Rx100 rx100ii

Started 10 months ago | Discussions
Lynxo
Regular MemberPosts: 240
Like?
Rx100 rx100ii
10 months ago

Hi,

Would you buy a used rx100 for around $450 or a new rx100ii for $720?

How are used rx100's? Are these pretty robust reliable electronics or best to buy new?

The tilt screen is nice but saving $300...

vaxn8r
Regular MemberPosts: 405Gear list
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to Lynxo, 10 months ago

I don't think I would by a new rx100 ii today over a new RX100 i. The original is lighter and more compact. The RX100 is marvel given the features and output in such a tiny package. There are equal or better IQ's in larger packages already. Why muck wiith the formula? Size and weight are the main reasons to pay the premium in the first place. Otherwise get a Canon Sxxx

 vaxn8r's gear list:vaxn8r's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Sony RX100 Nikon D700 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
vw671
Contributing MemberPosts: 511Gear list
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to Lynxo, 10 months ago

I just bought a mint open box RX100 for $440 shipped very happy I did. I say go for the old one!

 vw671's gear list:vw671's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony SLT-A57 Sony a77 II Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD Sony DT 16-50mm F2.8 SSM +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
larsbc
Forum ProPosts: 11,494
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to vaxn8r, 10 months ago

vaxn8r wrote:

I don't think I would by a new rx100 ii today over a new RX100 i. The original is lighter and more compact.

40g lighter, and 2mm less in thickness.  So not much in the way of bulk difference.

For $300 in savings I'd probably be able to give up the flip-out LCD.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
drumsultan
Forum MemberPosts: 78Gear list
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to Lynxo, 10 months ago

The only reason I am not pulling the trigger for the 2 is there is a claim that it is better in low light which has not been proven by a full test here on DP. I don't need the new features on the 2 for my purposes. However I like to shoot in low light and the new sensor in the 2 is supposedly better for that. If that proves not to be significant then the RX100 will be my choice as soon as I read the review here on DP.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
vw671
Contributing MemberPosts: 511Gear list
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to drumsultan, 10 months ago

drumsultan wrote:

The only reason I am not pulling the trigger for the 2 is there is a claim that it is better in low light which has not been proven by a full test here on DP. I don't need the new features on the 2 for my purposes. However I like to shoot in low light and the new sensor in the 2 is supposedly better for that. If that proves not to be significant then the RX100 will be my choice as soon as I read the review here on DP.

Every test I've read comparing the two says that the mk2 has a 1/3 stop advantage. If that's worth ~$250 to you then get the Mk2. In practice I don't think most people will notice that big of a difference.

 vw671's gear list:vw671's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony SLT-A57 Sony a77 II Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD Sony DT 16-50mm F2.8 SSM +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
newellj
Contributing MemberPosts: 869Gear list
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to drumsultan, 10 months ago

drumsultan wrote:

The only reason I am not pulling the trigger for the 2 is there is a claim that it is better in low light which has not been proven by a full test here on DP. I don't need the new features on the 2 for my purposes. However I like to shoot in low light and the new sensor in the 2 is supposedly better for that. If that proves not to be significant then the RX100 will be my choice as soon as I read the review here on DP.

Better high ISO performance has been demonstrated by everyone and questioned by no one - but it's maybe half a stop at best compared to the RX100.  So, if that's the only advantage of the Mk2 from your perspective, it's a pretty steep premium for half a stop or so.

 newellj's gear list:newellj's gear list
Sony RX100 II Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
drumsultan
Forum MemberPosts: 78Gear list
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to newellj, 10 months ago

I would agree that it is pricey being that is my consideration. The focus is also supposed to be faster as well in the 2. I tend to trust the reviews here more than anywhere else. Call me cautious. I know that either camera would be fun. I am shooting M4/3 right now w/two lenses and am happy with the results but I also want a small camera that I can slip into my pocket and take anywhere without carrying a camera bag. The RX100 or RX100 II is the one...which one??? I await the test here.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
newellj
Contributing MemberPosts: 869Gear list
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to drumsultan, 10 months ago

The reason low light focus is a little faster is the greater low light sensitivity of the sensor - so it's real but not earth-shattering.

I had an RX100 and sold it and purchased the Mk2.  The tilt screen alone did it for me.  The slight gain in high ISO performance is nice.  The Wi-Fi I don't use.  The price difference is what you've got to evaluate.  I am a big m4/3 user but none of my m4/3 cameras will fit in my shirt pocket - the RX100 (both) do, and that makes a big difference.  Both make extremely good files, especially considering the size of the camera.

 newellj's gear list:newellj's gear list
Sony RX100 II Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jay A
Senior MemberPosts: 1,059
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to Lynxo, 10 months ago

The II has the following;

- Slightly better low light capability

- Flip screen

- Hot shoe which can be used to attach an external EVF

- WiFi --- to me, this was the deciding factor, not in order to transfer images to a computer but rather to use a phone (iphone or android) to actually view and shoot remotely. I can walk around with the camera hanging in front of me, make like I am doing something on my phone, and snap away candids without anyone eve knowing that this is what was doing. I find this feature absolutel wonderful and it cannot be done with the older version of the camera.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lynxo
Regular MemberPosts: 240
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to Jay A, 10 months ago

Great feedback. I'll stick with the rx100.
Can always get the ii down the road, maybe by then they will come up with a constant aperature throughout the zoom.

Thanks!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dkloi
Senior MemberPosts: 1,854Gear list
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to Lynxo, 10 months ago

I got the RX100M2 over the RX100 for a combination of factors. From my experience on other cameras, I knew the tilt screen would be very handy. The slightly better ISO performance is a bonus. And I'm finding the WiFi connectivity to be useful for remotely controlling the camera. Able to show shots to friends and family immediately on a larger smartphone screen is quite cool too.

I think I would have still enjoyed the RX100 had I got that instead but I know I would have had at the back of mind the thought that I would have been missing out on the better camera. YMMV.

Cheers,
Daniel.

 dkloi's gear list:dkloi's gear list
Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D Sony Alpha DSLR-A580 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony SLT-A77 Sony DT 16-105mm F3.5-5.6 +19 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
salla30
Senior MemberPosts: 2,312Gear list
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to newellj, 10 months ago

newellj wrote:

The reason low light focus is a little faster is the greater low light sensitivity of the sensor - so it's real but not earth-shattering.

I had an RX100 and sold it and purchased the Mk2. The tilt screen alone did it for me. The slight gain in high ISO performance is nice. The Wi-Fi I don't use. The price difference is what you've got to evaluate. I am a big m4/3 user but none of my m4/3 cameras will fit in my shirt pocket - the RX100 (both) do, and that makes a big difference. Both make extremely good files, especially considering the size of the camera.

I am considering a 2nd RX100 to replace my "tired" version 1. Am interested to read about IQ differences between mk1 and mk2, as, of course, the mk2 is tempting.

If you have any thoughts on this please let me know (having been an owner of the mk1 AND mk2 you are in prime position )?

 salla30's gear list:salla30's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX1 Sony RX100 II Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony E 35mm F1.8 OSS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lynxo
Regular MemberPosts: 240
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to dkloi, 10 months ago

I pulled the trigger on the 100.  I like to shoot a lot of pet and flower shots so the tilt would be killer to have.

went through the nex5,7 craze.  Short run with a77 and a65.  I think I will shoot more now that I can carry it around with me all the time.

Do you know if the stock wrist strap is robust enough for long term use?  I like Gordys but they are too big and thick for the 100.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Clayton1985
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,804
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to Lynxo, 10 months ago

Lynxo wrote:

Hi,

Would you buy a used rx100 for around $450 or a new rx100ii for $720?

How are used rx100's? Are these pretty robust reliable electronics or best to buy new?

The tilt screen is nice but saving $300...

It's not one feature but multiple features that make the MKII worth it for some people. Tilt screen, hot shoe for EVF or flash, multi terminal for cable release or other accessory, better low light performance, step zoom, wifi, etc. If you don't find enough value in these features then it makes perfect sense to go with the RX100 but the idea that you are paying $300 for a tilt screen is a bit of a stretch. That would be about like saying that an f2.8 lens is overpriced because I only shoot at f8..... then buy a slower lens but don't call the f2.8 lens overpriced just because you don't shoot at f2.8.

The tilt screen, improved low light performance, and wifi were all key features for me going in but after using the camera I realized that I needed a wired remote and now I find that I miss having a viewfinder in certain situations. I don't think I'll spring for the expensive RX1 viewfinder but if Sony offers a more affordable option then I would consider buying it.   So, it's possible that some people would see more value in the MKII over time even if they don't see it initially but if not then the RX100 is still a great camera and a good value.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
newellj
Contributing MemberPosts: 869Gear list
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to salla30, 10 months ago

I can only comment on raw performance, but for a short while I had my Mk1 and two Mk2s.  The raw files from the Mk2s were at least as sharp as the Mk1.  Therefore it should be the case that if you encounter any differences in OOC jpgs the camera's settings would be the reason, and could be adjusted to produce OOC jpgs from the Mk2 that equal those from a Mk1.

 newellj's gear list:newellj's gear list
Sony RX100 II Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
zoranT
Contributing MemberPosts: 890
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to newellj, 10 months ago

newellj wrote:

Better high ISO performance has been demonstrated by everyone and questioned by no one -

no one? Really? Laughable, better high iso performance of the RX100 ii is a debunked myth

"Better noise reduction in JPEG and crushed blacks is not what I call improved low light performance!"

or take RAW, where there is literally no difference between both cameras

"zero evidence of improved low light performance in the raw stills direct off the sensor. Opening the files with Adobe Camera Raw from the RX100 and RX100M2 shot at identical settings (ISO 3200, F5.6, 1/200) the black levels are lower in the RX100 Mark II shot before you make any adjustments. That hides some of the noise in the blacks but the overall exposure seems darker, causing you to shoot at a higher ISO or lift the shadows in Photoshop – possibly creating more noise. As you can see, noise levels are the same in both shots so I am not too impressed by Sony’s claims that the RX100 Mark II is better in low light than it’s predecessor."

http://www.eoshd.com/content/10838/sony-rx100-mark-ii-review-m2-evolution-in-times-of-revolution

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Lynxo
Regular MemberPosts: 240
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to Clayton1985, 10 months ago

Clayton1985 wrote:

Lynxo wrote:

Hi,

Would you buy a used rx100 for around $450 or a new rx100ii for $720?

How are used rx100's? Are these pretty robust reliable electronics or best to buy new?

The tilt screen is nice but saving $300...

It's not one feature but multiple features that make the MKII worth it for some people. Tilt screen, hot shoe for EVF or flash, multi terminal for cable release or other accessory, better low light performance, step zoom, wifi, etc. If you don't find enough value in these features then it makes perfect sense to go with the RX100 but the idea that you are paying $300 for a tilt screen is a bit of a stretch. That would be about like saying that an f2.8 lens is overpriced because I only shoot at f8..... then buy a slower lens but don't call the f2.8 lens overpriced just because you don't shoot at f2.8.

The tilt screen, improved low light performance, and wifi were all key features for me going in but after using the camera I realized that I needed a wired remote and now I find that I miss having a viewfinder in certain situations. I don't think I'll spring for the expensive RX1 viewfinder but if Sony offers a more affordable option then I would consider buying it. So, it's possible that some people would see more value in the MKII over time even if they don't see it initially but if not then the RX100 is still a great camera and a good value.

No, not saying just tilt, did not want to go into detail and write long post.

Yes, in the long run mkii is better value if you need Extras

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
salla30
Senior MemberPosts: 2,312Gear list
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to newellj, 10 months ago

thanks.

i was hoping for more "the Mkii is quite a lot better than Mki in these area..." rather than "Mkii can compete with Mki just about", sort of talk.

Ah... im a bit torn. Need to think if I need the xtras really or not.

 salla30's gear list:salla30's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX1 Sony RX100 II Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony E 35mm F1.8 OSS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
salla30
Senior MemberPosts: 2,312Gear list
Like?
Re: Rx100 rx100ii
In reply to salla30, 10 months ago

what I mean is... Im getting the general vibe that there really is little or no dif between 1 and 2 in terms of IQ, and MAYBE a little better high iso performance with the 2 (and that's subjective).

So Im left with ergonomics to justify it. And Im not sure I can personally. Thanks for your feedback btw, much appreciated.

 salla30's gear list:salla30's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX1 Sony RX100 II Sony Alpha NEX-5N Sony E 35mm F1.8 OSS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads