DSLRUsers.com

Anyone had an experience with either of these cameras? are they worth the ( in some cases) significantly greater cost than the alternatives from nikon and canon?

I need a compact camera, when I say compact it has to be compact, no micro 4/3rds or interchangeable lens thus ruling out fujis nex v1 etc, i have had good experiences with s_ony compacts in the past, they have worked well for their intended purposes and have lasted quite some time so there is some merit for continuing with the brand in this case. Note I am open to other suggestions but the form factor is the key part here followed closely by image quality.

I did have a brief sojourn with the RX100. Stellar image quality but very slow in handling. It took just too long to power the thing on and wait for the lens to extend etc. I went back to the Fuji X10. Brilliant image quality, instant startup, small and built like a tank. And for now, very cheap.

ozimax wrote:I did have a brief sojourn with the RX100. Stellar image quality but very slow in handling. It took just too long to power the thing on and wait for the lens to extend etc. I went back to the Fuji X10. Brilliant image quality, instant startup, small and built like a tank. And for now, very cheap.

Thanks ozi
hmm interesting, I did not consider the start up time is that the only slowness? or did it extend to focusing - what did you think of the build quality?

I bought one for an overseas hike where I was in a similar position - no room or will to carry extra bulk and weight. I carried it in one of the R-Strap mini SnapR10 pouches

Not seeing the power-on issue. Mine takes about a second to a second and a half to power on, ready to shoot with the lens extended. Slightly longer to power down. This is the Mk1 version. Menus etc are snappy even though they are wide and deep to confuse newbies...

At the time, I considered the Fuji X20 but being an accused fan boy of Fuji I have to say the RX100 blitzes the X20 in IQ. The Fuji handles better though

Deficiencies are no filter thread (you can get a magnetic filter adapter) and the tiny body is hard to hold. I have the Franiac grip on mine which improves things a lot, I notice Sony now has a similar grip in rubber for less $$.

The Mk2 brings a marginally better sensor and tilt LCD. Meh.

photohiker wrote:I bought one for an overseas hike where I was in a similar position - no room or will to carry extra bulk and weight. I carried it in one of the R-Strap mini SnapR10 pouches

Not seeing the power-on issue. Mine takes about a second to a second and a half to power on, ready to shoot with the lens extended. Slightly longer to power down. This is the Mk1 version. Menus etc are snappy even though they are wide and deep to confuse newbies...

At the time, I considered the Fuji X20 but being an accused fan boy of Fuji I have to say the RX100 blitzes the X20 in IQ. The Fuji handles better though

Deficiencies are no filter thread (you can get a magnetic filter adapter) and the tiny body is hard to hold. I have the Franiac grip on mine which improves things a lot, I notice Sony now has a similar grip in rubber for less $$.

The Mk2 brings a marginally better sensor and tilt LCD. Meh.

hmmm thanks, i think most would agree the image quality is probably the best for its class, one thing i do wonder (and really only i can answer this) is whether the II version is worth a extra 150 bucks - the extra features are nice and the improved iso performance a plus but...

not fussed about a filter thread and i appreciate that its dinky size will always make it hard to hold/use.

How did you find the build quality? i hear it does not like being dropped in icy waters (Chase Jarvis lol)

Gerry, my brother has the rx100. He loves it and I love using it aswell. It's about a year old now and no issues. Personally yes, I think the tilt lcd alone is worth the price difference.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

biggerry wrote:How did you find the build quality? i hear it does not like being dropped in icy waters (Chase Jarvis lol)

It feels solid with it's metal case and all, not light for it's size. I haven't dropped it (yet), but I have gotten it a bit damp in the rain with no ill effects. I also managed to totally cake it with snow while skiing and with a little TLC back at the lodge it was back to 'new' in the morning with no ill effects. Mine has lived in the Snapr case so any bumps have been softened by the padding. I guess anything with a motorised lens extension is probably susceptible to bumps and wear, but so far so good.

The price difference between the Mk1 and Mk2 is only $100 or so and the mk2 is selling for about the same price I paid for the mk1.

i know you said you didn't want m4/3, but have you looked at/ considered the lumix GM ? its smaller than the rx100 and even with the little panckage zoom its barely thicker.

http://camerasize.com/compare/#491,332

biggerry wrote:hmm interesting, I did not consider the start up time is that the only slowness? or did it extend to focusing - what did you think of the build quality?

It was the time to extend the lens that annoyed me. Build quality is stellar but no better than the Fuji. The X10 is a veritable tank.

Rooz wrote:Gerry, my brother has the rx100. He loves it and I love using it aswell. It's about a year old now and no issues. Personally yes, I think the tilt lcd alone is worth the price difference.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

yeah the tilt screen is a nice extra, but not a show stopper for me. the extra iso performance is probably worth it..

photohiker wrote:

biggerry wrote:How did you find the build quality? i hear it does not like being dropped in icy waters (Chase Jarvis lol)

It feels solid with it's metal case and all, not light for it's size. I haven't dropped it (yet), but I have gotten it a bit damp in the rain with no ill effects. I also managed to totally cake it with snow while skiing and with a little TLC back at the lodge it was back to 'new' in the morning with no ill effects. Mine has lived in the Snapr case so any bumps have been softened by the padding. I guess anything with a motorised lens extension is probably susceptible to bumps and wear, but so far so good.

The price difference between the Mk1 and Mk2 is only $100 or so and the mk2 is selling for about the same price I paid for the mk1.

cheers, appreciate the info!

Rooz wrote:i know you said you didn't want m4/3, but have you looked at/ considered the lumix GM ? its smaller than the rx100 and even with the little panckage zoom its barely thicker.

http://camerasize.com/compare/#491,332

I have not looked at it, however i do not want interchangeable lens - that said it looks pretty neat and i will have a look and do a bit of research in it.

ozimax wrote:

biggerry wrote:hmm interesting, I did not consider the start up time is that the only slowness? or did it extend to focusing - what did you think of the build quality?

It was the time to extend the lens that annoyed me. Build quality is stellar but no better than the Fuji. The X10 is a veritable tank.

thanks ozi.

Just to follow up, I have had this camera (RX100II) for a few weeks and used it on and off for various things - overall I am very happy with it, slightly overpriced but the quality of the images (straight jpegs) is nothing short of excellent. My only really pita aspects is the actual size and grip (lack thereof) note however I am not the person its design or purchased for and also the flash, the popup flash works well but sheesh what a complex little mechanism, surely that is gonna break after a couple of years of use...

anyway, great camera perfect point and shoot.