OP
AdamT
•
Forum Pro
•
Posts: 62,282
Re: So I got a G5X Mk2 - My thoughts
It's unique (the RX100 VI/VII) in that you can stuff 200mm with 1" in a pocket.
you can stuff 24-250 with a fixed EVF into a pocket for less in the pan TZ100 and more zoom in the 200 .. diff is that the lens really is dreadful but they do it
Folks with cash will pay it, if they fell its worth it.
same with everything really, Fashion is the worst price gouging market
I personally concur that the G5X II is the better option, and it happens to be more affordable. I've played with RX100s several times, alot of fun, snappy and crisp optics
again not without issues , the Sonys tend to get the 24mm end right but the long ends vary from soft (Mk3/4/5 - 6/7 less so ) to really poor (Mk1 and Mk2) the JPG engines often crank up the sharpening at the long end like panasonics used to about 10-15yrs ago ..
but the SOOC colors and handling leave alot to be desired.
they simply don`t listen to users or reviewers, their totally illogical attitude towards touchscreens and grips on these is a real head scratcher
Granted the Sony's have phase detect AF, but, the Stacked CMOS on the G5X II and G7X III are VERY responsive for being contrast AF due to the latest DIGIC8 and Stacked CMOS for fast readout. It only hits you in AI-Servo in continuous drive.
I just wish they`d use smaller AF points like Panasonic do, the supposed "Spot" (more like a SPLAT) AF point in the G5X-II harks back to the S90 days , its simply too big when shooting gardenscapes etc at 24mm . maybe that helps the speed but then Pan manage it with a real spot AF point with totally variable point sizes larger and have had that since the dawn of M43 13 years ago ------ Pan are the Kings of CDAF though ..
have to be honest, I never use Auto and have never used C-AF in these cameras, I`m sure the basic sensor is the same as the RX100 Mk5A/VII but has no PDAF pixels mapped out , much like the RX10 Mk3 didn`t .. Canon aren`t interested in PDAF and they can`t be bothered to Fab a 1" DPAF sensor , the pixels for 40 million would be tiny on a 1"-er so can`t blame them .
-- hide signature --
** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **