RX100 vs RX100M2 RAW samples from ISO100 to 6400

Started Jul 19, 2013 | Discussions thread
Roland Schulz
Regular MemberPosts: 499Gear list
Like?
my conclusion so far, M2 wins...
In reply to Roland Schulz, Jul 22, 2013

Sony is right, the M2 is better than the M1, also in IQ!
I found the sensitivity is lower in the same ISO setting, 125 (M1) is very close to 160 (M2). Did´t find out yet what is "right". The following comparison rely on the native settings, ISO125 (M1) and ISO160 (M2) unlike otherwise noted.

The ~40% "improvement" is not so easy to find, but in sum it is there:

Noise: 
From RAW files luminance noise is a little bit smoother and chroma noise is a little bit less with the M2, but this advantage I´d say is close to invisible. Both are very close at native ISO.
From about ISO3200 on the M2 blocks shadow noise somewhat better as to be seen in my samples. The M1 produces more blue chroma noise in the shadows.
DR:
I´d say shadow detail can be pushed by a similar amount, but highlights can be recovered better from the M2, even when the shoot was a bit brighter.
I have no samples to post here now, since there are always "personal" things in the photos (car reg plates etc.).
In every of my test shoots it was easy to see that the M2 has a slight edge here.
Resolution:
There where many posts that the M2 would be worse in sharpness and resolution compared to the M1.
I´d call myself a pixel peeper sometimes, but I see NO loss in resolution in the M2 files. From my cameras the M2 is even better in the long end corners but this seems to be due to better lens tolerances I´m sure.
Colors:
It seems that the M2 has a different color response compared to the M1. ACR/LR doesn´t support own profiles for the M2 yet so these may not be my final findings.
The M1 sometimes clipped heavy reds, the M2 looks slightly better controlled. M2 is somewhat less saturated, but also that can be compensated. In the end it´s to early to place a final thought here.
WB shows totally different values in LR5. It´s about 4800k on the M1 where the M2 comes to about 7200k when both are calibrated to the same white subject. This may also be due to "wrong" color profiles in LR5.
AF:
I find the AF system of the M1 is different to the M2. The M1 feels a little bit snappier here and there, but the M2 gave me more reliable results in some cases.
In the end the M2 wins for me, now. May be some of the upper findings may be influenced by the profiles of ACR/LR5.
I find the differences to be quite small at all, one must decide himself if it´s worth the extra cash and the bigger size
Roland.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow