Previous news story    Next news story

Just Posted: Update to Sony RX100 II Samples Gallery

By dpreview staff on Jul 8, 2013 at 17:38 GMT
Buy on GearShop

We've just posted an update to our samples gallery taken with the new 20MP Sony Cyber-shot RX100 II. Now that we've had a little more time with the camera we've concentrated on getting a wider range of real-world shots, highlighting the potential of the camera's fast wideangle lens setting, and its improved low-light performance.

Click the links below to see our expanded gallery of real-world samples, and to visit our previously-published hands-on preview of the new camera, which features a 20MP BSI CMOS sensor and 28-100mm equivalent zoom lens.

513
I own it
339
I want it
92
I had it
Discuss in the forums
Our favorite products. Free 2 day shipping.
Support this site, buy from dpreview GearShop.
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 II

Comments

Total comments: 86
dividor
By dividor (8 months ago)

I got my RX100 M2 last week, and so far I have to say it's very impressive. For me, the low light capability in something so small is fantastic. Sure, it's not a DSLR with a prime, but for something in the pocket it's brill.

Here are some samples ....

http://regolith.org/blog/2013/08/10/mr-bombastic/

Admittedly not tack sharp, but given how dark it was I'm pretty happy so far.

0 upvotes
Rod Ballest
By Rod Ballest (9 months ago)

Sony DSC-RX 100 = Made in Japan.

Sony DSC-RX 100 II= Made in China.

Come on Sony you charge $ 100.00 more for something that was made in China I love my Japan made Camera I will no buy China made products, you lost me as a customer.

1 upvote
micahmedia
By micahmedia (9 months ago)

I'm not seeing that "improvement" in the raw files. Looks worse to me. Anybody else seeing that too?

0 upvotes
wild ta
By wild ta (9 months ago)

Can the RX100 II shoot videos in "miniature" effect?

It's not a complete dealbreaker for me to have that feature since the IQ looks amazing for a P&S however I do like using it from time to time on my Canon S100--just for fun. I found the Panasonic LF1 has the same feature as the Canon but I can't figure out if the RX100 II can do it. I only found the manual of the RX100 stating it can snap photos in "miniature" effect but not videos.

0 upvotes
FreedomLover
By FreedomLover (9 months ago)

Barney Britton, you were there :-)
Is there a yellow tint in the sky on some of the pictures?
Did you take snapshots with another camera for comparison?

The pictures are great, the lead picture exceptional. Congratulations to the one who took it.

0 upvotes
meanwhile
By meanwhile (9 months ago)

Three things I notice from these samples are well exposed shots, clean shadows, and lots of detail in the highlights. As someone who often uses a compact camera, that isn't a common combination. RAW would presumably give you another stop or two of latitude (though that is a guess) either way, and the high ISO looks pretty clean too. Impressive.

1 upvote
JeffAnderssen
By JeffAnderssen (9 months ago)

Agreed. This is exactly why I've pre-ordered this. Also the RX1/R, because I'm a curious idiot... one will be going back... I'm just not sure I could do the RX1/R justice and this one looks an incredible alternative

0 upvotes
Just Having Fun
By Just Having Fun (9 months ago)

Wow, looking at the graphs on DxO the RX100 and RX100II are virtually identical. For the overall score their is a 1 point difference.
My guess is Sony is applying even more NR to jpegs which kills detail but makes jpegs look better at higher ISOs. As for the RAW files, DxO found them to be almost exactly the same.

3 upvotes
ET2
By ET2 (9 months ago)

Not exactly the same. RX100 II has 1/3 stop lower noise.

4 upvotes
Kodachrome200
By Kodachrome200 (9 months ago)

again ET2 I that is nothing. raising the iso a third a stop does not increase the noise an appreciable amount. you wouldnt be able to tell the difference on a 16x24 print

1 upvote
bzanchet
By bzanchet (9 months ago)

No-RAW Sony cameras have much better jpegs colours than RX-100 IMO. I am amazed that I need to "fix" the images on a $650 camera...
Hope for a firmware update soon, or for the next gen of Canon and Olympus cameras with a sensor equivalent to the RX100.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 28 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
FreedomLover
By FreedomLover (9 months ago)

Bzanchet, what is wrong with the skin tones and how do you fix it?

0 upvotes
Darren Lee
By Darren Lee (9 months ago)

Is the articulating LCD screen helpful for bright sunlight also besides being able to shoot from the hip? I don't have a need for the hotshoe since i don't plan to get an EVF. If the lcd screen really improved on the brigth sunlight then i would likely get the RX100II...otherwise, i think i will buy the RX100.

Comment edited 27 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Jefftan
By Jefftan (9 months ago)

Can BSI actually worsen low ISO IQ?
I think that is possible
I would got a GR or Coolpix A and left the zoom to my TG-2 which is less than 10% of my pic

0 upvotes
photo perzon
By photo perzon (9 months ago)

the pictures on imaging-resource.com show at least at ISO 400 much les detail on the II

0 upvotes
Boky
By Boky (9 months ago)

something's seriously wrong with the colour.... does't look right, especially warm spectrum.

Boky

2 upvotes
Darren Lee
By Darren Lee (9 months ago)

so you guys think a firmware fix will be in order to resolve IQ issues?

0 upvotes
B1ackhat
By B1ackhat (9 months ago)

This is par for course for Sony. The color accuracy on the RX100 was awful and the score it received on IR supported that.

0 upvotes
FreedomLover
By FreedomLover (9 months ago)

This is interesting, B1ackhat, do you have a link and are there software filters for correcting it?

0 upvotes
bzanchet
By bzanchet (9 months ago)

I own a RX100 and I have to tell you, the colors look the same... and that is a bad thing.
The IQ on the camera is awsome, but it is biggest problem are the colours... specially skin tones...
If you are looking to buy this camera for its jpegs you are in for a bad surprise.

0 upvotes
Kodachrome200
By Kodachrome200 (9 months ago)

honestly what do you need a zoom lens for on a snapshot camera. its not like i am going to shoot sports or head shots with it. The fixed lens allows you to have a quality sensor in and a quality lens meet together in compact package in a way that is not otherwise possible. Zoom is overated for snapshot photography it really is rarely needed. certainly wouldnt choose either to be my only camera

0 upvotes
guyfawkes
By guyfawkes (9 months ago)

Can someone explain what a "real world" image is, please? Are there surreal world images or unworldly images it can also take?

2 upvotes
balios
By balios (9 months ago)

The real-world, as opposed to their studio scene shots.

real-world
noun
the realm of practical or actual experience, as opposed to the abstract, theoretical, or idealized sphere of the classroom or laboratory.

2 upvotes
tagomilonga
By tagomilonga (9 months ago)

What are you? ... 6 year old?

10 upvotes
wild ta
By wild ta (9 months ago)

Like MTV's "Real World"... LOL.

0 upvotes
sik_photos
By sik_photos (9 months ago)

I didnt look at the DXO ratings but i did look at the sample images. While Im not a big fan of the colors, wouldnt one have to admit this wins best camera that fits in your pocket?

9 upvotes
Kodachrome200
By Kodachrome200 (9 months ago)

ill take me Ricoh GR V anyday.

3 upvotes
ET2
By ET2 (9 months ago)

That's a fixed lens camera with F2.8 max aperture. No comparison.

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
1 upvote
jon404
By jon404 (9 months ago)

Can the GR V fit in a man's workshirt pocket?

That's my form factor... the XZ-1 and RX100 can do it... can the Ricoh?

3 upvotes
ET2
By ET2 (9 months ago)

Yes GR V can fit in a pocket, I would say, but it's fixed lens camera and it doesn't really have lowlight advantage that comes with APSC sensor, as the lens is one stop slower (F2.8 GR V vs F1.8 on RX100 II).

Comment edited 7 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Kodachrome200
By Kodachrome200 (9 months ago)

honestly what do you need a zoom lens for on a snapshot camera. its not like i am going to shoot sports or head shots with it. The fixed lens allows you to have a quality sensor in and a quality lens meet together in compact package in a way that is not otherwise possible. Zoom is overated for snapshot photography it really is rarely needed. certainly wouldnt choose either to be my only camera

0 upvotes
ET2
By ET2 (9 months ago)

Zoom lens is far useful for average consumer than a fixed 28mm lens like on Ricoh, period.

0 upvotes
Kodachrome200
By Kodachrome200 (9 months ago)

well now that you said period i have to agree with you

0 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (9 months ago)

Reply to Kodachrome200: LOL!

0 upvotes
Kodachrome200
By Kodachrome200 (9 months ago)

so i looked at DXOs ratings on the sensor got to say not impressed. Wasnt the idea of this newer and more expensive model to have better low light. It impoved by just a third a stop. its hard to even call that an incremental improvement it is hardly better at all.

2 upvotes
inFocus
By inFocus (9 months ago)

So the first thing you look at in a new camera model is sensor ratings? How odd.

1 upvote
Kodachrome200
By Kodachrome200 (9 months ago)

well when it is essentially the same as the old camera with a new sensor. yep i am just that odd

2 upvotes
Gwen22
By Gwen22 (9 months ago)

1/3 of a stop is not that bad at all , in one years separing the 2 sensors even with the BSI technologie we could'nt expect much more.
The add of the tilting screen and hot shoes while keeping the same size is also a worthing improvement!

3 upvotes
Kodachrome200
By Kodachrome200 (9 months ago)

when they announced it i honestly thought it would be getting into aps c territory. and i would bet money you couldnt tell the difference on a 16x20 print

0 upvotes
photo perzon
By photo perzon (9 months ago)

Why were the previous RX100 II samples dim and unfocused? These look good.

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (9 months ago)

They weren't unfocused - they were however shot in an extremely compressed timeframe on a crappy day (when we shoot for preview samples galleries we have to do so veryveryquickly and very close to our office).

3 upvotes
Tommygun45
By Tommygun45 (9 months ago)

Barney, c'mon now man. I love the work that you guys do and love this site but don't go down that road. If you can't post fair and realistic examples of what a camera can do why post them at all? It's not fair to the manufacturer or to the customers here who are trying to figure out how best to spend our hard earned dollars, know what I mean? The reviews in general are very well written and you guys do a great job but don't compromise it by saying you didn't have the time to take quality shots, or at least explain it when posting the original samples. (And maybe it was, I haven't seen them but based on that question and your response that is what I assumed, please correct me if I am wrong.)

5 upvotes
Kexi Cao
By Kexi Cao (9 months ago)

Barney, your comment will make people think that the RX100 can't take good shots in a "crappy day". If you have to have a nice day to get nice pictures, my iPhone 5 can do that but we all know RX100 is 100x better than iPhone 5.

1 upvote
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (9 months ago)

@Tommygun - I don't really see your point. When we get pre-release cameras, on the very rare occasions we're allowed to actually shoot with them, we usually have an extremely short time available to us to do it.

In the case of the RX100 II, I pretty much ran out of the office for a couple of hours one day before it started raining, took a few hurried shots that evening, and the next day the camera was in the studio all day, while we wrote the preview, and then the product was announced.

This is the point - we do what we can to get pictures on the site for you, then we follow-up when we have more time, post-announcement (when we don't have to hide the camera from view every time someone comes down the street towards us.)

The initial preview gallery was OK, given the contraints, but it wasn't the greatest, so I wanted to update it as soon as possible.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
9 upvotes
sagephotography
By sagephotography (9 months ago)

The previous samples were decent and showed image quality.... Which was the point of them. So many wannabee photographers online pretending they take amazing photographs I see.

0 upvotes
Tommygun45
By Tommygun45 (9 months ago)

Sorry Sage, we all can't be pro's like yourself. Nice gallery.

My point is, if I worked at Motor Trend and Ferrari gave me a car to write a review about, I wouldn't drive it down a dirt road to see how it handled or how fast it went just to be the first one to 'post my results.' Thanks for 'updating it as soon as possible' but you realize what that does right? When you post sub par photos or reviews of a product in a 'time constrained' manner are you being fair? I'm not some crazed Sony fanboy, just being a realist here.

1 upvote
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (9 months ago)

You know about embargos, right? Like when we're given a product 24 hours ahead of announcement, and only have that amount of time to prepare news and preview content...?

Would you rather we just said 'sorry, this just happened but we had no time to write or shoot anything, so we'll get back to you'? I'm not sure that would be a very sensible approach for us to take...

0 upvotes
Eric Hensel
By Eric Hensel (9 months ago)

I appreciate you posting the nuts and bolts of your decision-making, for those of us not in the business, Barney.
we never got these explanations in the 60's...no one explained anything...;)

0 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (9 months ago)

Don't worry Barney, I for one completely understand. It's one of those things that you just cant explain until you are in the situation yourself. Kinda like being a parent.

C

0 upvotes
sagephotography
By sagephotography (9 months ago)

Nice gallery? Where do you see my gallery? Shot for Armani and Audi, what about you? Fruitcake. PM me to see my gallery. It's wannabees like you on the forums that give photography a bad name. The sample images were decent and served their purpose. You, are a effing gearhead. Wannabee.

0 upvotes
Rooru S
By Rooru S (9 months ago)

Geez...maybe it's time to get myselft one of these RX-series. (RX1 still out of reach, but really want it!)

Need a comparison between the original RX100 and the upgraded RX100 II to decide which one to get since it seems both are going to stay in the market.

2 upvotes
angusmerlin
By angusmerlin (9 months ago)

Your shots are beautiful and at times visceral. One of the lake pictures reminded me of a backpacking trip in the High Sierras in California (picture #DSC00372). When looking at that one lake shot, I felt I could reach right into that shore water and stir up the underlying silt. Now that you have a broader realistic life feel for the RX100 Mark II, any chance that you could provide a comparison series of maybe 10-15 side by side tripod RX100 vs. RX100 Mark II shots similar to the pictures provided above? Other than low light shots, some now are reporting that still shots of the RX100 are actually sharper than the RX100 II. So, such a comparison series of shots would be very educational.

And, thanks again for the gorgeous pictures! Much appreciated.

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
angusmerlin
By angusmerlin (9 months ago)

And, Barney: For such a Sony RX100 vs. RX100 Mark II comparison study, it would be really interesting to see the untouched photo shots from both of the cameras side by side; and, then the finished pictures side by side to see what each of the cameras ultimately is capable of achieving.... Thanks!

0 upvotes
Geekapoo
By Geekapoo (9 months ago)

Absolutely love my RX100 and it's my go to small camera (the OM-D being my fav larger camera). Am curious to see a comparison for shots taken with the new vs. Original ......but am hardly disappointed with the RX100 now so doubt there is much they have done to warrant an upgrade or buying the new cam at a premium vs the RX100 at a discount. Oh and the slightly larger size/tilt rear LCD has no appeal to me.

1 upvote
Michael Stephen
By Michael Stephen (9 months ago)

I use my RX100 under a multi rotor for aerial photography, have a double page spread full bleed shot in an issue of Top Gear magazine.

0 upvotes
Mattoid
By Mattoid (9 months ago)

Please do a direct image comparison (with foreground and background elements to show blur amount and character) between the RX100 II and the Ricoh GR wide open at 28mm 35mm and 50mm equivalents. (interestingly the GR cropped to "1 inch" sensor size gives 50mm equivalent)

2 upvotes
Tapper123
By Tapper123 (9 months ago)

OK, you do have a point with the Ricoh GR. I still prefer the RX but the GR is a superb little camera, no doubt.

2 upvotes
Joe Ogiba
By Joe Ogiba (9 months ago)

I just checked Imaging Resource Comparometer of the Ricoh GR vs Sony NEX-3N @ 12800iso and the NEX-3N kills the GR. The NEX-3N is not much larger with the 16-50 PZ OSS and is much cheaper.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Mattoid
By Mattoid (9 months ago)

I took a look myself and couldn't see much in it. The hair on the dummy looked pretty un-detailed in both at that ISO. The nex did look more flattering though. The 35mm crop mode would be best to be used with the GR in that situation. As for size, the 3n body is the same at 34.6mm but the 16-50 adds a further 30mm, so for jacket poketability they are similar but the GR is just slim enough to be pant pocketable, which isn't the case with the nex unless you transport the lens separately. But you are right that at that price it is very attractive, and I actually will now look at that as a serious option so thanks.

0 upvotes
Tommygun45
By Tommygun45 (9 months ago)

You can always add the 20mm pancake to make it very portable. No let up in IQ either as many examples of that lens have shown.

0 upvotes
mugupo
By mugupo (9 months ago)

No matter how you slice it, the bokeh is still weak is nothing dramatic different than those smaller sensor point and shoot. For that money i would just EOS M with pan cake 20mm for less than half the price.

3 upvotes
Tapper123
By Tapper123 (9 months ago)

LOL, EOS M... probably the worst mirrorless camera in existence, and it's NOT pocketable; the RX100 I and II are. Just look at this size comparison: http://j.mp/15rQBnW

Even with the pancake, it's much bigger and heavier. And if you try to get some zoom to match the RX, it's ridiculously huge in comparison. Again, LOL EOS M.

And the RX bokeh is absolutely more impressive than smaller sensor cameras, though obviously (duh) it can't compare to much larger sensors. Again, it's a pocket camera.

There simply is no camera in this category that matches the RX series.

13 upvotes
cadet stimpy
By cadet stimpy (9 months ago)

Why do people always have to compare incomparable cameras in these comments? It drives me nuts...

12 upvotes
mcshan
By mcshan (9 months ago)

@cadet....I am with you there..someone will ask for pocket camera suggestions and ultimately be directed to a Canon Rebel. Camera and sensor size matters. Mention that the RX1 has great IQ and you can bet someone will bring up the LX7. Huh?

5 upvotes
Impulses
By Impulses (9 months ago)

Even the LX7 isn't pocketable in the way the RX100 is... Honestly, there IS no direct competition, that's why Sony can raise the price by a hundred bucks without batting an eye. The only cameras in the same category, e.g. pocketables with larger sensors/control ring/RAW, all cost half as much (give or take) and they all have 1/1.17 sensors (S110, P330, LF1, etc, there's not that many to begin with...).

1 upvote
sagephotography
By sagephotography (9 months ago)

If you want bokeh then there's things out there called full frame cameras.

Plus, look at magnum photographers. OHHH SOO MUCH BOKEH right? Not really. Pocketable, good high iso, decent zoom range with large aperture, stop moaning and use the tool that will achieve your artistic vision.

1 upvote
angusmerlin
By angusmerlin (9 months ago)

CameraDebate blog (July 11, 2013) actually has compared the Sony RX100 Mark II , a compact interchangeable lens camera and an SLR camera to each other. Taking into account the importance of choosing based on the purpose of a camera, for a compact camera and an overall achiever, they still chose the RX100 Mark II. Pretty impressive.

(PS: Hope it is OK to mention other blog sites. Wasn't sure...)

0 upvotes
angusmerlin
By angusmerlin (9 months ago)

@mugupo: Meant to open the replies & accidentally hit "like". Since no way to correct, am commenting instead that I do not agree with @mugupo.

0 upvotes
HomoSapiensWannaBe
By HomoSapiensWannaBe (9 months ago)

I would like a 1" sensor camera with a fixed 24-85 f2.0-4.0 full frame equivalent lens and built-in EVF. C'mon Sony, you know you can do it!

6 upvotes
ChicagoRob
By ChicagoRob (9 months ago)

Some of the nicest samples I've ever seen, regardless of sensor size. Absolutely superb image quality.

10 upvotes
Barend
By Barend (9 months ago)

Normally I take my Nikon D700 with a 50mm and 35mm for street photography but I'm afraid the RX100 took his place.
http://www.pictureplaza.nl/barend/amsterdam/

1 upvote
attomole
By attomole (9 months ago)

They're nice and i like the little sony, but can you get the subject to pop from the background as you could with your D700 and primes?

0 upvotes
Barend
By Barend (9 months ago)

Not exactly but de DOF of a 50mm is also reasonable and I have to take more pictures from the hip as they do not see me shooting. For that I use at least aperture 8.
The following pictures are made in Paris with my D700
http://www.pictureplaza.nl/barend/parijs/

0 upvotes
Tapper123
By Tapper123 (9 months ago)

attamole, can you carry a D700 and primes in a pocket?

I think some people are missing the whole point of a small pocket camera -- it's the camera you can always take with you. To dinner, on a walk, whatever, it can always be there. This alone is very valuable, and why the RX series has become so popular.

13 upvotes
mcshan
By mcshan (9 months ago)

@Tapper123...Good attempt to get attamole to understand but if his/her post wasn't sarcasm I have to wonder if he/she is capable of getting the huge vs small camera concept. Some people just don't get it.

1 upvote
Mikhail Tal
By Mikhail Tal (9 months ago)

Barney is the RX100 II the best compact camera ever?

2 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (9 months ago)

I think as far as IQ is concerned it's definitely a contender, but there's lots of work still to do ;)

9 upvotes
new boyz
By new boyz (9 months ago)

He said no, hehehe.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (9 months ago)

Much better, thanks.

0 upvotes
Tapper123
By Tapper123 (9 months ago)

DPR team, can you comment (yet) on the RX100 II compared to the original RX100, in terms of sharpness and color saturation? As you know, there has been concern on the Sony Cyber-Shot forum about this, due to comparisons made between early sample shots.

Is your copy of the II exhibiting any such issues in your opinion? If so, can changing in-camera settings (i.e. sharpening and saturation) produce images more similar to those from the original model?

Thanks for any insights.

2 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (9 months ago)

We're really just starting our testing - as soon as we've been able to get a good set of studio samples to compare against other cameras (including RX100) we'll add them to our previously-published content.

4 upvotes
Tapper123
By Tapper123 (9 months ago)

OK. Thanks, Barney.

1 upvote
fotografer
By fotografer (9 months ago)

RX100 series rule! Mine's the original version. Very happy to see there are visible improvements to the high iso pics. Well done!

6 upvotes
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (9 months ago)

Impressive little camera

3 upvotes
Digitall
By Digitall (9 months ago)

My first impression is that really improved the higher ISO, but at the cost of some loss of detail, nothing problematic but relevant. I still happy with my I version.

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (9 months ago)

Earlier bad links should be fixed now - sorry about that.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 86