Expanding my Gear Camera advice please

[Phil Stanley]

I have been using an AX100 AX33 and RX10 II for the last year or so. My wife and I shoot Weddings, both stills and video.

The AX100 has been the main Camera with the RX10 II used for close ups etc. The AX33 I dislike intently and has hardly been touched. I am not totally happy with the RX10 either I just haven't gelled with it.

So I am looking to sell the RX10 and AX33 and replace with something different. My considerations are.

1. Another AX100, but two factors concern me, it's fortay is not low light and with some winter weddings coming up I have some concerns about low light performance. Secondly the price in the UK is £1500 which
I feel is overpriced. We do really like this Camera though.

2. A GH4R with the 12/35 will cost about the same, will this offer better low light performance? maybe a little but of course the option of fast primes is an option.

Is there anything else I am missing, any other options apart from these two Cameras that should be considered?

Any advice most welcome

[Steve Burkett]

There's little point in getting the GH4r unless you're dedicated to going down the route of multiple lenses. The strength of this camera is adding various primes for a whole lot better low light. I love my 12-35 lens, but I know when to put it away and it gets used less in the winter. I recently got the 12mm 1.4 Panasonic lens and already it's been put to great use in some dimly lit Ceremonies and Receptions. Expensive lens though.

If you're not willing to go down that route, then the newly announced FZ2000 has a lot to offer. May match less well with your Sony, but I can't say for sure as I don't own any Sony cameras. It is a hybrid camera much like the RX10; not sure what your issues with that camera are, but could be the same with the FZ2000, depending what they are. You do lose the constant aperture though, which will affect low light when zooming in.

There's always the a6300; I've heard good and bad things about that camera. Seems a good camera for low light, though reliability is its chief issue.

[Phil Stanley]

Thanks Steve

I have no issue investing in primes, I understand it will give me better low light abilities when required.

We love the AX100 and it's ease of use, but have found it lacking for lower light work, our noise threshold is approx 12DB gain and it's easy to hit this at some venues, we do add light if required though.

The RX10 we have really struggled to get accurate focus and the quality does not seem on par with the AX100, some Cameras you just don't gel with and that is one of them.

The Micro four thirds route is appealing with so many lenses and choice between Olympus and Panny.

[Dave Blackhurst]

A couple thoughts, the AX53 is noticeably better than the AX33, but still not quite as good image quality, IMO. It does OK in low light, but with a bit of noise, from the testing I did (returned, leaning towards the RX10M3). You certainly would dislike it less than the 33, but that may or may not be enough!?

How are you using the RX10M2 - if its handheld, that may be part of the issue? I would at the minimum want to have a flash bracket to help with stability, I usually use a footed monopod, just because the form factor doesn't lend itself to handheld use (similar to most DSLR type cams, IMO). I actually grab the RX10M2 over the AX100, and the image quality to my eye looks to be equal or better (I believe the sensor in the M2 & M3 is a bit better in low light, and equally sharp). On my 4K screens I'd be hard pressed to say which camera was which (says a lot about the AX100 for it's age!).

Haven't noticed any problems with focus - are you trying manual focus or auto? If manual, have you tried using peaking? It's really hard to gauge accurate focus for a 4K image on a 3" screen.... are you finding the problems in "post", but it looked OK while shooting? If there is a specific scenario where you're having trouble getting/holding focus, there are several "modes" for focus that might be worth experimenting with? Auto focus is always problematic, and one place where a touch screen would be a good addition to the RX's...

Not sure if used AX100's pop up in the EU, and whether the prices are that much lower to justify it, but it IS a very nice camera - while the RX10M2 takes a little getting used to, it's capable of good results, from what I've seen the M3 version knocks off a couple of the "rough edges", at the price of increased size and weight. I've been contemplating whether going to the M3 would be an "upgrade" to justify retiring the AX100, but much like yourself, I feel it's a very "comfortable" camera for video. The RX's of course are more oriented toward stills, and take some getting used to for video... and the hack to bypass the 30 minute limit!

[Phil Stanley]

Thanks for your input Dave

The RX10 M2 is normally on a Monopod, for focus I have it set to BBF. However it is very difficult to see if you have acquired focus on the small screen as you say. I haven't tried peaking and manual focus.

My threshold for noise is quite high so I do not think the smaller sensor AX53 will work for me which is why I am considering the GH4R with it's choice of lenses.

The AX100 did drop in price from £1500 to £1350 for a while but it seems the sensor shortage has put them back up. They are a great Camera but I can get a GH4R (no 30 min limit) with 12/35 2.8 for the same money which gives me a little more noise performance with the option of lower light lenses, maybe with a small loss of usability. I do feel the AX100 are overpriced here.

[Peter Rush]

I got my AX100 for just over £1,100

https://slrhut.co.uk/product/ID571C7...UBkRoCXq_w_wcB

[Arthur Gannis]

I recently picked up a used Sony A7S ( first version) with a CZ 24-70 F4 zoom all for $2200 USD.
No low light level problems with this baby. With 24,000 iso setting being my low light dim venue choice.
It doesn't do 4K but if I really need 4K, then the A7S II is the puppy.

[Phil Stanley]

Originally Posted by Peter Rush

I got my AX100 for just over £1,100

https://slrhut.co.uk/product/ID571C7...UBkRoCXq_w_wcB

Thanks Peter, I have seen SLR hut but was not sure how reputable they were, that price is certainly competitive.

[Steve Burkett]

No matter how good the AX100 is, alas low light will never compete with say a GH4r with a prime lens. If quality is your goal when it comes to managing some of the low light situations venues can thrown at us, then nothing beats this combination. Its really down to ease of use vs quality. Getting the best quality requires more money, effort and stress on the day, but the results will speak for themselves. Taking the easy approach with a camcorder or hybrid camera does make your filming day less stressful, but you'll never capture great low light footage the same way as a prime lens set to 1.4 or 1.8. Same thing with photos too. I've seen the difference, matching footage shot on 2.8 aperture to that shot on 1.4 and it really is night and day. Its a whole new level.

[Phil Stanley]

Originally Posted by Arthur Gannis

I recently picked up a used Sony A7S ( first version) with a CZ 24-70 F4 zoom all for $2200 USD.
No low light level problems with this baby. With 24,000 iso setting being my low light dim venue choice.
It doesn't do 4K but if I really need 4K, then the A7S II is the puppy.

Another option thanks Arthur

[Peter Rush]

Originally Posted by Phil Stanley

Thanks Peter, I have seen SLR hut but was not sure how reputable they were, that price is certainly competitive.

I also bought an A7s II from them that developed a fault and they sorted it quickly. I also bought a pretty expensive G-Master lens - I can't fault them

Pete

[Phil Stanley]

That's good to know they are very competitive, is it grey import?

[Peter Rush]

Pretty sure they are grey imports

[Steve Bleasdale]

Just get two canon 80d and 2.8 lens your good to go by far the best cameras around

[Phil Stanley]

I have not even considered these Steve, what are the strengths of them