There appears to be a difference between the mk2 and mk3 but from what I'm reading if you're shooting jpg the high ISO output is better on the mk2. The mk3 is supposed to have better sharpening. The drawback for me on the Canon is the lack of EVF. The mk3 has one although it's nothing to write home about.

What exactly did they copy, putting a 1" sensor in a standard compact camera body? It's nothing but a matter of choosing sensor size. It makes sense to use 1" not just because it is a good balance of performance and size, but also because other brands, including Sony, are using them.

The sensor size to body size equation in the rx100 was the revelation, the rest was pretty vanilla (until the built in EVF, which they didn't copy anyway).

question for DPR crew: how does the G7X handle when turned upside down for 'over-the-head' shots?

@hk: G1X2 needs stopping down 1-2 stops for good quality, especially at the extreme ends of the zoom range and for closeups. Probably the same goes for G7X (already clear at f/2.8 100mm). Do you know similar cameras that don't have this problem wide open? RX100 isn't great wide open either, although RX100-3 seems a bit better than G1X2 wide open. If the image quality wide open is insufficient, maybe better buy a camera with slower (smaller, lighter, cheaper) lens that is sharp at f/3.5, e.g. GM5 with kit zoom?

Never, ever? Don't worry, I promise if you look at a photo taken with direct flash, your face won't melt like in Raiders of the Lost Ark...

I'll admit that I generally do everything I can to avoid direct flash as well, but if you ask me, some photos deserve to be taken even if you can't have the perfect technical conditions. Sometimes I can get pretty good results without such harsh lighting with a combination of turning the flash power down a bit and then playing with the shadows a bit in post.

I guess to each his own, but just try to keep this individual point in perspective in the interest of a well balanced review. For example, I understand reviewers prefer a control dial with feedback over the clickless style on the rx100 series, but the harping on it over and over gets a bit much.

It's personal preference, really. And, like I said: an unfortunate omission, certainly not a deal-breaker even for me.

The only time I use direct flash is when it's (well and far) off-camera... at which point I actually really love the look of it.

Oh - the other thing I'll do with a bounce-flash is point it upward and use a business card (white) to redirect some of the light forward. Kind of like the pull-up white card on 580/600EX. Helps make the light a bit more flattering.

Does that also assume that natural light is always superior to artificial light? Don't get me wrong, I usually prefer it when I can get it, but many studio photographers would probably beg to differ.

Direct flash just seems to have become a dirty word. I think there should be some photo challenges to show the possible merits of direct flash. Give it a go!

>there should be some photo challenges to show the possible merits of direct flash.

Good idea.

I've avoided flash for 50 years out of sloth, mainly. It would be instructive if I could see what could be done with some kind of muted or diffused flash.

What's the "ECO mode" does?

@Mike FL
http://gdlp01.c-wss.com/gds/3/0300016123/01/psg7x-cu-en.pdf

Page 153

It essentially shuts the LCD down faster. Dims after 2 seconds, turns off after 10 seconds.

The real solution is either:
#1 wait for the MK II next year
or
#2 carry an extra battery

If you did same to Sony RX100M3 with "Dims after 2 seconds, turns off after 10 seconds." Sony may be able to shot 500 shots.

Thta's why we have CIPA standard.

Meh, my S90 is rated for 220 and I regularly get 300-600. What else do you want to complain about?

Complain? for what? CIPA standard?

And you think making the sensor 3 times smaller with having tons of wiring in front of the photosites for the fast readout and AF doesn't come with compromises.

a faster lens helps in this case. giving each photosite the light it desperately needs.

And come on. skin tones are fixable. terribkle noise at base ISO is not so easy to correct. it will lower the resolution. making every penny spend on the 32mm F1.2 wasted

I could do without 4K. What I hoped for was that they would at least have a 24fps movie option.

Michel Cojan:

Right but the thickness difference makes the LX100 a significantly different type of camera.

2eyesee:

And a tilt screen would make the LX100 thicker and more expensive.

The LX100 is not designed as a pocket cam, so I really don't see how the few mm of added thickness for an articulating scree would matter that much. Same with the other omissions. they were clearly cost cutting measures, and in that sense I think they were a mistake. If the lx100 had a built in flash, ND filter, articulating touch screen, etc. and sold for $50-100 more, I would see it as a more mature product and I would consider it worth the added cost.

rpm40:

Some don't want screens that flip out, the LX5 and LX7 didn't have that.

Flashes, particularly built-ins, are overrated with the improvements in higher ISO performance. Though right the LX100 unlikely to be easily useable at say ISO 6400.

The lack of a built-in ND filter is a bit of an omission.

I think of this as Panasonic GX7 with an affixed zoom.

The reality is that for people for whom an EVF is important a very good (not excellent, but very good) EVF is better than none at all.

Sdaniella. I have the RX100m3 and I do recall people worrying about the pull out part of the EVF popping back in, but in practice with glasses is works just fine.

And actually now that I have had it a while, I actually like that it powers down when closing, because usually its going into my pocket. But yes I would like the an option to turn that off if I wanted.

Didnt mean to sound argumentative, I just wanted to offer my personal experience. The EVF on the RX100m3 is stellar and should be considered as a huge advantage for those looking for an EVF on a compact. I was hoping Canon would improve on this sensor size category but really didnt. A bit longer zoom, less battery and no EVF. But if you dont need an EVF and you're already used to Canon, this might be the way to go.

I dont know what ES-LV is. I have never heard that term referenced on these forums. Can you tell me what that is. Thanks. But I am not comparing the X100T and the RX for anything. They are separate tools for me.

Thanks for that detailed explanation.

I shoot usually in aperture priority or manual mode with all my cameras and with my Panasonics, Ricoh, and Sony, it seems the exposure changes in real time in the EVF and or LCD always. Almost all of my compositions have been WYSIWYG for exposure, but not always for DOF. So I have used DOF preview. Will the ES LV do that too? I remember the Live View on my Canon T1i was slow and painful so I didn't use it very often. But I am sure its better now.

Edit: I couldn't wait so I went and looked and it was defaulted on with the Sony RX100m3 and also my Panasonic's. I didn't check my Ricoh and sigma but I pretty sure all of my mirrorless are always live view because I adjust exposure and can see it in the EVF or LCD. Bbeen shooting mirrorless only for a few years now, so I must have just taken it for granted. Didn't even notice in my manual reads. I usually read the manuals several times! LOL

Are you separating DOF preview and Exposure LV? I just tested my Ricoh GR and when the Shutter is half way down, it shows the effects of my exposure adjustments in real time. My Panasonic FZ1000 also does this in real time and has a menu for Live View at 30FPS or 60FPS for live view.