Sony Cyber Shot DSC-RX100vi

Looks like Sony has done it again . . .

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cyber-shot-dsc-rx100-vi-m6

This one is pricey but I am considering it.

I always take on point and shoot and one DSLR with me when we cruise and this one might fit the bill.

Keith

Looks like Sony has done it again . . .

 

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cyber-shot-dsc-rx100-vi-m6

Excellent camera. Bought the RX-10 IV yesterday for our next cruise.

I borrowed and brought the RX100v to Washington DC, specifically for a White House tour, since larger cameras are prohibited.

I'll share images and thoughts on my blog but a bit of a preview --- the "golden era" for the RX100 models has passed, with the capabilities of smart phones catching up and even surpassing in some ways.

Still can be a useful camera for some purposes in the right hands, but it no longer brings the value it brought a few years ago.

Excellent camera. Bought the RX-10 IV yesterday for our next cruise.

Different camera

Different camera

Different body, different lens. Same sensor and similar performance.

I borrowed and brought the RX100v to Washington DC, specifically for a White House tour, since larger cameras are prohibited.

 

I'll share images and thoughts on my blog but a bit of a preview --- the "golden era" for the RX100 models has passed, with the capabilities of smart phones catching up and even surpassing in some ways.

 

Still can be a useful camera for some purposes in the right hands, but it no longer brings the value it brought a few years ago.

Smart phones still lack useful zoom but that is probably just a matter of time. The one thing they lack is a form factor that isn't complete crap. I love the camera on my Pixel but shooting photos with it is a fumbly chore and even with a pretty awesome screen, composing in sunlight is an exercise in guesstimation. I suppose you could fix this with a couple of accessories:

Sort of negates the portability perk of the phone, though.

Zoom lenses can be added:

A more pocketable solution with some assembly required. Optical quality may be an issue since I don't think demand has brought the big name lens makers to the game as yet.

If you're talking pure image quality within the range of a phone's lens, then the gap is closing fast. If you're talking pure usability as a full-time photo tool, then I would have to respectfully disagree that the RX100 series has reached the last station on it's journey.

Dave.

Smart phones still lack useful zoom but that is probably just a matter of time. The one thing they lack is a form factor that isn't complete crap. I love the camera on my Pixel but shooting photos with it is a fumbly chore and even with a pretty awesome screen, composing in sunlight is an exercise in guesstimation. I suppose you could fix this with a couple of accessories:

 

 

Sort of negates the portability perk of the phone, though.

 

Zoom lenses can be added:

 

A more pocketable solution with some assembly required. Optical quality may be an issue since I don't think demand has brought the big name lens makers to the game as yet.

 

 

If you're talking pure image quality within the range of a phone's lens, then the gap is closing fast. If you're talking pure usability as a full-time photo tool, then I would have to respectfully disagree that the RX100 series has reached the last station on it's journey.

 

Dave.

All trade-offs. The iPhone 8+ essentially covers 28mm to 50mm... I suspect that's why the RX100vi saw an increase in zoom range, the 24-70mm was no longer offering much of an advantage over phones.

But let's look at the trade-offs:

Form factor: Agreed that phone form factors are not so great. But, most P&S cameras are only slightly better. (Been a while since I used a P&S camera, using the RX100v was a struggle, manipulating the tiny buttons). So P&S can give you a slightly better form factor -- But then it's a second device you need to carry. And it doesn't fit nearly as neatly into your pocket at your phone.

Zoom -- Yes, the best phones still only have a limited zoom range. But go on vacation and see how many people are using their phones for all their photos. I think many people have figured out the camera makers were lying to them for years -- You don't need a 50x zoom! Sure, if you're shooting birds or wildlife or sports, you need some telephoto reach. But for most snapshots, people pics, landscapes, etc, 28-50mm is fine.

Features: This is a big one. Phones are MORE feature-packed than stand alone cameras. Every phone has a high resolution touch screen -- can't say that about P&S. Every phone has wifi and gps. Every phone has in-phone editing capabilities -- Nearly unlimited capabilities as apps are constantly being designed and added. In camera panoramas, HDR. Even fast fps burst shooting. Camera lighting simulation modes, etc. Some of the better P&S have EVFs, that's a nice feature for some P&S cameras. But there is an even longer list of features where phones beat cameras.

IQ: Even here, phones have a credible argument. The best P&S, like the RX100 models, certainly have more IQ potential than a phone. But with all the R&D pouring into camera-phone development, they get the best sensors, the best processors... When you literally just "point and shoot"... a phone can give you a better immediate image than most P&S cameras, maybe even better than the RX100. (I'm looking at my RX100 photos of the White House that I took this weekend... they aren't significantly better than my family's phone pics).

Sharing: This is an important subset of features. My daughter's edited pics were up on Instagram before we even exited the gate of the White House. My photos sat on a memory card, and now sit in lightroom waiting for editing.

----

It's interesting to note that over a year ago, Nikon was on the verge of finally releasing their 1" sensor cameras, their RX100 competitors. THey even had one model that had super wide angle equivalent, a very interesting compact camera. Yet, they kept pushing back the release date and finally cancelled the whole line. After spending resources developing it, even some marketing for it, they probably even produced some, yet they cancelled it. That shows you how little faith they had in the P&S market.

There is simply very very little reason to own a P&S camera these days.

If you like taking snapshot quality wildlife/sports pics, then I guess go with a P&S with a good telephoto zoom.

For almost everyone else -- If you want snapshots, go with a phone. If you want high quality images, then learn photography and invest in a good ILC.

The White House State dining room with the RX100v:

untitled (136 of 233).jpg by Adam Brown, on Flickr

Phones are MORE feature-packed than stand alone cameras. Every phone has a high resolution touch screen -- can't say that about P&S. Every phone has wifi and gps. Every phone has in-phone editing capabilities -- Nearly unlimited capabilities as apps are constantly being designed and added. In camera panoramas, HDR. Even fast fps burst shooting. Camera lighting simulation modes, etc. Some of the better P&S have EVFs, that's a nice feature for some P&S cameras. But there is an even longer list of features where phones beat cameras.

For almost everyone else -- If you want snapshots, go with a phone. If you want high quality images, then learn photography and invest in a good ILC.

I heartily agree that nobody needs a 50x zoom in a point and shoot. However, a quality unit like a 1" camera with an excellent high single- or low double-digit zoom still has a place filling the gap between the instamatic shooters and those who want better images but with no desire to go the ILC route. There's a reason the $1200 RX100 VI is in the top ten on Amazon's Top 100 P&S Cameras list. (Just below the $380 my-phone-can't-do-this Olympus TG-5 Tough.)

2¢ or so...

Dave

In the pre-digital world the conversation would be:

But go on vacation and see how many people are using an Instamatic for all their photos... :)

 

I think the RX100 does a little better than snapshot quality. your included photo supports that.

 

 

Unlike many P&S users, I understand what I'm doing. And I also processed RAW. At first, I took an image in "P" mode... To my surprise, the 1/30 shutter speed was much too slow. Most of the images got camera shake. And needless to say, OOC jpegs didn't look nearly as nice as processed raw.

 

 

If I kept the camera in P mode or auto mode, and if I had just used SOOC JPEGs... they might have been worse than the phone pics.

 

 

Yes, a 1" sensor compact has more *potential* than a phone. But for simple SOOC camera shooting, you don't see that potential.

 

 

 

While phones are advancing in leaps and bounds, the percentage of people who own a phone (IOS or Android) with the latest and greatest camera module is nowhere near a majority. This is just a guess based on the cost of a new iPhone or a top-end Android phone and an average selling price of around $420 for all phones purchased in 2017 (North America), but it's a reasonable guess.

 

 

That's true -- BUT --- People still update their phones more often than their cameras. Sure, not everyone is using the newest iPhone 8+ or Samsung whatever.... but the iPhone 7 also has an excellent camera, and the iphone 6 has a passable camera. Not many people are still using their iPhone 3g, for example.

Further, upgrading your phone is cheaper than buying a RX100vi. (especially as the phone companies will finance and/or subsidize the phone purchase).

 

 

In addition, you're already buying and paying for the phone. So if you have an interest in photography, makes more sense to upgrade your phone rather than spend even more on a camera.

 

I heartily agree that nobody needs a 50x zoom in a point and shoot. However, a quality unit like a 1" camera with an excellent high single- or low double-digit zoom still has a place filling the gap between the instamatic shooters and those who want better images but with no desire to go the ILC route.

I'm not saying there is absolutely no role for anyone. I think the RX100 series is still good for someone who wants higher IQ and pocketability. The RX10 series is still good for those who want a decent telephoto range but don't want to have to swap out lenses. But for both those groups, I still give the caveat of actually understanding photography, shooting raw when appropriate, adjusting settings as appropriate.

If you use those cameras strictly as "point and shoot" cameras, you are wasting a lot of money just to get some telephoto range.

So it's a rather small market -- those who want to take photography more seriously, but either want pocketability or a single lens solution. (I'm also currently reviewing the Sony 24-240.... and my initial thoughts are, go get a RX10 instead of relying on the 24-240!).

There's a reason the $1200 RX100 VI is in the top ten on Amazon's Top 100 P&S Cameras list. (Just below the $380 my-phone-can't-do-this Olympus TG-5 Tough.)

Not sure how scientific that is. the top sellers in photography are Fujifilm instax cameras and FILM!

The top 10 dSLRs are the Canon T6 -- The top 7 spots are various kits of the T6! and right below the T6, at #8 in dSLRs.. the Canon G7xii!

And still another variable to consider - those who just really don't get along with the idea of using a phone as a camera, no matter how good. Indeed it is mostly down to the ergonomics - even P&S cameras mostly feel better in my hands taking a photo than my phone...which is just a super-thin, slick, buttonless slab that's all monitor, all touch, and the camera lens on the back barely discernible, which makes covering it with a finger all too easy. I don't see the touch operation as a benefit - rather I find it a complete annoyance and distraction. Holding a thin flat slab with one hand clamped between my fingertips while lining up a floating finger with a virtual button on a screen just isn't a pleasant experience for me. Combine the lack of optical zoom, and I just get no enjoyment out of using the phone.

Sure the IQ has gotten better with the phones - even though the small sensors are technically no better than those in most P&S cameras, they don't really compete outright with the 1" and larger sensors - but they do include all kinds of processing tricks built in my default which are usually optional on P&S cameras today, unless you use them in 'intelligent' or 'superior' auto mode, where they function just like the phones do - merging images and all.

I've recently upgraded to one of the newest iPhones, and still honestly don't think of using it as a camera - as I just don't like the entire physical interaction and process. I've taken a total of 6 photos with it so far, in going-on-3-months. The photos are decent - at least for normal screen viewing...but I recently have been going back through photos all the way back to 2006 and trying to re-edit and enlarge some display shots I took with those old P&S cameras in my galleries (I had originally uploaded 800x600 sizes, which are just too small by today's standards)...and I'm still impressed how much more I can crop and enlarge even old 5MP shots from small sensor P&S cameras, and of course most of those had optical zooms with ranges that exceeded 200mm, making them immensely more versatile and useful than a phone...not to mention all of them being significantly more pleasant to shoot with (for me), having a bit of a grip, physical buttons rather than virtual, and most with viewfinders making them much nicer to use in all kinds of lighting situations, and with polarized sunglasses that still block out my newest iPhone screen too much.

Again - all my own personal experience - but no matter how good phones get, I find them still uncomfortable to use as cameras, and would still prefer a dedicated camera, even with a smaller sensor, that has a viewfinder and physical buttons, plus a bit of a grip that would allow easier one-handed shooting.

Not sure how scientific that is. the top sellers in photography are Fujifilm instax cameras and FILM!

The top 10 dSLRs are the Canon T6 -- The top 7 spots are various kits of the T6! and right below the T6, at #8 in dSLRs.. the Canon G7xii!

That's why I only looked at Point & Shoot Cameras. Top 100 on Amazon needs a bit of filtering or you get stuff like cat litter and hygiene products.

However, For the Advanced Compact shooter, SOOC is getting better all the time. JPEG engines are becoming faster and more discerning. For all but the most demanding lighting, the SOOC JPEGs from my A7M3 are very hard to best without an unacceptable (to me) amount of tweaking on a RAW file and even then, the difference is often only visible if you know which image is which. As in any industry, late-model advanced compacts are benefiting from the tech in the manufacturer's top end. Admittedly, this requires that the SOOC shooter knows something about photography and gets within a light-year of the correct exposure. I would conditionally agree that if you're using an advanced compact in pure P&S mode, you're not necessarily getting your money's worth.

Having said that, there are still people who simply like cameras. Heck, there are still people who buy Leicas! I would expect the list of available models and the frequency of introductions will shrink as manufacturers, bail out but like film, there will still be a market. Likely a market with some pretty amazing cameras in it.

Dave

I just picked up the RX100-IV for the wife to replace her tired but well used and loved Pentax. I wanted her to have a bright lens, an EVF, and be compact and light. For less than $800 she's getting the camera, top of the line SD card, case, two extra batteries and charger, etc. from Beach Camera (all USA warranties). That's more $$$ than she thinks she needs, but I beg to differ.

She's tiny at 5'3", so the size is perfect for her petite hands. Same as the previous post, using the rear screens or phone screens to find subjects, then hold steady is difficult or her, so after coaching her on my a6000 with a viewfinder - she was sold on that feature.

She doesn't need a giant zoom, 1% of her pics could use it - but I love her artistic eye, she see's scenes really well and I think she'll be able to take advantage of the sensor, lens, and stabilization to get some wall-worthy shots. Kids, architecture, landscapes - she deserves a camera of this level and look forward to seeing her results from Spain later next month.

That's why I only looked at Point & Shoot Cameras. Top 100 on Amazon needs a bit of filtering or you get stuff like cat litter and hygiene products.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agreed. Despite the advent of programs like Lightroom Mobile, the overwhelming majority of photos taken with phones are SOOP with very little post-processing. I take that back. Very little good post-processing. An awful lot of them are probably subjected to some lame filter or have dog ears tacked on. Come to think of it, that alone is likely the main draw for a typical phonetographer. I would agree that for someone with little or no knowledge of photography, phones exceed the need.

 

 

However, For the Advanced Compact shooter, SOOC is getting better all the time. JPEG engines are becoming faster and more discerning. For all but the most demanding lighting, the SOOC JPEGs from my A7M3 are very hard to best without an unacceptable (to me) amount of tweaking on a RAW file and even then, the difference is often only visible if you know which image is which. As in any industry, late-model advanced compacts are benefiting from the tech in the manufacturer's top end. Admittedly, this requires that the SOOC shooter knows something about photography and gets within a light-year of the correct exposure. I would conditionally agree that if you're using an advanced compact in pure P&S mode, you're not necessarily getting your money's worth.

 

 

Having said that, there are still people who simply like cameras. Heck, there are still people who buy Leicas! I would expect the list of available models and the frequency of introductions will shrink as manufacturers, bail out but like film, there will still be a market. Likely a market with some pretty amazing cameras in it.

 

 

 

 

Dave

As is often the case, we aren't really in major disagreement, just both approaching a similar point from different angles.

I will say that for me, it is rare that an SOOC image looks as good as my edited image. That doesn't mean RAW though -- in many cases, I can make a JPEG look just as good as a RAW.

With the RX100, I note a positive and negative of the SOOC jpegs -- On the positive side, you get a clean bright jpeg. The Sony ILC cameras tend to meter towards the underexposed side, protecting the highlights. I find most of the A7riii images need a bit of exposure lifting in post. The RX100 jpegs are nice and bright, which is the look many people expect these days.

Conversely, the 2 major negatives of RX100 jpeg files -- They tend to blow highlights, impossible to recover in jpeg and even difficult in raw.

Additionally, the jpegs apply quite a bit of noise reduction -- over ISO 400 or so, you get a lot of smeared detail. Looks fine in a 4x6 or web image... but phones look good at those sizes as well. Once you start to look bigger, you note you've lost a LOT of detail in the jpegs.

I agree there are people who just like to carry a camera. But most people who like the feel of a camera, like the feel of a "real" camera, not a tiny thing with awkward pop-up EVF, no grip, tiny buttons.

Speaking of the EVF -- the one on the RX100 is better than not having any EVF. But without a proper eye rest, it's just a tiny box that pops up on the corner of the camera. In most cases, it's more comfortable to compose with the LCD.

Not to mention -- unless I was missing something -- You can't retract the EVF without turning off the whole camera. Can't just use it for one shot and then put it away, without it turning off the camera. Maybe there is a menu setting to stop this from happening, but the default is really annoying.

I had the original RX100 6 years ago... loved it back then. But a lot has changed in a short time span. At the time, the iPhone camera was f2.4 and 8 megapixels, and simply not a good performer. Instagram was in its infancy.

Dave -- Love your word "phonetographer." To me, it conveys an image of someone who wants all the bells and whistles of point and shoot cameras and apps that will handle post-processing fixes and effects, without having to bother with the details of an actual camera. I'm not disparaging "phonetographers," just noting that they are a particular segment of the market for multi-function devices.

As is often the case, we aren't really in major disagreement, just both approaching a similar point from different angles.

Different perspectives. That's why we own more than one lens! :)

Dave -- Love your word "phonetographer." To me, it conveys an image of someone who wants all the bells and whistles of point and shoot cameras and apps that will handle post-processing fixes and effects, without having to bother with the details of an actual camera. I'm not disparaging "phonetographers," just noting that they are a particular segment of the market for multi-function devices.

Probably a little kinder than my word for those who line up in front of every landmark with their iPads held high overhead, tapping away as they try to capture a copy of the brochure photos.

*sigh*

I am a big fan of "good enough". It means something different to just about everyone and though it doesn't have a fixed value (I have experience with creeping good enough), the quality of today's phone camera modules make them easily good enough for a growing population of "phonetographers". They're taking pictures and having fun. That's sort of the point. Right? :)

Dave

Call me a Luddite, but for me, a phone is a phone and a camera is a camera. I still use a flip phone and will probably never own a smart phone. I have a laptop, a tablet, and three Sony cameras (a65, a3000, and DSC-RX10ii). My grown kids like to impress me by showing me their smart phone photos, but still ask me for canvas prints of my Alaska and Hawaii panoramas to put on their walls. (They have to ask, since they know I don't text . . . :)

Call me a Luddite, but for me, a phone is a phone and a camera is a camera. I still use a flip phone and will probably never own a smart phone. I have a laptop, a tablet, and three Sony cameras (a65, a3000, and DSC-RX10ii). My grown kids like to impress me by showing me their smart phone photos, but still ask me for canvas prints of my Alaska and Hawaii panoramas to put on their walls. (They have to ask, since they know I don't text . . . :)

I have a newer smartphone with a fantastic camera (tech junkie was a job requirement for years). It has completely replaced the 24/7 "just-in-case" P&S I used to carry. But like the P&S, I probably take pictures with the A6300 or A7M3 100:1 over the phone, even though I have produced excellent 16x20 prints from the phone images (I really meant "fantastic"). As a camera, it is a great phone and makes calls I can't on my camera. As a phone, it will never replace a camera as my main photographic tool.

I just like cameras. :)

Dave

The Sony RX100v tours the White House -- review of the White House tour combined with RX100v review:

https://enthusiastphotoblog.com/2018/08/08/white-house-tour-and-sony-rx100v/

The Sony RX100v tours the White House -- review of the White House tour combined with RX100v review:

https://enthusiastphotoblog.com/2018/08/08/white-house-tour-and-sony-rx100v/

Nice!

Dave