Jump to content

Sony A6500 or Sony Cyber Shot RX10 IV


 Share

Recommended Posts

Looking for opinions on these two cameras. Am looking for a camera with excellent video (will stay in focus while zooming in & out) and for still shots for Alaska.

 

I can get the a6500 with the 55-210 lens, but wondering if that will be long enough range for Alaska. The RX10 IV has a zoom of 24 - 600 but how is the video capabilities?

 

Both are within the same price range. Which has the easiest learning curve?

 

Your expert advice is appreciated!

 

Kathy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking for opinions on these two cameras. Am looking for a camera with excellent video (will stay in focus while zooming in & out) and for still shots for Alaska.

 

I can get the a6500 with the 55-210 lens, but wondering if that will be long enough range for Alaska. The RX10 IV has a zoom of 24 - 600 but how is the video capabilities?

 

Both are within the same price range. Which has the easiest learning curve?

 

Your expert advice is appreciated!

 

Kathy

 

 

Without knowing more about you than the question you asked (learning curve is a signal :)), I would lean towards the RX10 simply because the 55-210 while good, falls a little short of Alaska's demands.

 

If you are looking to enter the world of interchangeable lens cameras, the A6500 with the two-lens kit is a great start with class-leading autofocus and excellent image quality. You could rent an "Alaska lens" like the FE 100-400G for the trip and build your system as you grow beyond the kit lenses (that may take a while since they are pretty good). As for video, the A6500 produces excellent, detailed video, including some of the best 4K imaging available.

 

If you prefer an all-in-one solution, the RX10 IV is as pricey as it is for a reason. It produces excellent images with a versatile lens range that is useable rather than the ridiculous 50x and higher zooms on some of the newer offerings. It has excellent autofocus and its video capability is also superb and almost unmatched other than a dedicated high-end video camera.

 

Though the RX10 would have a bit less of a learning curve, the Auto modes on both would support getting great photos as you learn the ins and outs of more advanced photography. Either solution would be excellent for your purposes with the aforementioned caveat of needing more lens for Alaska with the A6500.

 

If you have specific questions, feel free. There are a lot of good people on this board who will be happy to jump in.

 

 

Dave

Edited by pierces
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 55-210 actually probably is enough for most shots in Alaska, though you may miss a few Eagles and really distant whales. The problem with the 55-210 isn’t the range, it’s just a weak lens in general.

 

But beyond the range, you might simply find the rx10iv a bit simpler to use. If you’re looking for the best pictures with the least learning, I’d go with the rx10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the advice and comments.

 

I do have the Nikon D200 and the Nikon 5100 which I basically used in auto or scene mode. I'm looking to update to a lighter camera with wifi abilities. My Granddaughters are in horse shows, hence the need for excellent videos! I also have the Sony RX100 II which take good photos but really no zoom.

 

havoc315, which lens would you recommend?

 

Thanks! Kathy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the advice and comments.

 

I do have the Nikon D200 and the Nikon 5100 which I basically used in auto or scene mode. I'm looking to update to a lighter camera with wifi abilities. My Granddaughters are in horse shows, hence the need for excellent videos! I also have the Sony RX100 II which take good photos but really no zoom.

 

havoc315, which lens would you recommend?

 

Thanks! Kathy

 

That's the thing, with he lenses I'd recommend, it's not a light camera.

I'd go with the 70-200 f/4, the 70-300 G or the 100-400.

 

The 70-200 f/4 and 70-300 aren't "heavy".. but depends who you ask. They aren't exactly feathers. They are fairly bulky. The 100-400 is pretty heavy. Some people don't mind the weight and can lug it around all day. Other people might only want to hold it a few minutes at a time because it definitely weighs on you.

 

The RX10iv will give you the best images without work. Really, the best images without work come from good phones but they don't give you the zoom range you're looking for. But phones have the best auto modes.

 

The Sony with 55-210 will give you perfectly reasonable snapshots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd throw in one additional point on the 'auto' modes for Sony cameras. The standard 'auto' mode that most cameras have is called 'Intelligent auto' on Sony cameras...it's a basic single-shot mode where it sets the exposure, but not too much smarter than that. Phones typically have auto modes that can choose different 'scene' setups, shoot multiple exposures and automatically stack them, and so on, which is why you often hear how advanced and great phone 'auto' modes are. But most modern Sony cameras have an additional 'auto' mode called 'Superior Auto'. In this auto mode, the camera can do all the stuff phones do to automatically process your shots - including taking multiple frames and stacking them, automatic HDR shooting, and choosing scene modes for various recognized shooting scenes. So Sony's Superior Auto mode is about as good as a phone and as easy to use. Keep that in mind. That mode exists on both of the cameras you are considering. I'd probably recommend the RX10IV in your situation as it will be the easiest to use, doesn't require worrying about lenses, and has excellent optical zoom range built in for covering nearly any situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the thing, with he lenses I'd recommend, it's not a light camera.

I'd go with the 70-200 f/4, the 70-300 G or the 100-400.

 

The 70-200 f/4 and 70-300 aren't "heavy".. but depends who you ask. They aren't exactly feathers. They are fairly bulky. The 100-400 is pretty heavy. Some people don't mind the weight and can lug it around all day. Other people might only want to hold it a few minutes at a time because it definitely weighs on you.

 

The RX10iv will give you the best images without work. Really, the best images without work come from good phones but they don't give you the zoom range you're looking for. But phones have the best auto modes.

 

The Sony with 55-210 will give you perfectly reasonable snapshots.

 

 

Thanks for your quick reply! Now to do more research!

 

Kathy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd throw in one additional point on the 'auto' modes for Sony cameras. The standard 'auto' mode that most cameras have is called 'Intelligent auto' on Sony cameras...it's a basic single-shot mode where it sets the exposure, but not too much smarter than that. Phones typically have auto modes that can choose different 'scene' setups, shoot multiple exposures and automatically stack them, and so on, which is why you often hear how advanced and great phone 'auto' modes are. But most modern Sony cameras have an additional 'auto' mode called 'Superior Auto'. In this auto mode, the camera can do all the stuff phones do to automatically process your shots - including taking multiple frames and stacking them, automatic HDR shooting, and choosing scene modes for various recognized shooting scenes. So Sony's Superior Auto mode is about as good as a phone and as easy to use. Keep that in mind. That mode exists on both of the cameras you are considering. I'd probably recommend the RX10IV in your situation as it will be the easiest to use, doesn't require worrying about lenses, and has excellent optical zoom range built in for covering nearly any situation.

 

 

Thanks, zackiedawg! I could get the RX10IV and if not satisfied exchanged it for the mirrorless.

 

I appreciate the help everyone has given!

 

Kathy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kathy:

 

 

I am old!

 

 

I have the A6300s and a RX10-III.

 

 

Both are great cameras and both do take decent videos - slow-mo better on the RX10.

 

 

The only bitch - age or weakness - the RX10 is much more heavier than the A6300!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kathy:

 

 

I am old!

 

 

I have the A6300s and a RX10-III.

 

 

Both are great cameras and both do take decent videos - slow-mo better on the RX10.

 

 

 

The only bitch - age or weakness - the RX10 is much more heavier than the A6300!

 

 

Thanks for adding that, Tom. For day to day walkabout, that is a real factor. For Alaska....

Further Note: The RX10 is not heavier than the A6500 with the 100-400 G zoom. ;)

So add in the consideration that you may only need a long zoom occasionally and while it is built in on the RX10, you pay the price for reach daily. The A6500 is considerably smaller and with the 16-50PZ kit lens is almost a pound lighter.

I would still lean towards suggesting the RX10V for ease of use.

 

It's a great time to be a photographer but with all of the awesome options available, it's a terrible time to be a camera shopper. Too much good stuff!

Dave

Edited by pierces
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a major difference between the two cameras. The 6500 has a much higher 'clean' ISO.

 

About 1.5 stops of difference.

How does that happen? Just based on the sensor sizes (and math), it should be about 3/4 of one stop difference.

(RX10 iv crop factor / a6500 crop factor)^2 = (2/1.5)^2 = 1.78

(Ignore the one. If the two sensors are identical, the answer is one.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How does that happen? Just based on the sensor sizes (and math), it should be about 3/4 of one stop difference.

(RX10 iv crop factor / a6500 crop factor)^2 = (2/1.5)^2 = 1.78

(Ignore the one. If the two sensors are identical, the answer is one.)

 

They aren't identical. The photosites are larger on the A6500 and physics comes into play. More accurate sampling of a larger number of incoming photons leads to a better signal to noise ratio. It's like taking a poll with more people giving a more accurate result.

 

I shoot with both 24MP APS-C and 24 MP FF cameras and while the A6300 uses the same BSI technology as the A7M3 and produces excellent images, the higher ISO images are significantly cleaner on the FF camera through the same lenses.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It should be said that noise itself is partially controlled and influenced by the exposure, not just the sensor size and performance. Properly exposing a shot, or exposing 'to the right' (ie: bright as you can without blowing out highlights), will help even smaller sensors produce a less noisy shot...and even a big full frame sensor with amazing performance forced to badly underexpose a shot can show noise. I have the A6300 and the original RX10, so I'm very familiar with both and their noise threshholds - and I agree the A6300 is probably a good stop and a half, maybe slightly more, above the RX10, the RX10 can still be very usable if you expose properly, and also taking advantage of the multi-frame noise reduction mode (which both cameras have)...I have shot high ISOs from 1600 to 6,400 quite often with the RX10, and it can be quite usable in that range if well exposed. With the A6300, I can push to over ISO 12,800 and still get pretty clean results with a good exposure...so it remains a good stop and change ahead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DXOMARK gives the RX10 a clean ISO of around 500 depending on the version.

 

The 6500 has a clean ISO rating of 1400

 

That is close to 1.5 Stops

 

 

Proportionally that carries to "useable" ISO as well. Their rating is based on no noise reduction or post processing. Add in personal levels of "useable" and the numbers are much higher...but roughly the same ratio. About 1.5 stops.

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly...the DXO ratings are a good tool for comparing whether one camera is better than another, but not necessarily to arrive at a 'hard' number for top ISO...what's usable is entirely up to the user, and also highly affected by exposure. DXO rating the A6300 at a max clean ISO of 1400 to me is incredibly low...my own tolerance goes significantly higher than that. I consider 6,400 to be the upper usable ISO level when shooting JPG and with no post processing or noise removal needed:

 

original.jpg

 

But I also consider much higher ISOs usable with a decent exposure and still retaining good detail even if some noise is visible. Here's a shot taken at night at ISO 16,000 (thousand!):

original.jpg

 

There's noise, but there's also pretty good detail in the wildebeest. Both of those are JPGs, not RAW. I consider that pretty usable with very good detail...so my threshholds are a bit higher than the DXO rating would indicate.

Similarly, for the RX10, I can go up to 1,600 with no fear - shooting JPGs out of the camera:

original.jpg

 

So I would stand by the A6300 being about 1 1/2 stops, nearly 2 stops, better overall, but I'd also say both cameras can produce very usable higher ISOs than those DXO ratings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said you can't shoot higher but it is a accurate account when comparing cameras.

 

My new a7 III will shoot usable stuff at 51,000 in jpeg.

 

And yes I agree that the secret to high ISO is solid exposures. I prefer to be a bit hot. However, the a7 III has 15 stops of dynamic range making it a bit more forgiving in the shadows.

 

One last thing .... shooting at 6400 and using the photos for social media is one thing .... but blowing a picture up to the size of a wall is something entirely different, even 30X40 prints can be tricky when your shooting high ISO ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be clear, I actually sell some of my birding work and wildlife shots...I tend to make prints at 24x36 or 24x30, but have gone larger on request. The ISO 6,400 stuff with the A6300 holds up just fine at those sizes. I don't use social media at all.

 

I would be very comfortable printing large with the A7III at ISO 30,000 or so...51,200 would be OK for certain situations, but 25,600 to 30,000 would be what I'd consider the usable-out-of-camera-with-no-processing range for that cam. Definitely ETTR tends to be best for high ISO work -- though as you say, some cameras are quite good with shadow recovery, and also most Sony sensors are technically 'ISO-less' so if shooting RAW and processing, you can shoot at ISO100 and pull them up - or with the newer two-stage ISO sensors, shoot at ISO 640 to 800 to kick in that second step and then raise in processing. Most of my advice above applies to shooting JPGs and needing to get it more spot-on in camera - if shooting RAW on Sony sensors, you have a ton of leeway to adjust the ISO equivalence while converting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't use social media at all.

 

 

Cruise Critic Boards, DPReview forums...

 

 

...just sayin'.

 

;)

 

 

When shooting JPEG on the Sonys, people tend to forget DRO (Dynamic Range Optimizer). You pay a small price in shot to shot speed in bursts and the buffer can fill a bit quicker but the process of breaking the image into small areas (up to 4000, I remember reading) then raising shadows and preserving highlights by adjusting the ISO boost per segment makes HDR a seldom used option. Levels 1-5 are available and represent how aggressive the balancing is. I typically leave it at Lvl 2 as I have found it to be a good balance between smoothing the light levels and preserving "reality" in the image. It can also boost the range of "acceptable" ISO by lifting shadows without risking high noise in better exposed areas of the image. Chroma noise can be an issue at higher DRO levels since it will boost shadows very aggressively.

 

My apologies to film aficionados...digital just rocks!

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I should have specified that I don't shoot my photos for the purpose of using for social media...I post some here, when I think about it or want to - but it's not the primary purpose. I shoot for me, I shoot to print, I occasionally sell, and occasionally publish. I absolutely never shoot for social media, but will occasionally share a reduced-size shot on some message boards. I only wanted to reply to that comment so it was clear I'm not just OK with high ISO for tiny, resized online shared photos, but find it quite OK for large prints too.

 

Facebook/Instagram/Twitter/etc. nyet! I always think of those as 'social media' - I guess I didn't consider message boards would technically be part of that definition too. You got me there. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...