>>4296998
This is the last rx100. The vi and vii are shitty boomerzoom cameras with slower lenses so anyone that isn’t retarded should ignore them. I still don’t understand what manner of bathtub sake the Sony engineers were pickling their brains with when they decided to ruin the lineup, when the super zoom rx10 already exists.

>>4297005
so ill have to chose between V or VA.
are these 2 solid cameras? any differences between them?

>>4297005
>I still don’t understand what manner of bathtub sake the Sony engineers were pickling their brains with when they decided to ruin the lineup, when the super zoom rx10 already exists.
It's for retards who see people praising the rx100 and would get it but are having second thoughts because, being retarded, they think more zoom = more better and 3x just ain't gonna cut it. You may have noticed that the VA is still being sold new.

>>4297052
>. The ' VA' model gains a deeper buffer, new white balance, metering and autofocus options, and the ability to save 720p proxy footage along with 4K video. Support for Sony's PlayMemories Apps has been removed.
ur welcome 4 googling 4 u

I'm looking to get one of these but VA+ is way too expensive, and I keep getting outbid on the V

Is the IV or even III worth it for say around the 300-400$ mark? Or are they just dust collector pieces that arn't practical anymore?

File: DSC00251.jpg (119 KB, 1280x853)

119 KB JPG

>>4297163
I own a Iv, I love the little thing and the images are nice. But if I had to be honest, if you’re just posting to Instagram or whatever the quality won’t be too different looking than any modern phone. But some of the video modes are cool, and it is better in low light than phones still I would say.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	DSC-RX100M4
Camera Software	DSC-RX100M4 v1.30
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	33 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2018:12:01 22:17:06
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	125
Brightness	1.0 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	12.20 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1280
Image Height	853
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4297185
Damn, I'm intending to use it for close ups of product photos for my job and then while I have it, use it for cosplay photography.

The RX100 seemed like a great way to keep things light when I travel, but I suppose I should start looking at the mirror less cams then

>>4297065
so for a noob like me , what does that mean? is better cus....? explain in dumb words

>>4297221
nta, but it seems like a minor iteration. They are basically the same camera, I would just get whichever is cheapest. None of the changes are going to have a gigantic impact on the function. The files are going to look the same.

Typically Sony will release "A" versions of their cameras with minor tweaks some time after the initial release. I would assume that's what this is.

>>4297185
>it is better in low light than phones still I would say
Hmm. We visited friends across the ocean and had the opportunity to travel through cities. I had an RX100VA with me, a friend had a current iPhone. In low light, my photos were only better overall when I could take my time to take pictures, i.e. with a tripod or a series of pictures for averaging. Especially with quick shots, shooting freehand or in rain, the ease of use of cell phones make compact cameras appear less than ideal.

>>4297229
>putting an rx100 on a tripod
gtfo

File: _DSC5669.jpg (1.58 MB, 3240x2160)

1.58 MB JPG

>>4297163
The big upgrade with the V over the IV is the phase detect AF, other than that you get 24fps instead of 16fps If you're going to be shooting quickly moving subjects then it could be worth it. That said I have the IV and even with just 25 contrast detect points it's still decently quick and will track objects.

>>4297213
Go for the RX100. It's one of the few decent cameras that are actually literally pocketable without wearing a trenchcoat. To get the same versatility on a mirrorless body you're going to be looking at about double the weight just for the lens, probably the same for the body, and like 4 or 5 times the thickness. You may even need to go with multiple lenses, or extension tubes with a standard zoom. I think this photo may have been taken using an old Canon close up filter (magfilter attachment) but it doesn't make a huge difference, the RX100 will focus pretty close on its own.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	DSC-RX100M4
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Elements 15.0 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	70 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	5472
Image Height	3648
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	137 dpcm
Vertical Resolution	137 dpcm
Image Created	2018:10:23 01:17:20
White Point Chromaticity	0.3
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	125
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Brightness	9.8 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	25.70 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	3240
Image Height	2160
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4297242
I’ve done that and even used it with studio strobes before lol. What are you, against having fun and fucking around or something?

>>4297324
you just seem retarded, is all

>>4297229
Depends on whether you like phone stacking smears more than ISO noise. It's a matter of taste.

Normies view everything as wallet sized photos now so the smears are invisible but ISO noise is not. Yes, things do look waxy and cartoonish, but all zoomers have body image issues so they actually want that especially on skin.

Can you get good subject separation with this type of camera? Still kinda feels like a hipster cellphone camera

>>4297325
>doing fun things with your camera besides spray and pray snapshitting building corners makes you a retard
Modern /p/ user, everybody.

File: _DSC5512.jpg (128 KB, 667x1000)

128 KB JPG

>>4297335
Can you get a shallow depth of field? Sure. Not a shallow as a larger sensored camera of course but shallower than with a phone, unless you want to fake it.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	DSC-RX100M4
Camera Software	DSC-RX100M4 v2.00
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	24 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2018:06:01 23:07:14
White Point Chromaticity	0.3
Exposure Time	1/30 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	2500
Brightness	-0.6 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	8.80 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	667
Image Height	1000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4297229
>the ease of use of cell phones make compact cameras appear less than ideal.
Try turning the big dial on top until the green "AUTO" lines up with the white line next to the dial.

Ok guys i have a mark iii of the RX100.
Which one would you say is the best upgrade for video, it would be a great help to hear.

>>4301592
The IV gets you 4K, but if you're mostly or just doing video then take a look at the ZV1 cameras

>>4297367
That example doesn't say much, even phones can get a decently shallow dof at that distance.

File: 432856830.jpg (451 KB, 2048x1365)

451 KB JPG

>>4301635
But not as shallow, arguably not "decently shallow". That's just physics, phones don't have sensors as large and lenses as fast. Would this same photo taken on a phone also have the paw and background out of focus? Probably, but not to the same extent. Just like how an even larger sensored camera would have an even shallower depth of field.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>>4301636
I'm not claiming that phones are good, I'm just saying that it doesn't tell much to someone who's concerned about full / half body portraits.

>>4301637
Well he didn't ask about that specifically

File: DSC02482.jpg (2.31 MB, 2989x4483)

2.31 MB JPG

I own a III and it's really cool to use, the screen on these suck ass

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	DSC-RX100M3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 16.2 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	34 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:03:27 16:10:56
Exposure Time	1/320 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	125
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Brightness	9.9 EV
Exposure Bias	-1 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	12.48 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: DSC02371.jpg (2.03 MB, 3648x5472)

2.03 MB JPG

>>4297335

I don't think shallow DoF is something you should be seriously considering with any of these, at 1.8 or 70mm at f2.8 there's not much, some but not much

>>4297324
I so wish it had a hot shoe, that 1/2000 flash sync is so fucking cool to have

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	DSC-RX100M3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 16.2 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	63 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:03:27 16:10:31
Exposure Time	1/1250 sec
F-Number	f/2.8
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	125
Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Brightness	9.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	22.95 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

File: DSC02495.jpg (1.95 MB, 4446x1984)

1.95 MB JPG

>>4301592
The III is hopeless for video, lol

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	DSC-RX100M3
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 16.2 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.5
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	31 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2024:03:27 16:11:03
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	125
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Brightness	9.9 EV
Exposure Bias	-1 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	11.45 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

i miss my rx100m3 :[
I sold most of my digital cameras for drugs or music gear a while ago now. rx100 is what I missed the most.

Shame what has ahppened to the secondhand camera market, especially compacts

File: _DSC4201.jpg (4.39 MB, 5015x3134)

4.39 MB JPG

It will do 95% of everything you could ever want to do with a camera. Just get it.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	DSC-RX100M5
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.1 (Macintosh)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	70 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2024:01:11 19:55:49
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/6.3
Exposure Program	Shutter Priority
ISO Speed Rating	125
Lens Aperture	f/6.3
Brightness	9.0 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	25.70 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4301637
in portraits you have control over subject to background distance

just got gifted an rx100 II, been pretty neat

>>4297335
with like an rx100 III, you get slightly better than an aps-c camera + typical f3.5-f5.6 kit lens