|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
02/06/2014 10:03:28 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by Mike:
Thanks Ann, i'm still up in the air on whether I want to splurge for this of go with a Canon G1x or G16. The Sony has a smaller sensor but it keeps topping the G1x on all the image quality comparisons I can find.
im still not sure the Sony is worth the xtra $200 or $300 over the canon.. |
Yeah, the Sony is all about IQ and size. When the designers were making choices, they optimized for those two things. Everything else, including price, was secondary.
If I were choosing today, the Fuji x100s would be in serious running. At the time, I was concerned about the Fuji's fixed focal length, but since I've had it, I almost always use it at 28-35mm, and the Fuji is all sorts of awesomeness at that focal length. But that's another $500 over the Sony... |
|
|
|
02/06/2014 11:20:11 PM · #27 |
Being a big fan of the RX100, I have to add some RX100 love and comments.
Although I have the first gen RX100, I mostly agree with your review Ann, but I will add a few of my own impressions:
1) GeneralE, the Li batteries last a lot longer than AAs, and they are lighter to carry. The Sony OEM battery for this camera lasts forever. The third party cheap Wasabi batteries are very good, but they are about half what the incredible Sony battery lasts. Still, I can carry three of them for the less than the size and weight of 3 AAs.
Karen, if you haven't bought the charger yet, get the Wasabi charger and batteries...they are made in Japan and very good, especially since you can get 2 plus the charger for under $18.
2) Ann, I'm surprised you are having focus issues. My RX100 focuses essentially instantly, and I have it set to multi-area single shot focus, and it doesn't constantly prefocus. Yet I've never thought it to be slow (well, in a pretty dark room it's a slower than a SLR, but usually works well -- I have the focus assist light on.)
3) The base for the RX100I is 125, and IMHO you'd be hard pressed to find noise at that ISO. I always shoot RAW too, so no noise reduction, and I'm an avid pixel peeper! In general, noise is not bad through ISO 1600, it's there at 800+ but not a bad looking kind of noise. I've shot through ISO 6400 and the images are very usable if printed 8x12 or smaller.
Also, for anyone interested, check out the magnetic filter attachment from Carryspeed. I mentioned that too in the other RX100 thread
The major fault I have with this camera is that there's no viewfinder. It's a very good LCD, but not in bright sunlight as Ann says.
Second, on my RX100 I, the battery compartment door on the bottom tends to be easily popped open (the battery doesn't fall out though, because it's latched in.)
Third, the lens stops down significantly as you zoom. I would be in Heaven if they would make it a maximum of F4 even when zoomed, better yet, F2.8.
Pricey but worth it. Having the RX100, I can't justify the RX100 II as an upgrade. I was tempted by the RX10 though, and still am a bit! I bought the Panny FZ-200 though when it was on sale for around $350 to try and quell my desire to buy the RX10 at $1299. I'm sure the RX10 is better, but 24-600mm at F2.8 (very sharp Leica lens) trumps it, even though I am sure the RX10 will have much better IQ at it's more limited focal range!
|
|
|
|
02/10/2014 10:04:13 AM · #28 |
i picked up a canon g1x this weekend. so far i like it with one exception. its big. really big.
im going to be trying out out in the next few days and if im not blown away by the IQ, i may go with the Sony. its so much smaller.
|
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 06/06/2025 11:21:07 PM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 06/06/2025 11:21:07 PM EDT.
|
