Hi, I have a quick question.
I have an A6k+16-70 combo for a lightweight travel kit. It's to throw in the bag when I won't be focusing on photography so much, and also for convenience to have small a 24-105mm f4 package at all times with me.
I most often use this combo in good to very good light and at around 100-800 ISO and I quite often PP the images out of it.
I quite like the output from the 16-70; zeissy enough for travel.
My question is, if I were to replace this combo with a RX100 Mk3, would I still be happy? Obvs I'd be using it in the same circumstances. The attraction with the RX100 Mk3 is it being a much smaller package which won't take much room in any bag. But I can't be sure if I'd miss the DR and rendering I get from the A6k combo. Especially DR; I hate blown highligts. The A6k has quite a nice DR in lower ISOs.
There is also the thing with color transitions: I used to be an avid user of m43 and one of the reasons I left the ecosystem was low color depth: the colors looked quite "shallow" and "rigid" or "harsh" compared to what I'm getting with my FF setup. Obviously this has everything to do with low bit depth of the m43 sensors.
There is also another matter of me almost hating the A6k LCD: it's dim, hard to see in sunlight, when you crank up the brightness it clips everything and you can't tell the exposure. How's the RX100 Mk3 in this regard?
Thank you.