QUICK LINKS:VideosSample ImagesCamera TimelineLink Directory

connect.dpreview.com geasrshop.dpreview.com

News ReviewsBuying GuideSample Images Articles Cameras LensesPhonesPrinters Software Forums Galleries Challenges

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 II Review

September 2013 | By Allison Johnson with additional material by Shawn Barnett

20.2MP | 1" BSI CMOS | $750/£649 (MSRP)

True breakthrough products are rare in consumer electronics and perhaps even more rare in the digital camera space. The Sony Cyber-shot RX100 was one of those rare products that caught the attention of casual photographers, enthusiasts and critics alike. It successfully fitted a large 1”-type sensor into a compact camera so inconspicuous that without knowing otherwise, a casual observer would assume it to be a point-and-shoot like any other. Unassuming to the eye, it succeeded in pulling off an impressive trick - delivering excellent image quality from a truly pocketable camera.

Now Sony has introduced the RX100 II, sold as a sister model to the existing camera. A new, back-illuminated 20MP sensor (the largest BSI chip we've yet encountered), gives a claimed 40% improvement in low-light sensitivity, which Sony says will allow the RX100 II to focus faster in low light than its predecessor, as well, of course, as producing cleaner high-ISO images.

Meanwhile, the camera's enthusiast appeal is bolstered by the addition of a Multi-Interface hot shoe, allowing use of external flashguns or, significantly, accessories such as an electronic viewfinder. The rear screen also now tilts up and down, which makes the RX100 II more flexible to use and more at ease in bright light. Impressively, Sony achieved this while adding just 2mm to the camera's depth - so it retains its pocketable prowess. The RX100 II has a list price of $750 - $100 more than that of the original RX100.

Key Features:

1"-type Exmor-R BSI-CMOS sensor (13.2 x 8.8mm, 3:2 aspect ratio)
20.2 million effective pixels
28-100mm (equiv), f/1.8-4.9 Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* lens
Steady-Shot image stabilization
ISO 160-12,800 (Down to ISO 100 and to 25,600 expanded)
NFC-mediated Wi-Fi allowing file transfer and control from smartphones
Rear control dial and customizable front control ring
10fps continuous shooting in 'Speed Priority' mode
Tiltable 3" 1.2M-dot 'WhiteMagic' LCD screen
13 Picture Effects (33 with variations)
Memory Recall feature can store up to three groups of custom settings
1080p60 video, (AVCHD) with MP4 option (50p in PAL regions)
Built-in stereo microphones
330-shot battery life (CIPA)

The RX100 II also manages to find room to include Wi-Fi capabilities that can be set-up using near field communication (NFC) if you have a smartphone that supports it. Those of us without NFC in our mobile devices will have to set the Wi-Fi up manually. The RX100 II's video capabilities have also been expanded, with the camera now offering the ability to capture 1080p footage at 24 frames per second, in addition to the 60p and 30p the current RX100 offers (50p/25p on European models). Sony now offers a filter adapter for the RX100 II and its predecessor, a $30 accessory that makes it possible to use 49mm filters with either camera.

Following on the heels of a hit

The RX100 was well received by consumers, and when we reviewed it last year it earned a Silver Award (mainly in response to user interface concerns). It wasn't just another enthusiast compact camera, it was truly a stunning piece of engineering. Now, the pricier RX100 II promises better low light performance, faster auto focus and the option to add a viewfinder/flash/remote trigger.

With the RX100 still on the market (and selling for a more-attractive $600 in the U.S. and £549 in the U.K.) do the RX100 II's additions and improvements make it worth the extra investment? If a tilting screen and the ability to use accessories aren't deal-makers, does the image quality justify its expense? Read our full analysis.

If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review before coming to your own conclusions.

Images which can be viewed at a larger size have a small magnifying glass icon in the bottom right corner of the image, clicking on the image will display a larger (typically VGA) image in a new window.

To navigate the review simply use the next / previous page buttons, to jump to a particular section either pick the section from the drop down or select it from the navigation bar at the top.

DPReview calibrate their monitors using Color Vision OptiCal at the (fairly well accepted) PC normal gamma 2.2, this means that on our monitors we can make out the difference between all of the (computer generated) grayscale blocks below. We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally A,B and C.

GearShop

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 II Compact Camera●

$748.00

Buy on GearShop

Sony DSC-RX100M II Cyber-shot Digital Still Camera 20.2MP, Black	$679.99
Sony DSC-RX100M II Cyber-shot Digital Still Camera 20.2MP, Black	$679.99
Focus Camera Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100M2/B RX100M2 RX100M II RX100MII 20.2MP Wi-Fi Digital Camera with F1.8 Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T Lens and Full HD 1080p Video at 60fps + Sony 64GB SDHC Class 10 Memory Card + Wasabi NP-BX1 Battery Pack + Sony Camera Case + Micro HDMI Cable + Focus Multi Memory Card Wallet	$748.00
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100M2/B RX100M2 RX100M II RX100MII 20.2MP Wi-Fi Digital Camera Bundle with Sony 64GB Memory Card + Wasabi Power Replacement Battery for Sony DSC-RX1 + Sony Black Carrying Case + Wrist Grip Strap + Camera Accessories	$788.00
Sony DSC-RX100M II DSC-RX100M2 DSC-RX100MII RX100M2 RX100MII DSC-RX100M II Cyber-shot Digital Still Camera 20.2MP, Black Bundle with 64GB Class 10 High Speed Card, Spare Battery, Micro HDMI Cable SD Card Reader, Mini Tripod + More!	$759.00
Sony DSC-RX100/B 20.2 MP Exmor CMOS Sensor Digital Camera with 3.6x Zoom	$598.00
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100M2/B RX100M2 RX100M II RX100MII 20.2MP Wi-Fi Digital Camera Bundle with Sony 32GB Memory Card + Wasabi Power Replacement Battery for Sony DSC-RX1 + Sony Black Carrying Case + Wrist Grip Strap + Camera Accessories	$768.00
Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-RX100mII DSC-RX100m II DSC-RX100M2/B RX100 II + LoweProCase (Sage) + Battery + Charger + Giotto's Blower + Lens Pen Cleaning System + 64GB Kit	$748.00
Sony Cyber-Shot DSC-RX100mII DSC-RX100m II DSC-RX100M2/B RX100 II + LoweProCase (Red) + Battery + Charger + Giotto's Blower + Lens Cleaning System + 64GB Kit	$748.00
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 Digital Camera (Black) 32GB Package 3	$598.00
Sony DSC-RX100 II Cyber-shot Digital Still Camera DSC-RX100 MARK II	$734.99

Show all listings (11) ...

Get more prices from Amazon

Comments

Total comments: 411

I couldn't believe what I was reading in the 'Final Word' of the review about the 'shooting experience'. I agree with the criticisms about the Control Ring, but then to compare the camera to others that aren't anything like pocketable just shows me that DPR don't 'get' the RX100M2 . It was the same with the RX100 review.

10 upvotes

Maybe just bad luck. No dust in our RX100 and it was a preorder and has been used often.

NOTE: this was in reply to the "dust in optics" by SETI.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Returned my RX100 due to dust in optics. 2 weeks was enough to pump 3 dust particles and it was just summer street photo walking. Will not risk again

0 upvotes

That´s almost inevitable with compacts. I hed issues with my S100s´ lens (got stuck open), so sent it to the service and sold right away.
I know this could happen to interchangealbe lenses too, but those can be changed (unlike lens on a compact).

0 upvotes

That S100 thing is fault that Canon is aware of and repairs free of charge even when you're out of warranty. Once fixed, it should be not a problem anymore.

1 upvote

Note: we purchased the RX100 when it first came out (preorder! rare for me) and no dust yet with lots of use. Maybe just luck but dust got in our older S90.

1 upvote

Fuji X100 got similar issue (actually - even worse considering the amount of reports people made).

1 upvote

Awards, awards, awards....
Why do people care?
A site which gives 95% of all reviewed cameras (above the travel zoom category) an award just gives them away, rendering them meaningless.
An award should be by definition something for rare, top of the class products. What DSLR was the last not to get an award here?
See...

2 upvotes

well, largely DPR only test cameras worth testing, and not the mass of useless compacts for example.

I also think we're in a very rich era of camera development and the pace is such that each new camera generally does bring something to the table.. (and some more than others.. :-)

1 upvote

No, I don't see it that way. Even at a time when they were still reviewing most available DSLRs they all got awards.

1 upvote

The UI is fiddly and various shooting restrictions are annoying, but my primary user complaint is how super tiny the thing is. Did it really need to be this small? Could've made it a bit wider and incorporated a proper control wheel. The X20 (for less money) blows this away in terms of ergonomics and style. The AG-R1 grip is mandatory, so is a leather case.

In the RX100M2's defense, it does take unbelievable images. I'd say this is more than a full stop above where Micro 4/3 was in the 12MP days, easily. I'd bet the 1" 20.1MP gives the new 16MP models a real challenge, too.

I find the WiFi almost useless. Sure, you can send images to your phone with no problem, but the images get resampled down. Sending to PC involves dealing with firewall and UDP issues, and while I was able to connect, the transfer itself is slow, and there's no automation ala smartphones sending to DB. To do that, you might as well load it off SD or USB cable.

0 upvotes

Well, generally when you're sending to a smartphone it's for immediate sharing so it's likely it'd get downsampled anyway... Although I agree, if they're going thru the trouble of building in Wifi/NFC and developing the app they might as well hist give people the option.

I don't know if the review's comment about NFC pairing been smoother than other's implementation was a dig at Panasonic's effort (who else is doing NFC?); I admit the latter is occasionally fiddly and the difference in pairing during capture and pairing for instant transfer during playback is initially confusing, as is remembering to open the app first...

At least Panasonic gives you the option to do full res transfers tho, not to mention a lot more control while in remote control. Now if they'd only put out an uber LX7 replacement with Wifi and a 1" sensor...

0 upvotes

I thought PlayMemories app has the option to download original full-size images. At least with QX100/QX10 PlayMemories app has that option

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

1 upvote

Yep, make it somewhat bigger and put a 24-120 equiv. lens on it, and I am all eyes.

Cheers

0 upvotes

et2

in earlier versions of playmemories, it only sent a 2 megapixel image.

That may have changed in the recent few updates, but that's how it was when i had a NEX-5R.

0 upvotes

Why are people complaining that the swivel display makes it chunkier? Is 2mm really the straw that breaks the camel's back? It's thick for a pocket cam, but the new display didn't change that significantly... Could it be thinner without it? Maybe, but then there'd be people asking for a touchscreen instead (pretty sure it was mentioned once already here) which also contributes to thicknesses.

It can't be all things to all people... Sony oughta consider replacing both models next year tho. RX150: as slim as possible and still $600 (price ain't coming down until it's got some competition sensor-wise at the same size), RX200: enthusiast focused model with hotshoe, swivel display, and maybe even a built in EVF, maybe a bit larger, $700-800.

Then they can please everybody and they're poised to scale the price of the low end model if any serious competitors show up without sacrificing any on the high end model. I'd buy a slightly slimmer low end model in a heartbeat.

5 upvotes

Did they fix the annoying lag when first zooming in during playback mode btw? Bugged the hell out of me when I tried the original, and zooming during playback was generally fine, it was just that one delay when you first zoomed in... Much more annoying than the divide between stills and video, that's somewhat subjective (tho having the option to have it either way would be best).

0 upvotes

I don't undrstand complains about clickless ring. For me it is perfect, when I shoot videos, change setting, or defocus insensibly...
I've bought mkI just after it appeared in the market, and I have to say, all those "Cons" in the review are just made up sundries. These "cons" are not of those, that could annoy you in everyday use.

2 upvotes

What makes your conclusion any more valid?

0 upvotes

I am delighted I bought this little pocket rocket. I am 73 and finding heavy gear too much to carry walking around. Just went to Romania for a week with a canon 600D, sony nex6 and this little camera and ended up using the rx100ii most of the time as I never print more than 13x19 and take raw. The only thing I hate is the memory recall as twice in the dark I pressed it by mistake and found later I had taken jpeg and not raw. Not sure what I did but had to reset the camera. well done sony. Look forward to FF in October. The LCD is so good I don't need a viewfinder.

1 upvote

Thinking about it more, this camera is so innovative, so peerless, so amazing for its size, so without competition, pushes the envelop SO MUCH, if this is not a GOLD, what is???

18 upvotes

Usabilty/price. But if it works for you, who cares, then it's gold for you which is great. Go buy one and create some photographs.

1 upvote

$499.00 retail price, it would have probably got gold.

0 upvotes

:) i bought one the first week it came out. I also bought the RX100 the first week it came out. yes the price is punchy. but it is punchy for a reason. no competition. still. a full year on. nobody is even getting close.

i think the price is justifiable. yes, it costs as much as a mid range, APS-C DSLR. but it takes just as good pictures. So i don't see why people are complaining.

BTW, I'm not a Sony sales rep. my full frame camera is a Canon, and I love Nikons, too. (Had my D600 not spit oil all over its sensor, I would be on Nikon.) But whenever i touch a Sony camera, it stuns me how much better the functionality is. they are years ahead of Canikon in terms of giving the customer what the customer wants.

5 upvotes

This should be a GOLD. Really.

I owned the RX100. I didn't last a year. So I had to buy the RX100II. It's amazing.

I HATE the tilting screen (and the hot shoe, although less so.) It makes the camera bulkier, and its completely useless. This camera should fit into my pocket. The RX100 barley fit in there. The MkII is worse.

Re some of the negatives listed in the above review: the tracking AF is a lot more reliable than on my full frame Canon (Canon's AI servo really blows.) To be fair, given the smaller sensor / much thicker focus plane, it is easier to get it right here than on full frame.

Re the shooting experience, I love it. I put everything I need on the Fn Button. Works really well. Sure, if you are coming from Canikon, it'll be different. But I find it better than Canon's.

The functionality of this thing blows my mind. I wish my Canon 6D could do this much.

What's badly needed is a touch screen that doesn't tilt, and the MkIII will be a real winner.

DEFINITELY A GOLD!

1 upvote

The flip screen may be useless for you (and the camera does have some useless elements, for me) but it is as functional as any similar display you see on other cameras without it being full swivel; with swivel mount likely adding even more bulk.

It's funny, the UI functionality part of this is what disappoints me the most. The IQ is astonishing for the size (if not price).

0 upvotes

It's a shame that manufacfurers keep thinking people don't need viewfinders anymore. It may be the case, of course, that people really don't need viewfinders anymore. I sincerely hope, though, that many people will buy Panasonic's LF1, the only enthusiast-small-compact camera with built-in viewfinder at this point of time, which, by the way, also has at least a minimum of telephoto capability (200 mm eq.). Why doesn't the LF1 get reviewed, by the way? I think it's the most interesting compact camera on the market today (alongside its Leica branded sibling).

(As for the "award", I couldn't care less, but on the other hand I wonder why cameras without viewfinders get rewards at all ;-)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting

4 upvotes

I imagine the P&S market in general doesn't much care about viewfinders since they were weaned off them ages ago, and the newer generations (born into modern smartphone use) were never even exposed to them. Then on the opposite end of the spectrum, enthusiasts' opinion of EVFs vs optical viewfinders are still pretty divided... And it probably wasn't very cost effective to slap even a low res EVF unto a pocketable camera until a few years ago.

I actually bought myself an LF1 so I guess that much might make ya happy, tho the EVF wasn't amongst the top three reasons why I got it. Zoom range/aperture, size, and Wifi/NFC implementation would probably top the list for me... And the price was just about what I was willing to pay for a pocket camera (if I could get an RX100 II for $600 I'd probably choose that, but at $750 it's a bit much).

I've used the EVF on the LF1 a bit and I can appreciate it's handy to have (it made it easier to take stable shots while zoomed in on a concert), but I'm also seriously thinking of now getting a M43 model sans an EVF, so what do I know... :P

0 upvotes

Because not everyone needs or wants a viewfinder on a tiny pocket camera.

1 upvote

I agree. I'm waiting for an improved version of something like the LF1 with a 1mb viewfinder. I don't mind if the camera is a bit bigger. The LF1 viewfinder was a little bit too low res for me as I've got used to the Oly VF-2 with my Olympus XZ-1

0 upvotes

@everyone "crying" for the Silver award choice - if you really think all it takes for a camera as a photographer's tool to get a Gold award is its great sensor disregarding usability as a photographer's tool you probably don't take that many photographs.

Don't bother reading reviews. Read paper specs and order through Amazon/Gearshop accordingly.

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting

2 upvotes

This review is very good but it can be summed up by the following:

Next time Usain Bolt wins the 100m he should be given a silver medal.

Comment edited 49 seconds after posting

28 upvotes

The Olympus XZ10, with a smaller sensor, has an optically much better lens, and that lens remains faster through out the zoom range.

The Olympus can also be used through ISO 2000, while it looks like this Sony tops out at about ISO3200.

Unless you're counting video quality, not an Olympus strength, or an available EVF, the Olympus beats this Sony--and the Olympus is a lot less expensive, more pocketable too.

So yeah there are problems with this camera, that other small still cameras best.

I'm less familiar with it than the Olympus, but I suggest you look into the Fuji X20 too.

0 upvotes

RX100 in imaging-resources studio shots easily out resolved XZ10. If DPR shoots the new scene with XZ10, you will see RX100 20 MP would do the same here.

The old studio scene was not credible as it was too small. That meant the studio scene was only reflecting close focusing performance of a lens, not real world performance.

So no you're wrong. RX100's 20 MP sensor and lens combo is better than XZ10.

0 upvotes

ET2:

Drop the more pixels = better camera thing, that only matters if you're going to do lots of cropping.

The Olympus has an optically better lens, and that lens is faster thru the zoom.

Yes the Sony is better at higher ISOs, but its lens limits what it can do.

You see I have real world shots from the Olympus, I'm not using the studio scene.

And don't mistake, I think the Sony is a plenty good camera, with a very good sensor, it's the lens that's that needs be better.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

RX100 resolves more detail, has better dynamic range, lower noise, and focuses faster.

No contest here.

1 upvote

I don't like the new studio scene. :( lol

1 upvote

The video samples are, as usual for this site, nearly useless. I've told dpreview before about how we need more useful videos that show AF/AE performance, etc. etc. But you're not interested in improving things I guess.

1 upvote

You could always get a video camera -- which this isn't.

0 upvotes

Oh I see, that's why it shoots 1080p60 video w/stereo audio and manual control then? Give the camera whatever name you wish - it's irrelevant. I assume this site basically ignores video because they don't really "like" video and are into still photography more. Whatever. That's just incredibly stupid if so.

1 upvote

May the crying over silver begin.

Oops, too late. :)

3 upvotes

Can someone help me out please. I have noticed, from this test scene (even the one before) that the D7100 has yellow 'patches' or 'blotches' in its images starting at ISO3200. Seems quite bad. I have noticed this is other Nikons too.

And at this ISO the Sony has cleaner images. However this can't be, right? The Nikon is supposedly one of the best apsc and the sony has smaller sensor by far, not to mention its only a compact.

Is this something to do with noise reduction approach? Appreciate if anyone could, errr, shed some light.

0 upvotes

Nikon has this broken JPEG engine for years now. These mucus-like splotches look especially "nice" on the faces in low-light portraits.

0 upvotes

I wish me the nikon1 would have this sensor!
manfred

2 upvotes

Other than the illogic silver award. It's a good review as ever.

For me RX100 has been the best compact travel camera from release and has not been challenged since.

RX100M2 is a sweeter renovation.

4 upvotes

Reading the above, I don't understand why this camera doesn't get a gold award. It seems to me something to do with the shooting experience. Or perhaps it's the price. But to say that it can't be beaten for features and image quality while remaining pocketable does beg the question of why it's only silver. It seems to me that this assessment reflects the reviewers' personal preferences a little too much and not enough of the review's systematic analysis.

16 upvotes

I'm really looking forward to the RX10 (APC-C version).

0 upvotes

This is funny. The dumbed down mini-Rebel SL1 gets gold with a 78% score. The best in class Sony RX100MKII gets silver with a higher 79% score. No logic whatsoever.

45 upvotes

Yeah, that SL1 review makes no sense.

9 upvotes

The award is based primarily on the reviewer's opinion of the camera. We award it after spending a lot of time with the camera and considering questions like, Would we buy one? Would we tell our friends to buy one? Would we tell most of you to buy one? The score informs that decision, but doesn't make the decision. It's an award, not a calculation. Follow the link and scroll down to "The new awards" http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4416254604/camera-scores-ratings-explained

5 upvotes

But as it turns out, most of what we all recommend to other is things we are comfortable with, i.e. stuff from our home turf.
The most obvious reason is that if we recommend anything else than what we own ourselves, our own choices comes in question.
Hence, all awards needs to be seen thru the eyes of the reviewer.
Tbh Shawn, you lost a lot of credibility in my eyes when you tested a Canon with your favorite F/4 tele zoom.
- Anyone can figure out that you will approve the result of that test!
How many other brands of cameras will you show the same courtesy?
Are you willing to build your own set of favorite lenses for all brands, and give all tested cameras the same courtesy?
The sad thing is, you don't come accross as someone who realises it yourself. So there is a big potential right there.

Oh, maybe I'm presuming stuff here, so let's rephrase:
For which SLR mounts do you have a set of favorite lenses?

3 upvotes

This camera which has "Image quality is at the top of its class" scores 79% and a silver award and the Canon Eos 100/D 78% and a gold award...

*scratches head*

No I don't get it

17 upvotes

please see: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4416254604/camera-scores-ratings-explained

Namely "There is no direct link between the overall score and the awards: they are not given automatically to cameras reaching a certain threshold"

1 upvote

I have the thing and I can attest that it's silver level. Amazing IQ alone does not make a perfect camera. It has issues with the practical functionality of the WiFi feature, in-hand ergonomics and general mechanics of use. It's really a gem in many ways, but an imperfect one.

0 upvotes

I agree, Make the camera a little bit larger, the sensor a little bit smaller and the lens a bit faster and you would have had a good handling, versatile camera with very good IQ and it would still be pocketable for most people.

1 upvote

I don't understand. This is the best camera in its class, but only received the silver award. Why? Sure, it has its flaws but there's nothing better in its class (similar size and weight).

Comment edited 27 seconds after posting

37 upvotes

I hope Sony read the review and design new version which is much better and get the GOLD

0 upvotes

Perhaps because of the price bump

2 upvotes

Well, it is competing now with the mk1. Perhap mk1 is still a better over all deal now that mk2 is out. mk2 is not as innovative as the original rx100

0 upvotes

I think the slow tele end of the zoom range should have been mentioned as a weakness and the rapid drop in aperture. It goes from f/1.8 to f/2 just changing from 28mm to 29mm, which is a joke. To really standout form the first version, it should have been f/4 at tele end, 24mm at wide end, placed more emphasis on improving lens quality as it's clearly soft at the edges and corners of the test scene, had 1/4000 shutter speed, at least allowed monochrome filters in RAW+jpg, kept the RAW files used for the HDR mode, bundled it with an EVF at a good discount.

Still a great little camera, but I'm not really seeing much reason to get this over the original

4 upvotes

We agree on the quick drop in maximum aperture, and it is mentioned about halfway done the image quality page: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-cybershot-dsc-rx100-m2/6

There is a black and white 'Creative Style' mode available in Raw+JPEG, but the monochrome filter effect modes are not available in Raw+.

1 upvote

You're right THX1138. If they add those improvements, especially allowing RAW+ on the efx, I'll upgrade to the M3! (But that "slow" tele end isn't so bad at all compared to a lot of kit zooms).

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

What a "joke" is that they put some an impressively large sensor in an impressively small body, and yet some people (you) try to find something to complain about.

Is it a problem that it doesn't cook eggs? Perhaps you'd like to complain that you can't change the lenses on it. Or that it doesn't have a full frame sensor in it.

I haven't seen anything that would suggest that it's physically possible to make a faster lens, with that sensor size, in that size of camera body. Have you? What would you suggest, that they make the camera bigger? If you want that, you can buy an lx7 (with a smaller sensor), or a m43rds, or a dslr.

4 upvotes

Okay, I see what you mean now.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

Did I not say it's still a great camera. As for making the camera bigger, they already did by puting the swiveling LCD, it's much thicker now. I would have preferred the camera grew a little for the faster lens. We are only talking half a stop, yet you are carrying on like a pork chop as though I asked for f/1.8 throughout the range.

Oh thanks for your permission to buy other cameras, but I already have them and won't be adding the Sony to my collection.

1 upvote

No. The problem is the people making these kind of comments don't understand what it actually takes to manufacture this kind of camera. Please looking up MTF, and it's implications to lenses. Don't just be annoying consumers who gripe about features that aren't actually feasible. Grip about low res raw video, but not about this lens please.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting

1 upvote

2mm = 'much thicker now'..?

I've never seen so much hyperbole as in this comment thread, and that's saying something on DPR.

3 upvotes

The first person to invent a blow-up camera with stick-on features will be a multi-gazillionaire.

2 upvotes

I liked the control ring on the RX100. It operated smoothly with a quiet clicking sound. The corners were somewhat soft at wide angle and there seemed to be a lot of plastic in the all-metal body.

If you look at the the test chart shots for the image quality compared (daylight) the lower left corner is much better than the lower right corner. I ran into a similar thing with mine. But I really did like that control ring.

0 upvotes

I thought "Carl" has to be removed for the previous "Carl Zeiss" brand name to become "Zeiss" alone...

1 upvote

I recently purchased an RX100M2 and am very pleased with it. It delivers still and video results that surpassed my expectations, and has a quick menu and enough assignable function buttons and dials to provide a very capable shooting experience even for those who never go near the "Automatic" modes.

I agree with the criticisms of the front control ring - it is frustrating to use because of the lack of feedback and rather erratic response to movement. And the camera really needs to have the optional Sony grip affixed to be decently "ergonomic". But those are really the only two negatives on an otherwise very impressive product.

It's an expensive product, but it's really in a class of its own.

2 upvotes

I tried a Sony rx100 mk II for some street life. Bought one and returned it within the hour.* Great camera for many things but didn't find it too hot for street life work. I sincerely find the Pentax Q line faster with greater usability for that kind of work. And the Sony at tele goes very slow.

Still have to give sony the kudos for packing so much high tech in the little space and above all the LCD. The LCD is hands down best in class of any LCD I have seen on any camera. With the power on sun mode I had direct clear sky sunlight falling on it and it still was very visible with great contrast. The fuji xm1 for example has a mode like that but the LCD becomes washed out and hard to judge exposure.

Sony- if you could make a camera like this with faster response, less zoom range and higher quality lens (wasnt too impressed with some of the ghosting) and faster I would be interested. Or even a prime set. But for now it just comes across to me as a camera trying to be "too smart" and "trying too hard"- sort of what Zack Arias said in the x100s review.

* I made it darn clear to the store I may return it according to their policy if it didn't work for me to make sure and they fully encouraged me to give it the try and return if it didn't work. I double clarified that they were cool with that before buying.

2 upvotes

Cool. What's even cooler is if they let you do it again.

0 upvotes

Since when does 13.2 mm equal 1 inch?

0 upvotes

@Stizer23- they do, that's why they have the policy. I do not buy with the intent to play and return. I buy with the intent to try to keep. That's how I got the Fuji X-E1 (same store) along with two lenses, so they know me already.

0 upvotes

@roserez- I guess you are not replying to what I posted.

0 upvotes

prime please..

0 upvotes

Total comments: 411

Editorial content

Product database

Community

About us Write for us Advertise with us FAQ Feedback Interest-Based Ads Privacy Legal

All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998 - 2013 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.

Mobile site