Compact - Canon g9X ii, Sony RX 100s, Lumix LX100 ii - thoughts welcomed

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
Bender79ita Senior Member • Posts: 1,582
Re: Compact - Canon g9X ii, Sony RX 100s, Lumix LX100 ii - thoughts welcomed

LorneBMT wrote:

In my quest to see what's next as a replacement for my Canon g9x II (dust on sensor issues), among cameras I've been looking at are Sony RX 100s and the Lumix LX100 ii

In my mind, anything larger than the g9x isn't truly pocketable (at least, not for pants). And everything I'm finding with comparable or better image quality is a chunk larger (except perhaps the Ricoh GR cameras, but they seem especially prone to dust, and I'd like to have at least some zoom).

That being the case, unless I decide to pay the considerable cost of repairing the g9x, I think I might go instead for a more capable compact for which I would need to use a case; hopefully an unobtrusive one that I could put on a belt.

In terms of features, I'm mostly interested in good wide angle and low light capability, with some degree of zoom (though not so much that it significantly impairs IQ).

Visits to camera shops and online research currently has me thinking, as mentioned above, about a Sony RX 100 or Lumix LX100 ii. Where the Sonys are concerned, I'm a little put off by what I'm reading about the interface, and where the RX 100 vii is concerned, what I'm hearing about IQ sacrificed for zoom. At the same time, I'm seeing some good prices for RX 100s on eBay, especially for the vii. And where the Lumix is concerned, I'm wondering if its larger size makes even the belt case idea impractical.

Welcome your thoughts about all this, and other cameras I've not considered.


I have had and used an RX100III for a while.

I have also had a Ricoh GRIII as loaner.

I would not get a RX100VI or VII. I would not enjoy the slower lens. f1.8 at 24mm is barely enough to get acceptable shots in the evening. f2.8 would not be. YMMV.

DR is quite good on the Sony. You can recover alot if you're careful with your exposure.

Version III has very poor autofocus. I recommend the V or the ZV-1. IQ is almost the same.

All the menu/ergonomics paranoias are nonsense imo, you get use to any camera as long as you are willing to put as much effort to learn it as you did with buying it.

I liked the GRIII more though. It was much more fun to shoot. APS-C DR with image stabilization, dual dials, more rounded, more pocketable, lighter.

I did not mind the lack of EVF on the Ricoh, because it allows to change relevant settings 1 handed.

The bigger sensor does resolve finer detail better, allowing for some cropping. The 1 incher kind of gets lost with foliage and finer textures. It's still fine for generic shooting.

When I took this picture, I didn't notice the guy INSIDE the wood panels. I brushed almost +4EV to make him appear. Noise shows in that area, but still, quite powerful recovery.

I don't agree with the ILC solution. ILC won't be anywhere near as pocketable as a fixed lens camera. If you want a pocketable camera, you don't want an ILC.

The GRIII next to the RX100III

The a6400 is one of the smallest ILC setups on the market, it doesn't get nowhere close to the GRIII.  The mount, EVF, and bigger battery take up too much space.

 Bender79ita's gear list:Bender79ita's gear list
Sony RX100 III Nikon D810 Nikon D5600 Sony a6400 Sony ZV-E10 +9 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow