Sony Need help deciding..RX100 or new release??

I tend to get photos I'm happier with when using a camera that I'm familiar with. When I can pick it up and change settings without thinking or searching through menus. Where I understand it's limitation, strengths and weakness. That familiarity is to me worth more than a couple of advantages on a camera I'm not used to using. If it were me, I'd buy now and expect it to be a good friend by September rather than a stranger. You'll find plenty if France to spend the money saved on! Have a good trip.

Hello,
Yes you have expressed one of my main concerns. I like to know my camera and it can take a while :)
As I've got time am going to wait for the announcement and gauge prices. Then by 15 July which is my cutoff date I'll have a decision and camera!
Thank you I plan on enjoying the trip. Am looking forward to sharing some photos of the trip!
Chao
 
Hello Everyone,

I thought I would give an update since you were all so generous in your time to answer my question.

As I indicated in my earlier posts, today was my DECISION day and I took the plunge and got the RX100. The price had gone up to $568 from when I had bought it so I am still ahead. Yay :) Though this place has the cheapest going around of the stores here in Melbourne that I've seen. Most still have the price at over $600.

Ultimately, I decided that I can live without a tilt screen, the sensor will be more than enough for me and I don't need wifi. Besides, I can use the $200 odd toward my upcoming trip to France or better yet the RX1 I'm now enviously watching 😁

I look forward to sharing some of my photos in the relevant threads...it can't charge up fast enough!

Chao,
Irene

*Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaay a new camera*
 
It really is a great camera, and I don't think you are giving up anything to get it. Congrats and enjoy!

My one caveat with this camera -- I shoot RAW because they don't process the jpgs very well at low ISO. That's my one quibble, but otherwise, it's a lot of fun!
 
It really is a great camera, and I don't think you are giving up anything to get it. Congrats and enjoy!

My one caveat with this camera -- I shoot RAW because they don't process the jpgs very well at low ISO. That's my one quibble, but otherwise, it's a lot of fun!

Thanks for the tip. One of the reasons I got it now is so I have a couple of months to get comfortable with the camera and my preferences. I've never shot RAW before so maybe I should experiment. Hmm shooting RAW means larger files which means I need more cards!

Let's hope I can just buy cards and avoid more spending :)
 
I think you'll be very pleased - I recently went through an XZ-2 (a troubled camera, IMO) and an LX7 (perfect in every way but size) to an RX100 and have to say I'm really happy. For now, anyway... ;) ...you know how these things go. The ability to put the RX100 in my shirt pocket turned out to completely trump all the other advantages and disadvantages among these three (few of which were compelling, for my needs and wants).

Part of me would really love to spring for an RX100 II, but rationally I'm having trouble getting there, for the following reasons. If you all can convince me, please do! Here's how I see the Mk2 changes:

1. Higher ISO Sensitivity - nice to have about 2/3 stop better high ISO performance, but that's not a huge margin and the RX100 performs well at high ISOs already. There is also a downside, which is the corresponding increase in base ISO sensitivity, which sort of highlights the slightly strange decision not to include an ND filter in these cameras.

2. Tilt LCD - nice to have, but my OM-D EM5 has that and I've only used it once in about a year...my G5 has a fully articulated screen and, again, I've used it exactly once...so that does not seem compelling for my uses, and it's possible that those extra few millimeters of thickness could affect its pocketability, which would be bad.

3. Accessory shoe - I like the idea of external viewfinders a lot, for several reasons, but once again it takes the camera out of the shirt pocket category - and into the bargain, the Sony EVF is around $450 right now, more than many "serious compact" cameras cost. I wouldn't use any other accessories in the shoe, so that doesn't seem compelling...

I have one of the MkIIs on pre-order, but I'm really thinking I should cancel... :redface:
 
My reasons for not feeling inclined to upgrade to the RX100 MkII are pretty much exactly as you've listed, jnewell.

So... it's not possible for me to convince you, since I'm thinking that you should cancel, too! :D
 
I realized that I forgot wifi and NFC - which I guess says something about how important I think those are in a camera...but I am possibly a dinosaur... ;)

It's hard. Changes like being able to use the tilt screen or the EVF are so attractive...in theory. In practice, for me, what's brilliant is that it fits in a shirt pocket. Once it doesn't do that, it's...just......another............little p&s.
 
I realized that I forgot wifi and NFC - which I guess says something about how important I think those are in a camera...but I am possibly a dinosaur... ;)

It's hard. Changes like being able to use the tilt screen or the EVF are so attractive...in theory. In practice, for me, what's brilliant is that it fits in a shirt pocket. Once it doesn't do that, it's...just......another............little p&s.

Like porchard I think you've just outlined why you're not really needing the mark II ;)
I'm very happy with my RX100 so far though I need to sort out why it's got some scratches on the outside of the lens barrel. Sigh.



Irene,
Have camera will travel & shoot!
 
I realized that I forgot wifi and NFC - which I guess says something about how important I think those are in a camera...but I am possibly a dinosaur... ;)

It's hard. Changes like being able to use the tilt screen or the EVF are so attractive...in theory. In practice, for me, what's brilliant is that it fits in a shirt pocket. Once it doesn't do that, it's...just......another............little p&s.

I am quite satisfied with the IQ from my RX100 and the only feature I would have truly appreciated and am envious of is the WiFi. I would have taken a bluetooth as well if that was available. EyeFi cards are quite costly and not available anywhere in India as of now.
 
I'm having a good think about the RX100 at the moment. I liked my HX20V for everything apart from the smeary jpegs so in principle I do like Sony's compact features. (I also had an NEX5N which I loved and hated!). I changed the HX20V for a Panasonic TZ40, which might have wifi and probably better GPS than the Sony but the IQ is, frankly, appalling. I like landscapes with lots of trees in them and leaves get rendered as a green smudge, even quite large areas. So, I'm thinking I might go for an RX100 and trade in both the TZ40 and my Fuji X10 (quite good IQ but it feels clunky to me and bigger than the sensor warrants somehow). Question is, how do people feel about using the RX100 as their "main" camera? I've seen reviews complaining about the "shooting experience" not being great, whatever that really means. If there are elements about using it that really hack people off I'd like to hear about them.
 
I'm having a good think about the RX100 at the moment. I liked my HX20V for everything apart from the smeary jpegs so in principle I do like Sony's compact features. (I also had an NEX5N which I loved and hated!). I changed the HX20V for a Panasonic TZ40, which might have wifi and probably better GPS than the Sony but the IQ is, frankly, appalling. I like landscapes with lots of trees in them and leaves get rendered as a green smudge, even quite large areas. So, I'm thinking I might go for an RX100 and trade in both the TZ40 and my Fuji X10 (quite good IQ but it feels clunky to me and bigger than the sensor warrants somehow). Question is, how do people feel about using the RX100 as their "main" camera? I've seen reviews complaining about the "shooting experience" not being great, whatever that really means. If there are elements about using it that really hack people off I'd like to hear about them.

After getting rid of my Canon 40D and L lenses a few yrs ago I downgraded to Micro four thirds with various lenses biggest being 100-300mm lens, got fed up lugging a bag full of lenses etc around and decided I still wanted smaller. Fortunately the RX100 was getting released at the time, after reading many reviews etc etc I took the plunge and bought one. I liked it so much that I sold all the M4/3 camera gear and tripod which was really overkill for such a small package. It is now my main camera, goes everywhere with me and I've never looked back the best part ...no bags of lenses etc to carry. It's hard to take a crappy under or over exposed photo with it.

Having said all that if you do wedding photography etc for a living then you will probably want to stick to SLR and the various types of lenses needed.
 
Fifteen years back I slowly ended my photography. I had two Minolta bodies, the original 9000AF and the new 9, both superb cameras and an assortment of Minolta lenses from 85 1.4G to 100 2.8 macro, couple of zooms including Leica inspired 70-210 3.5-4.5 which when used with right apertures would give results rivaling APO lenses.

I had stashed all this away till the photo bug bit me again with SONY's new offerings in DSLR, NEX series etc. All was fine as I had decided on a DSLT-A58 or a NEX-7 till this little man aka RX100 came along. I saw it with my friend, never thought big about it, was not supposed to. After all its just a compact. I borrowed that cam from my friend just to take some casual typical P&S and within few minutes, all my perceptions went away. I ended up borrowing the camera for the whole day.
Next day I returned the camera with broken heart. Now I was in a dilemma, go with my original decision and get to use the lenses and flash or get this unit which even though truly beyond good still had its compromises. Then I thought long and hard about myself. Close to fifty, all I want is to take photographs and for that, I have to have a easy to carry and be unobtrusive so that when I take it out of my pocket, I don't make people around me notice its a serious pro cam, that changes many expressions as people then become circumspect. With heavy heart as my lenses and flashes and two Minolta bodies would end up in museum permanently I got the RX100.
Every day with it has made me forget the lenses and camera. This is today's Rollei 35 that helps me snap pictures with ease and even if I need the occasional blow up, it never ever disappoints.

Of course WiFi would have been a nice touch, so would a hot shoe but I live without them and adjust to the shots accordingly.
 
Question is, how do people feel about using the RX100 as their "main" camera?

I don't have a "main camera" (I have several, for different purposes), but I never feel, when I take the RX100, that I've only got the "poor-relation". Obviously, this is not a camera to take for distant wildlife or sports shots, but for every appropriate use, it is very good.

If there are elements about using it that really hack people off I'd like to hear about them.

I must say that there's nothing that really "hacks me off" about the RX100. Of course, nothing is perfect, and I could probably come up with some minor nit-picking points in criticism, if I were pressed - but it really is a surprisingly good camera. It took me a little while to tune into the way it works, but after that, I just became more and more impressed.
 
Back
Top