NC_Girl

After a week with the RX 100 I have decided to sell my DSLR, zoom and prime lenses to my BIL. This RX100 is Un-freak-en-believable.... !!

Now, don't get me wrong, it is NOT as good as a DSLR, but it is DAMN CLOSE! and it's so teeny..... it has been in my purse all week, the DSLR only went out with me on occasions because it was so bulky.

If you have not tried one out, and would like a very small camera that you don't mind carrying around all the time, you should definitely take a look see at it....

I had read about it but hesitated because it seemed so expensive for a P&S but it is worth every single penny.

Anyone else here gotten one?

flyboy60

I considered one, but I ended up going with a Micro 4/3 camera (Olympus E-PL2) for 3 reasons: it is noticeably less expensive (I paid under $200 with the kit zoom), it has interchangeable lenses, and I already had an Olympus 4/3 DSLR and lenses, and there is an adapter that preserves focus and automation between the 4/3 lenses and micro 4/3 cameras.

But that being said, from what I understand, the Sony RX-100 definitely has the best image quality of any fixed-lens compact camera, BY FAR. I also considered the Olympus XZ-1 and the Panasonic LX7, which would have been 2-300 less than the Sony RX100, but don't have anywhere near as large a sensor as the Sony.

NC_Girl

Yes, the price on the rx100 is quite high, and hasn't come down after a year! and as we all know, most cameras drop off in price after a few months... But that tells me that they are still selling so well that they don't need to. It was really hard to justify the $650 price but now that I have it, it is well worth it to me.

I love taking photos and even though I had a small fortune in my DSLR and a couple great primes I hated lugging it around so the reality of it is that it sat in its case at home and my trusty old s95 went with me everywhere...but a few weeks ago I dropped my s95 and I went on a search for a new small camera, I tried out several, including the SZ20 and the LX7. They were both good but I liked my s95 better. Tried out a NEX, too big, might as well carry a DSLR I figured. Then I bit the bullet and ordered the RX100... and honestly, for me, it lives up to all the hype. It is so much better than the very capable s95 and comes close to, if not matches my DSLR's kit lens. No it can't touch a DSLR with a prime, but I realized a year or so back that the DSLR which sits at home doesn't take very good pictures anyway

Last night I went to a piano recital for my niece and was blown away by the video/audio it was able to get under extremely difficult circumstances! After uploading it to youtube I posted this thread.

All cameras are compromises of course, but this one comes as close to perfect "for me" that I just sit here and think why didn't I get this camera a year ago????

flyboy60

For the amount I saved going with a u4/3 camera and kit zoom compared to the Sony, I could still get one fast prime (presently trying to decide between a 14mm f2.5 or a 20mm f1.7 - effectively equivalent to a 28mm or a 40mm in 135 film land) and still have money left over - plus it will easily adapt to 50mm and other fast manual lenses And BTW, for extreme compactness, I also own a Canon S90, but the IQ is not really in the same league with either the Sony RX100 or a micro 4/3 camera using a prime lens.

That being said, if I didn't already have the S90 and the various 4/3 and MF prime lenses that I can use with Micro 4/3, I might well have gone with the Sony RX100 - it's certainly a unique product right now.

deniah

i have one. its my backup cam when i dont want to carry the rx1.
its great for being pocketable, but i dont find it fun to use.
do not enjoy the telescoping zoom (would prefer fixed lens). do not enjoy the p&s style handling. do not enjoy using the front ring dial (novelty).

very competent however. really sharp jpegs. good for making videos

luckyg777

I bought one about a month ago and have since sold my Nikon D7000.

Personally, I find a full-size DSLR too annoying to travel with (e.g. taking pictures in small spaces such as aircrafts, 'intimate' locations such as restaurants, etc.).

Fantastic camera. My only qualm is that it's not very 'holdable', however a 3rd party grip addresses this (http://www.dpreview.com/articles/651...ichard-franiec).

shawbridge

I got my wife who is a gifted painter who paints abstract-ish landscapes an RX-100 and she loves the image quality. She actually took an online course on its features. Although she is not a professional photographer, she is going to have a show with photos taken by the RX-100 (modified no doubt in interesting ways). She wouldn't do that if the picture quality weren't so good.

JohnnyColombia

A timely bump for this thread. Henry's in Canada currently has CAD100.02 off the first generation RX100 and they deliver to USA no tax for CAD12.95.

Total price in USD equivalent is under $470 which is cheaper than even the open box price at Adorama.

Regular retail for new is about US$549 so it's a saving of about $80.

http://www.henrys.com/71138-SONY-DSC...S-3-6X-3-.aspx

Just ordered one because I got drunk and sold my G12 to a girl in a pub. Hope it's as good as they say.

Braindrain

I've got the RX100 Mk2 and it's pretty good. I got this after deciding my Panasonic LX-7 was too big.

Image quality, the RX100 does shine in low light (of course) but the Panny has far more easily accessible manual control functions.

Seems the Mk3 has now been released in Jpn so look for discounts on both Mk1 and Mk2 in the near future.

schwaa

Wow, I am getting ready to sell off my dslr and equipment to fund a M4/3 purchase. I was considering purchasing an rx100 for my wife, as her low end P&S is about 6 years old now. I don't want the rx100 to wind up more to my liking than the omd em5 and I definitely can't have her getting better shots than me!(I know, it's not the camera). Thanks for the tip on the mk3, I will hold of on the mk2 for a bit.

glennaa11

I think their naming convention invites needless confusion now that there are 3 different RX100 models.

The Camera Store recently did a fairly comprehensive video review of the RX100mk3. Looks pretty awesome. The smaller zoom range (in exchange for a faster lens) is an interesting tradeoff though. The pop-up EVF is interesting. I'd probably need to personally see it in action first.

lhgreengrd1

I would never have considered the RX100 mk I or mk II, because I would not buy any camera for more than $100-200 that didn't have a viewfinder. OTOH, the mk III is VERY interesting once it comes down a bit to the sub $500 range - perhaps in 6-12 months.

Braindrain

I've noticed it takes a very long time for the RX100 (series) to go down in price.

JohnnyColombia

What about the Canon G series? That had a viewfinder but it was horrible and I never used mine on the G12. It didn't even look like it was finished properly, as if it was missing an eye cup or something.

Just having a look on camelcamelcamel.com and the RX100 seemed to keep its price well into the product lifecycle of the RX100M2. Didn't come down until July/August last year. Then came down further right about now when the RX100M3 came out

The RX100M2 dropped $50 at Christmas and then another $50 now. So maybe lhgreengrd1 can get a RX100M3 when the RX100M4 comes out

lhgreengrd1

Well, that camera would have been completely useless to me. And BTW, I pretty much assume it would be around the time when a successor is announced that the RX100 Mk III might hit the price point where I'd be interested in it.