2-4 years is very small in the world of cameras, things don't change as much (at least for canon/nikon. sony's been evolving quite a lot in the past 5 years , but emount won't go away anytime soon)

Last edited by paperwastage; Jan 1, 17 at 8:51 pm
paperwastage is offline  
Old Jan 2, 17, 1:10 am
  #8  
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 567
Originally Posted by paperwastage View Post
http://1000wordpics.blogspot.com/201...ony-a6000.html

you can keep researching, but as I've said, A6000+kit lens ~= RX100M3

and if you really aren't looking to get a new lens anytime soon, the portability of RX100 is unmatchable

(depending where you live, but in USA)
RX100 M3 is $650, maybe less

A6000+kit lens is maybe $600? I see deals for $400 body-only + get a better lens.. this might be better? A5000 body-only is maybe $350?

lenses are an investment (if you're sticking with APSC E-mount for the next 10-30years). 2-4 years is very small in the world of cameras, things don't change as much (at least for canon/nikon. sony's been evolving quite a lot in the past 5 years , but emount won't go away anytime soon)
Thanks so much for the reply!

Are you referring to local camera stores for your estimates? I've mainly been looking at Amazon which is currently showing $698/$548+$50 GC for the RX100m3/A6000 respectively. The A6000 with the additional 55-210 lens is also $698, but no GC.

Everything is starting to point towards the rx100m3, just waiting for the cost to come down a bit more.
eeflyer is offline  
Old Jan 2, 17, 9:37 am
  #9  
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,480
Originally Posted by eeflyer View Post
Thanks so much for the reply!

Are you referring to local camera stores for your estimates? I've mainly been looking at Amazon which is currently showing $698/$548+$50 GC for the RX100m3/A6000 respectively. The A6000 with the additional 55-210 lens is also $698, but no GC.

Everything is starting to point towards the rx100m3, just waiting for the cost to come down a bit more.
overstock.com has rx100iii for $650. It's a big company, can return if there are any issues

(I'm skipping over those shady online/times square photo companies that tend to bait and switch)

You can typically find Openbox versions from Bestbuy at $100 off... Same warranty and can return if you want

a6000 is $400 at Bestbuy/b&h/Adorama/Walmart, it was $400+$50GC during Christmas . Would rather get body only, skip the kit lens, and buy a better "starter" lens to keep for the next 2-3 years . Go research emount lens and find a decent 24-60
paperwastage is offline  
Old Jan 3, 17, 6:59 pm
  #10  
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,480
https://slickdeals.net/f/9627092-son...-free-shipping

back, A6000 body only $400 + $50 gift card

spend the gift card on a better lens.. or someting from newegg
paperwastage is offline  
Old Jan 3, 17, 7:36 pm
  #11  
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 567
Originally Posted by paperwastage View Post
https://slickdeals.net/f/9627092-son...-free-shipping

back, A6000 body only $400 + $50 gift card

spend the gift card on a better lens.. or someting from newegg
Cool, thanks for the heads up! I'll take a look at it. It's strange because I have deal alerts set up for both of these cameras, but didn't get notified about this post :/
eeflyer is offline  
Old Jan 9, 17, 9:56 pm
  #12  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 92
I've debated this for my wife, and will end up going with the RX100. I will be carrying an A7 on the same trip, so to me didn't make sense to have 2 larger cameras with interchangeable lenses.
el aye is offline  
Old Jan 10, 17, 11:48 pm
  #13  
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 567
Originally Posted by el aye View Post
I've debated this for my wife, and will end up going with the RX100. I will be carrying an A7 on the same trip, so to me didn't make sense to have 2 larger cameras with interchangeable lenses.
Decided on the rx100 as well. Picked up a used one. Hopefully it won't come back to bite me, but as a student, funds are restricted
eeflyer is offline  
Old Jan 11, 17, 8:49 pm
  #14  
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,480
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58947684

some of my pictures (RX100 m4) from my london/iceland trip

you do need to learn how to use it (or just keep it on auto, if you're frustrated with the bad UI)
paperwastage is offline  
Old Jan 17, 17, 1:37 am
  #15  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 543
I would say never mind available light situations. A good phone camera can do a decent job in those conditions. I'd get the smallest camera that still gives you good photos in low light. That - and telephoto - are probably the situations where it is worth having a "real camera" in addition to the phone always in your pocket.

If that's the A6000, go for that. It's still a small package even if you swap out the kit lens and put in a different one for low light.
osamede is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread