RX100 image quality in good light vs Canon S95 or Sony NEX-5N

Started Nov 6, 2012 | Discussions thread
Tom Hoots
Tom Hoots Veteran Member • Posts: 6,072
Re: RX100 image quality in good light vs Canon S95 or Sony NEX-5N

Dave Lively wrote:

I would appreciate any comments from those of you that own both the RX100 and either the NEX-5N or Canon S95. I am mostly interested in dynamic range and color depth at base ISO. I see a lot of comments about high ISO and low light performance but I am more interested in how the RX100 performs in good light at ISO 125.

Here are a couple of pictures -- download the "original" versions and check them out in your favorite viewer:



I don't know what you do to "publish" your photos -- do you print, how big do you print, do you save for viewing on web pages, how big do you save them, and so on -- but I generally crop my images and save them at my monitor's resolution of 1920 x 1200, which I have done with the "originals" here.

This test wasn't "scientific" in any way -- I've got them framed similarly, but not identically, but hopefully they show any relevant differences between the two cameras, when saved at this resolution.  The camera settings are a bit different -- the RX100 used "P" mode, which I normally use, but I never liked what the NEX-7 did in "P" mode, so I had it in aperture priority mode.  But, the in-camera settings I used were the in-camera settings I used most of the time for good-light pictures with each camera.

The bottom line for me is that I think the RX100 color is more accurate than the NEX-7's color.  And, I like the detail better from the RX100 over the NEX-7.  This is only one of dozens if not hundreds of test shots I've taken comparing the RX100 to the NEX-7 and the NEX-5N, which I also have.

My personal bottom line?  I've sold my NEX-7.  I considered selling my two NEX-5N bodies, but their resale value is so low, I'll just keep them, instead.  But they live on a shelf in my house.

Meanwhile, the RX100 goes with me everywhere.  I prefer its JPEG color and native saturation to either the NEX-7 or the NEX-5N -- I think the RX100 is considerably more "natural."  And, given my usual output, with largish JPEG images, I just don't see much of an advantage to the NEX cameras -- quite often, I prefer what I see from the RX100, instead.  Oh, perhaps the NEX cameras might do a bit better in low light situations, but with the RX100's F/1.8 lens (at the wide end, at least), I can often use FAR lower ISO settings than I would need to use with the NEX cameras.

So, I'm happier with my RX100 than I was with my NEX cameras.  I recommend it highly.

Tom Hoots

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