Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 40 of 40
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,009
    thanks guys for the help!
    i ended up buying a rx100 M5A
    pretty happy so far : )
    i came here to choose between 1,2 or 3 and ended up getting a m5a
    : D should not ask a dentist what to get ; D
    "I have been coming from mountain to mountain and sometimes you feel like, you are fucked, but when you say you are actually fucked, you are only what 45% fucked." NIRMAL PURJA

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    84
    Thanks to this thread I just picked up a used RX100 M3 to get myself started - figure we venture out to some of the most picturesque places on the planet, may as well... take a picture?

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    SW CO
    Posts
    5,292
    Big fan of the RX100 here. I've taken some of my favorite ski shots with the RX100 I -- just keep it in my ski pants pocket and snap off a shot whenever. I have also a Sony a6500 now, but it's not as easy to quickly snap off a shot. Here's an example of a shot I snapped off with the RX100 M1 while trying not to fall too far behind:



    When I have the money, I'd love to upgrade to the RX100 VI. The lack of EVF on the M1 makes it tough. I often just shoot from the hip and hope for the best. And for action shots while skiing (especially in larger terrain), I'd like the extra zoom available on the VI & VII, even though I won't use the video capabilities. Personally, I'd really love if Sony made two models of the RX100 (like they do with some of their other options): one designed for photos & one for videos. But there's probably not the market to support that, especially when so many people are even debating the utility of a pocketable camera with phone cameras getting so good.

    Aside: I'm really not a great photographer, but one thing I think is true with landscapes and especially sunset shots is that quite a few of the gorgeous professional shots you might want/hope to replicate were taken using a filter (neutral density or even reverse grad ND for sunsets) and a tripod. These filters substantially increase the dynamic range of the camera so details in, say, the clouds and foreground aren't washed out by the sun. (Just my $0.02, and maybe I'm wrong but that's my impression.) From this standpoint, I don't know that the a6500 with a nice lens takes substantially better photos than the RX100 m1 when shooting hand-held without a filter. So I guess my point is, temper your expectations when shooting sunset photos if you're not using a tripod and a filter.
    "Alpine rock and steep, deep powder are what I seek, and I will always find solace there." - Bean Bowers

    photos

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Posts
    15
    Another option that’s a bit cheaper than the RX100VI/VII is the Canon G5XII. It’s got the same sensor as the RX100IV so it’s not quite as good as the 6 or 7. The lens seems to be a compromise between the RX100V and VI. It’s got more zoom than the 5, but it’s better in low-light than the 6/7. Which works out perfect for me!

    Even for sunset photos without a tripod/filter, it seems like these high end point and shoots can do pretty much everything. Not a perfect photo, but I don’t think a graduated filter would have helped much here, there’s plenty of dynamic range as-is:Click image for larger version. 

Name:	AB1B08D3-1534-4E05-A732-40527B0D1561.jpg 
Views:	57 
Size:	430.2 KB 
ID:	365595

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    16,363
    That, and focus stacking.

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    2000 miles from snow.
    Posts
    1,457
    Another RX100 guy, with 2 x Mk II (with Ikelite underwater case), and a Mk VI. While the II's are great for most everything, the optical viewfinder of the VI is mandatory for ski shots, otherwise the screen washes out.

    The biggest reason for recommending the VI is both the longer lens, and particularly the 24fps burst if can do for up to 10 seconds. A good ski day with your buds and nothing can overcome bad shooting like having 150 pictures of your buds best 6 seconds of skiing ever.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Mitch.jpg 
Views:	58 
Size:	1.02 MB 
ID:	372497
    Last edited by Bite Me; 04-23-2021 at 11:38 AM.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Aspen
    Posts
    1,877
    The III (w/pop-up viewfinder) is on sale, new, for $600 https://www.crutchfield.com/S-UufNOr...RX100-III.html

    VI is on sale for $1100 - https://www.crutchfield.com/S-oE5XNF...-RX100-VI.html

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    2000 miles from snow.
    Posts
    1,457
    Just to confirm why the 24fps and an optical viewfinder are so important (Mk VI and higher). Just (try to) follow the subject and keep your finger down. Remember, these are cropped, so lose a little precision, but for something you can carry in your pocket, this camera is not too bad - Would NEVER have got the last one without following one and kept on shooting - Blue Angels yesterday in Melbourne, FL:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC00714 (2).jpg 
Views:	57 
Size:	390.3 KB 
ID:	374754Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC01047 (2).jpg 
Views:	60 
Size:	589.8 KB 
ID:	374755Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC02060 (2).jpg 
Views:	52 
Size:	576.4 KB 
ID:	374756
    Last edited by Bite Me; 05-16-2021 at 12:08 PM. Reason: additional blather

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    2000 miles from snow.
    Posts
    1,457
    Like this shot and the clarity:

    Attachment 374758

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    107
    Sounds like the rx100 is the winner here, but is it really really ridiculously small or is it just me?

    I am concerned i'll drop it or lose it with larger than average hands.

    Am I dumb for this concern? Is there anything comparable but slightly more substantial?

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    2000 miles from snow.
    Posts
    1,457
    I don't see it as ridiculously small, I see it as something that comfortably fits in your pocket. Nothing else in that size has the capabilities.

    The Canon's are larger if you really want something that doesn't fit in your pocket, but you're going to sacrifice features too.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    16,363
    Quote Originally Posted by Bite Me View Post
    I don't see it as ridiculously small, I see it as something that comfortably fits in your pocket. Nothing else in that size has the capabilities.
    Disagree.

    https://www.dpreview.com/articles/14...-ricoh-gr-iiix
    Is it radix panax notoginseng? - splat

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    4,867

    wtb small camera for ski touring?

    Bumping this thread: are people getting good enough battery life out of the RX100VI for a day of skiing in cold weather - even using burst mode occasionally? Do you find them to hold up well enough when bouncing around in hip/pants pockets in bad weather?

    The Canon G5XII mentioned about looks like it has a better grip, but worse AF seems like big downside for quick shots.

    I love taking photos with a real full sized interchangeable lens camera, but rarely take it skiing because it just adds weight to my pack and rarely gets busted out due to the time involved. Phone cameras are pretty good now, but lack of optical zoom or viewfinder is still a problem for snow/skiing.

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    604
    FYI they sell aftermarket rubber grips cheap that stick on the Sony…makes a big difference. Haven’t had battery issues but if you are concerned just buy an extra. Big fan of the RX100 Series…sometimes I see old photos and mistake them for my big camera.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Posts
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Dromond View Post
    Bumping this thread: are people getting good enough battery life out of the RX100VI for a day of skiing in cold weather - even using burst mode occasionally? Do you find them to hold up well enough when bouncing around in hip/pants pockets in bad weather?

    The Canon G5XII mentioned about looks like it has a better grip, but worse AF seems like big downside for quick shots.

    I love taking photos with a real full sized interchangeable lens camera, but rarely take it skiing because it just adds weight to my pack and rarely gets busted out due to the time involved. Phone cameras are pretty good now, but lack of optical zoom or viewfinder is still a problem for snow/skiing.
    I've got both the G5XII and the RX1007 (broke the G5XII after one too many drops, now the RX has accidental damage protection). The G5XII is way better for those quick shots and low light, the RX100 has more reach and faster AF.

    I've found the RX100 AF locks on instantly and can track even very fast moving objects (like birds), but you have to manually set the focus point a lot more often or it'll focus on the wrong thing! And on the tiny screen you can't tell until you get home. I have tons of landscape photos where the close by twig is perfectly in focus and the entire rest of the image is blurry...

    The G5XII is definitely slower to lock on, but it tends to be much better at picking the right subject the first time. It also is way faster at turning on, so the time required to turn on the camera, take a shot, turn it back off, and put it away is several seconds faster on the G5XII. For times where I'm with a group that I need to catch back up to when I stop for a pic, that's huge.

    I'm stuck with the RX1007 now, because it works well enough that I'm not going to sell it to buy a new G5XII. But in the future I'd definitely go the Canon route for this if you can spare the extra size (it's probably about 0.5" bigger than the Sony).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •