G1X Mark II compared to Sony RX100M2 - Initial Impressions

Started Apr 9, 2014 | Discussions thread
Heyseuss Hoolio
Heyseuss Hoolio Contributing Member • Posts: 585
Re: G1X Mark II compared to Sony RX100M2 - Initial Impressions

jack Hoggard wrote:

It's interesting how someone gets a new camera, and gives his opinion as to why he likes it, and the naysayers come out. As to the RX100/II, I held one a few tears ago, and it is too small for me. The moderate size of the G1X II is just right for me. Add to that the large sensor, fast lens, and touch screen/wifi, and the slight pixel-peeping difference in low ISO IQ fades into insignificance.

Enjoy your new camera and thanks for the post.

The naysayers are the point of this thread.  It's a COMPARISON thread.  People are to give their opinions as to why one or the other works for them and the differences.

This goes with the same battles as the Canon S series cameras against the Mark I version of the rx100, or Mark II.  Though now all the argument of "sensor size" differences are for the Canon.

I think the image quality itself is very comparable, so far I've only seen the one high ISO direct comparison of the Lego man, and the Sony did look better.

But...image quality alone is not the only factor to look at, there's many other factors that are deal breakers that allow/help you get your photo and obtain your user experience.  Since IQ is pretty close I would not factor that in.  The Canon has a wider zoom range, which 24mm at the wide end is a big difference compared to the 28mm of the Sony, longer zoom to the Canon too.  Depth of field, the Canon will give you that lower depth of field appearance.  Megapixels, how many do you want?  Movie settings, I'm giving this to the Sony.  Small size, Sony.  Aperture Range, Canon.  Among many other factors.

I believe from the "photography" standpoint, the Canon is the way to go.  For more pocketability and just general purpose throw a camera in you pocket and who cares what you take a picture of, the Sony.

To me, these two cameras shouldn't be compared with each other because they are in a different class.  The RX100 I/II should be compared with other slim pocketable cameras such as the Nikon Coolpix, Panasonic Lumix tough cameras, or any other lower end sub $200 point and shoots, because the features in all of those are comparable to what the Sony has.  The only thing Sony has it's claim to fame is it's sensor, same thing with their A7/A7r, every other usability aspect of them are down the drain.

And there's no reason to compare these cameras to what shutter speed/ISO/aperture one or the other chooses.  If you know how to shoot a camera those are non-issues, YOU work the camera.  Shoot RAW too.

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