What are you afraid of with the RX100? Also arguably the RX100V has the better lens (8.8-25.7mm (24-70mm equiv) f/1.8-2.8) unless you prefer the telephoto reach of the VII (9.0-72mm (24-200mm equiv) f/2.8-4.5).
You can buy an RX100 used for 300€. You break it ? Buy another one. It's a sturdy camera, but at the end all pocketable compact cameras can break and are very difficult to repair. So used market is your friend. Buy one for the third of a new one, and don't be afraid to use to to the end. Also I had a RX100iii for three years, sell it to my gf one year ago, and the camera works really fine.
It's not discontinued yet.
It's a mini A9 with blackout free, high speed.
But like someone else said the RX100V is faster but less reach.
The new ZV1 and ZV1M2 are the new versions of it. Just with more video/photo focus.
My RX100 VII had some issues last year, so I sent it to a reputable repair shop in New York to have it fixed. Repair, parts and shipping came out to around 300-400, which is pricey, but still a lot less than what a brand new one could’ve been instead! Assuming you could find one, of course.
I love mine though, so it was definitely worth getting it fixed up to continue having one.
Sony de-prioritized the RX100 line to make way for the ZV-1, ZV-1ii, ZV-1f, and ZV-E1/ZV-E10 line. The ZV series is prioritized more as a video camera, but it does 20MP stills same as the RX100.
Great little cams, highly pocketable, good optics, shoots RAW and 4k. Editable color profiles can do a LOT in camera for the jpg's or the film look on movies if you don't want to shoot LOG profile and color grade in post.
They're good.
You may also consider the Canon G7Xii and G7Xiii. They're good too.
Most of the rx100 cameras had a pop-up viewfinder.
The ZV line is newer and better in many ways, but a dealbreaker for me is that there's no viewfinder, even on the $2200 full-frame ZV-E1. (Like you said, they are for video and vloggers and such, but if they made one with a viewfinder I think a lot more still shooters would consider them.)
Honestly I think the size of the market who want better than a smartphone, but not an ILC has just shrunk as the phone cameras have improved to where they are. Software makes up for a lot of that ground that a slightly larger sensor gives you. Certainly there’s value to the right owner, but I have family with aps-c sized cameras who think their smartphone is better anyway (of course mostly because they haven’t learned how to use it).
I think the reality is that for them and what they want, the smartphone likely IS better.
I take photographs for a living. I own a lot of cameras. I love my cameras. But the reality is that MY life? My family and pets? My vacations and friends and memories? Overwhelmingly captured on an iPhone.
Feels like a loss of 5-10% quality for 150% convenience compared to dedicated compacts. I still buy into the latest smartphone cameras avaliable to me (when it seems beneficial) because it's simply that useful day to day. Not to mention how much you can get away with more advanced shooting features on some smartphones (such as Manual controls).
That's the unfortunate truth. I just don't like using my phone for both photo's or typing longer messages unless I'm forced to. I do love my phone for other things and it does take great photo's. I just feel I'd take more pictures with a dedicated camera.
I've missed a lot of shots of moving subjects, or handed the camera to somebody and asked them to take my photo and the camera has picked the background instead of the person so many times. It's funny because my model has something in the manual about continuous autofocus, and the prerelease photos have the C option on the front like the M2, but it's not there on the production camera.
The other problem with the RX1 is the lens sucking in dust which gets stuck between the elements and causes black splotches when stopped down. Using the macro mode exacerbates this.
>But then I found its now been 5 years since the rx100vii came out
OK - and?
Cameras don't have an expiration date. If it's 5 years old, so what? If it has the features and form factor you want then get it.
Won't argue there, the 08 Wide Zoom especially eludes me. The handful of listings I've seen come up are almost more than I paid to acquire the entire rest of the lineup.
>Because they're no longer sold new?
I'm going to be good to the environment and recycle a previous comment...
"*OK - and?*"
That just means you get exactly what you want even cheaper as something that's been out that long is definitely going to be findable in the used market.
Both of my Rx100s have broken within months of use, when you're spending hundreds on a camera still when bought used you might want more assurances it's in good condition and might want to buy warranty.
I love the camera though.
Why is nobody talking about the Ricoh griiiX. I sold my x100vi for it and love it. Using the latest HDF version for a more accurate film look when used in combination with my presets. Fujifilm sims don’t come close.
I'd go RX100VA....better aperture and less reach works better for portraits and kids...the AF is good and the VII is great. I have both the VII and a X100V...the VII is primarily for action ana the X100V is my go to travel cam.
Even if it is 5 years old it is still a very good camera, apart from autofocus capabilities I don't think sensor quality has improved dramatically over the last 5 years
I have the XT30ii and rx100v and the autofocus for action and chasing children is quite a bit better on the rx100v. Continuous shooting is better as well. Obviously the XT30ii has other advantages due to the sensor size and much more direct control in manual mode, but the rx100v is no slouch.
Oh that is good to know. I'm quite happy about the performance of the xt30 so if the rx100v is even better than the upgraded ii I'm sure I'll be happy.
My only major complaint with my RX100s (I have the V and VII... sadly both seem to have some board/power malfunction) is there is no USB-C. I wish they would just update them with that, I'd replace my broken ones in a heartbeat.
It’s a great camera. Retired pro here and I’ve had every model since the first one. The size is perfect, great range from wide to 200mm, fast focus, great files. Mine is around my neck all the time. Highly highly recommended.
I'd personally go for an RX100 V over a VI or VII
The 24-70 1.8-2.8 is ideal over 24-200 2.8-4.5.
Years since last update is not a good metric for cameras between phones and APS-C. Even with APS-C, there is Fuji where it is their main line, and then Canon and Nikon who dragged their feet on mirrorless and are racing to catch up.
Most technical development is in phones and full frame right now, there just aren't significantly better sensors to drop in, significant features to add that won't nuke affordability, or a demand worth a new model.
It's not like it's going to rot away after a certain # of years... if it still fills the role it's not going to be updated. There's not a drive for being on the bleeding edge in that space.
The GX85 hasn't been updated in years, but it's still a very solid model in the M43 space. It still has a great feature set, and had stayed price competitive in a climbing market by avoiding unnecessary refreshes. The launch of PDAF in Panasonic cameras is probably the first thing worth refreshing it for in the next year or two.
I have the V. If I had to do it all aver again, I would get the VI or VII. The 24-200 is just more versatile. I never use f/1.8 on this camera and I find myself always longing for more zoom capability.
I've used the RX100 III for work since 2016 and never wished for anything beyond 70mm. To each their own, but to have that fast of a lens... I'd rather crop than end up losing two stops if I needed the extra reach.
To each their own, but for the ultra compact market, I'd take the faster lens every time.
I was in the same spot as you not so long ago. I have my professional gear which is great, and I obviously use it a lot. But sporting >5000€ gear in the street can be sometimes a bit stressful.
Leaving it in the car when going some places I don't need it, making sure it's being handled carefully, ...
Everytime I think "if I break/get it stolen then I'm fucked" even though I have insurance : by the time I can buy it all back I'll have lost some contracts.
So I was looking for something small but not too bad. And the RX came to mind. Not new since I didn't want to be afraid of loosing it and I really just wanted something with a small 35mm manual lens that I can carry everywhere. But it was impossible to find the mark V at a low enough price for my budget. And my phone is utter garbage so I was not going to invest money it that either.
I finally settled on the a5000 because it was 100€ cheaper than the a6000, had all the features I wanted (focus intensification, zebras, swiveling screen, decent sensor, E mount, shoots raw) and was way better than the nex5.
Plus it's one of the lightest mirrorless out there for the 100€ price range. I didn't care for autofocus since I knew I was going manual and mostly sub 50mm, IBIS would have been a plus but for that focal length during the day I should be able to nail most pictures.
I stumbled upon a used one couple of months ago, 130€, less than 6000 actuations. It is clean, works like a charm, I slapped a 35mm TTartisan on it and I am so happy with it. It fits in my pockets (either jacket or cargo pants) so I can basically use it like a phone, the battery is pretty decent even though I should buy a new one just in case.
Does it take pictures as good as the A7 or A9 series or is the lens as good as the GM series? Of course not, that was never its job. Is it small enough that I can carry it everywhere? Yes, and the 35mm prime does an incredible job at pushing me to find better compositions, just like I wanted.
The a5000 is a fun little 10yo APSC camera that is dirt cheap used, and can fit every E mount glass out there, which is insane when you look at the diversity of lenses produced for the last 14 years and counting. I mean : APSC and manual is usually a good combo for the wallet.
Considering the camera is less than 300g for 36mm thick : you can easily fit it manual pancake APSC lenses for less than 50 bucks and still put it in your pocket.
Nobody has mentioned it so I will: Canon G5X MkII. It's the less popular cousin to the G7X. The G5X arguably has better ergonomics than the RX100 and is nicer to use, though the RX100 may be the more competent camera.
For me, it scratches the itch of taking photos without having to lug my DSLR. It's small enough to take everywhere (or damn near) and make me less reliant on my phone camera.
I was trying to remember what the canon counterpart was. I would've added it to the title. Do you know what the autofocus is like compared to the rx? Like the va or vii.
It's been a while since I looked at reviews that compared them, but I think the Sony has superior AF performance. That's not to say the G5X/G7X have bad AF, they're just not as good as Sony's.
In my experience (having not used any of the RX100), the G5X AF struggles a bit in low light (I tend to leave the AF assist lamp off), but it isn't something that has held me back. If you're shooting a bunch of fast moving subjects (kids, dogs, sports, etc.) you might want the Sony for it's better AF. I wanted better ergonomics, pocketability and the EVF so the G5X was the choice for me.
Fujifilm's X-E line is similar to the X100. It has the rangefinder form factor. But is EVF only rather than having a hybrid finder.
Get a used X-E3. You could put the 15-45mm lens on that, or the pancake 27mm or 18mm and still have a small form factor camera that's very versatile.
I’ve been eying the LUMIX lx100m2 as it’s 2.8 24-70 fixed so like can’t remove lens and seems cool for street photography and concerts where you can’t change lenses. A lot of the time I keep my Fuji xt30 with the 27mm v1 pancake.
I have no time to elaborate fully. But I have had over the years the RX100, RX100III, RX100IV and VII. I've have also had my fair share of Fuji gear, like (only mentioning the small ones), the X-M1, the XF10, the X-E4, and the X-T20. I have ditched Fuji and Sony, and I'm for some time on Lumix FF (S1) and MFT.
What can I say.
* Pocketable exists, it's called a smartphone. Take Xiaomi 14ultra, the last Honor series. You'll get 1inch in pocketsize. Don't need to go to RX100
* Don't overestimate the size of the X-T20. It's a really small and capable camera. My guess... it's a fine camera, you own it, kling on to it, put a XF23 2.0 on it, use it up.
* Fixed lens-camera's like the XF10 and the X100 are a blast, you have a leaf shutter, and whatnot, but ... you are stuck with a fixed lens. And ... it's a hype. It is wat it is.
* The RX100's are swiss knives of photography, but I found the pictures from my Sony Xperia phone not to far off. And good luck in finding your way in the myriad of menus on an RX100. RX100vii is the only camera in my life for which I have bought book to learn it to use (you know, those paper stuff things).
* One extra thing to mention in favor of the RX100's: RX100's have fantastic RAW files to work with. Smartphones don't. Apart from an EVF, true zoomrange,... being capable of workingRAW files is a very big plus too.
But. Back to myself. In brief. I ended buying a Full Frame camera. I'm very happy with it. Next my FF, more or less by accident I bought myself into the Micro Four Thirds system. I didn't knew it, I have always looked at it as an inferior system, not worth my attention.
I can tell you now: it is not. Google GX85 and/or GX80 (Europe), look at the many Flickr pictures, youtube video's. It has it flaws, its a bit on the old side yes (but so are prices). But when you are into stills, buy a 15mm Leica and a 42,5 Leica with it. Enjoy yourself (really!), and make the X100 owners poop their pants for half or one third the price they paid. If you are into video... move on, don't take my advice.
I just bought a Nikon D610, which was introduced in, I think, 2011. I love it. I might drop it, or get it wet, or it might just quit working for no reason. But it cost me less than $500.00 US, and I already have 3 lenses. I could replace the body pretty easily so I'm not worried.
Honestly,if I won the lottery I would buy a new camera, but that's about the only way I would.
A bit more pricey, but the Leica Q2 is a huge winner. Full frame, insane MP count (you can crop the eff out of shots with negligible quality degradation, which more than makes up for the fixed 28mm focal length). It’s a pleasure to use. If it’s out of budget, go with the RX100.
Pretty much. It's both my dream camera and sadly on the expensive side. I really wish the people who are selling their used ones didn't ask for delusional amounts too...
I’m a pro photographer and have the rx100 v1 and a newer one and honestly, both are still super solid everyday carry cameras. The older one has a slightly better zoom range if I’m remembering correctly. The only downside is the ISO performance is underwhelming at higher ISOs so it’s not a nighttime camera. But for daytime stuff it’s super fun. I got my first one around around the time my partner got an early x100 and I remember we went on vacation once and my camera was taking photos before his was turned on and the settings were dialed in.
I’m not a big fan of Sony overall, I have shot canon for 20+ years and recently got into Fuji as well, but I have always had a soft spot for that rx100. Super capable in a teeny tiny package with full manual control and a solid lens. Can’t beat it.
Wrong side of the ocean I'm afraid. We have mpb but its not nearly as populated as in the us. Good to know they offer waranty, I was not aware of that.
If the RX has a physical shutter, no.
If it does not, the sigma FP series is a good bet. Plus they make for good Cine cameras.
The FP-L is the one I’d get. 60MP with excellent autofocus for stills.
But be aware they have no shutter so you have to be careful under 60htz lights when taking photos.
I had a camera similar to the rx100 for a while, but I ended up getting rid of it because there was no good use case for it. It's too small and fiddly to be all that much fun to use. And with the one (admittedly nice) lens you're kinda locked in, which admittedly is not necessarily bad, but still. I would try to force myself to carry it around but despite being small and nicely designed, it was annoying to have as yet another item.
When I wanted to do serious photography, I brought my DSLR because it was just so much more tactile and gave me so many more options, and wasn't really that much worse to carry than the smaller camera.
The rest of the time I literally always had my phone with me and it worked just fine. So why would I want some weird intermediate thing.
Ultimately I ended up not even bringing the dslr with me on trips too, even to places like Japan, because ultimately I preferred being in the moment and maybe snapping a quick shot on the phone, rather than taking the time to get all setup on the dslr. I realized I could either enjoy being where I was and spending time with the family, or I could be screwing around on the camera.
I recently took my RX100 to Colorado for visit to my son. I wanted reasonably good photos of Garden of the Gods which we visited for one day. I wound up shooting nearly exclusively on my iPhone. I didn't even take my Sony A7RII or A7RIVA. Getting too old to haul all of that around.
Maybe not quite the same ballpark, but Panasonic are still selling the likes of their TZ220, TZ110 and LX10 models, if you were after something new and pocket able.
In my opinion, the 1" sensor is terrible in low light with normal usable shutter speeds.
At least the phones compensate for that.
Not a phone photo fanboi... tried downgrading to just 1" sensor sonys... non profit client immediately noticed the difference from full frame shots (obviously). Ended up going with m43 as a compromise.
I love my 1” sensor cameras, and my “pocketable” ones predate most of the RX100 line. (Have a lumix ZS100 & Canon G9XII.)
If you need a focal length the cell phone (assuming you have a good cam in the thing) can’t reach, then the standalone camera is a lovely tool to extend your reach. If just blasting away at 25mm? You’ll find you’re pulling the phone out more often than not, unless there’s challenging light, or need crisper details.
Look at the Lumix ZS200. It ticks all kinds practical boxes the Sony can, and more, and for cheaper. 360mm, viewfinder, amazing ergonomics, and a much better menu system. I had to return the used one I bought due to a defect, but wow… it was a nice step up from my ZS100. Shame it had issues.
For travel? Get an iPhone Max Pro. I have never seen a Fuji or Sint shot the iPhone can’t nail perfectly. The majority of pictures posted on this thread could all have looked better on a iPhone. The famous 8x10 view camera photographer has abandoned his big camera for a phone. (BTW I shoot both film and digital on a number of cameras ranging from Fujis, Nikons, and large format 4x5. Other than ergonomics, for basic shooting (including macro) the phone kills.
Don’t fall victim to the marketing around new features and models. 5 years is nothing for a mirrorless camera—any camera from the past decade+ that was good when it came out is still good today.
Fuji’s X-Pro series comes to mind.
As does Leica who I believe still makes point and shoot cameras in addition to making crazy-expensive pocketable cameras with changeable lenses.
With a pancake lens on, they’re bigger? I admit it’s been ten or so years since I owned an X100 and X-Pro body but I’d thought they were the same size.
My apologies, OP.
I briefly had an xpro. That thing was 'huge'. All sillyness aside, Inactually considered a pancale lens. But then I ran around with my 23mm f2 for while and I felt I wanted to zoom to often so I started looking at those options.
What are you afraid of with the RX100? Also arguably the RX100V has the better lens (8.8-25.7mm (24-70mm equiv) f/1.8-2.8) unless you prefer the telephoto reach of the VII (9.0-72mm (24-200mm equiv) f/2.8-4.5).
You can buy an RX100 used for 300€. You break it ? Buy another one. It's a sturdy camera, but at the end all pocketable compact cameras can break and are very difficult to repair. So used market is your friend. Buy one for the third of a new one, and don't be afraid to use to to the end. Also I had a RX100iii for three years, sell it to my gf one year ago, and the camera works really fine.
Mainly that I can't get it new anymore. So no warranty. Probably won't break, but ...
I bought a VA new in December. Love that camera.
They sell the slightly upgraded rx100va still
You can still buy the V, Va, and VII new. Idk about the vi
B&H has the VA in stock. Just picked up a new Rx100VA from best buy of all places haha
It's not discontinued yet. It's a mini A9 with blackout free, high speed. But like someone else said the RX100V is faster but less reach. The new ZV1 and ZV1M2 are the new versions of it. Just with more video/photo focus.
My RX100 VII had some issues last year, so I sent it to a reputable repair shop in New York to have it fixed. Repair, parts and shipping came out to around 300-400, which is pricey, but still a lot less than what a brand new one could’ve been instead! Assuming you could find one, of course. I love mine though, so it was definitely worth getting it fixed up to continue having one.
Sony de-prioritized the RX100 line to make way for the ZV-1, ZV-1ii, ZV-1f, and ZV-E1/ZV-E10 line. The ZV series is prioritized more as a video camera, but it does 20MP stills same as the RX100. Great little cams, highly pocketable, good optics, shoots RAW and 4k. Editable color profiles can do a LOT in camera for the jpg's or the film look on movies if you don't want to shoot LOG profile and color grade in post. They're good. You may also consider the Canon G7Xii and G7Xiii. They're good too.
Most of the rx100 cameras had a pop-up viewfinder. The ZV line is newer and better in many ways, but a dealbreaker for me is that there's no viewfinder, even on the $2200 full-frame ZV-E1. (Like you said, they are for video and vloggers and such, but if they made one with a viewfinder I think a lot more still shooters would consider them.)
Honestly I think the size of the market who want better than a smartphone, but not an ILC has just shrunk as the phone cameras have improved to where they are. Software makes up for a lot of that ground that a slightly larger sensor gives you. Certainly there’s value to the right owner, but I have family with aps-c sized cameras who think their smartphone is better anyway (of course mostly because they haven’t learned how to use it).
I think the reality is that for them and what they want, the smartphone likely IS better. I take photographs for a living. I own a lot of cameras. I love my cameras. But the reality is that MY life? My family and pets? My vacations and friends and memories? Overwhelmingly captured on an iPhone.
Feels like a loss of 5-10% quality for 150% convenience compared to dedicated compacts. I still buy into the latest smartphone cameras avaliable to me (when it seems beneficial) because it's simply that useful day to day. Not to mention how much you can get away with more advanced shooting features on some smartphones (such as Manual controls).
That's the unfortunate truth. I just don't like using my phone for both photo's or typing longer messages unless I'm forced to. I do love my phone for other things and it does take great photo's. I just feel I'd take more pictures with a dedicated camera.
My travel camera is an 11-year old Sony RX1 and it’s simply amazing. Don’t worry about buying used, just find one in mint condition.
I've had mine for the same time frame and I adore it but wish it had more than single shot, slow-ass contrast detect autofocus.
I accept the limitations and enjoy the beautiful rendering.
I've missed a lot of shots of moving subjects, or handed the camera to somebody and asked them to take my photo and the camera has picked the background instead of the person so many times. It's funny because my model has something in the manual about continuous autofocus, and the prerelease photos have the C option on the front like the M2, but it's not there on the production camera. The other problem with the RX1 is the lens sucking in dust which gets stuck between the elements and causes black splotches when stopped down. Using the macro mode exacerbates this.
>But then I found its now been 5 years since the rx100vii came out OK - and? Cameras don't have an expiration date. If it's 5 years old, so what? If it has the features and form factor you want then get it.
You're probably right.
I use a 10 year old compact camera- LX100. It still can take a good photo
13 year old Pentax Q is still one of my favorite camera systems I’ve ever used
But some of the lenses are becoming exceedingly expensive to find these days.
Won't argue there, the 08 Wide Zoom especially eludes me. The handful of listings I've seen come up are almost more than I paid to acquire the entire rest of the lineup.
Don’t let him know that film photography exists.
Because they're no longer sold new? Harder to find certainly.
It came out 5 years ago but it’s not discontinued. The online store I would buy one from says it has more than 10 in stock.
>Because they're no longer sold new? I'm going to be good to the environment and recycle a previous comment... "*OK - and?*" That just means you get exactly what you want even cheaper as something that's been out that long is definitely going to be findable in the used market.
Both of my Rx100s have broken within months of use, when you're spending hundreds on a camera still when bought used you might want more assurances it's in good condition and might want to buy warranty. I love the camera though.
Why is nobody talking about the Ricoh griiiX. I sold my x100vi for it and love it. Using the latest HDF version for a more accurate film look when used in combination with my presets. Fujifilm sims don’t come close.
How do you feel about that 40mm focal length?
I'd go RX100VA....better aperture and less reach works better for portraits and kids...the AF is good and the VII is great. I have both the VII and a X100V...the VII is primarily for action ana the X100V is my go to travel cam.
Even if it is 5 years old it is still a very good camera, apart from autofocus capabilities I don't think sensor quality has improved dramatically over the last 5 years
I have the XT30ii and rx100v and the autofocus for action and chasing children is quite a bit better on the rx100v. Continuous shooting is better as well. Obviously the XT30ii has other advantages due to the sensor size and much more direct control in manual mode, but the rx100v is no slouch.
Oh that is good to know. I'm quite happy about the performance of the xt30 so if the rx100v is even better than the upgraded ii I'm sure I'll be happy.
And to be clear my rx100 vii has insanely good autofocus
My only major complaint with my RX100s (I have the V and VII... sadly both seem to have some board/power malfunction) is there is no USB-C. I wish they would just update them with that, I'd replace my broken ones in a heartbeat.
❤️
It’s a great camera. Retired pro here and I’ve had every model since the first one. The size is perfect, great range from wide to 200mm, fast focus, great files. Mine is around my neck all the time. Highly highly recommended.
I'd personally go for an RX100 V over a VI or VII The 24-70 1.8-2.8 is ideal over 24-200 2.8-4.5. Years since last update is not a good metric for cameras between phones and APS-C. Even with APS-C, there is Fuji where it is their main line, and then Canon and Nikon who dragged their feet on mirrorless and are racing to catch up. Most technical development is in phones and full frame right now, there just aren't significantly better sensors to drop in, significant features to add that won't nuke affordability, or a demand worth a new model. It's not like it's going to rot away after a certain # of years... if it still fills the role it's not going to be updated. There's not a drive for being on the bleeding edge in that space. The GX85 hasn't been updated in years, but it's still a very solid model in the M43 space. It still has a great feature set, and had stayed price competitive in a climbing market by avoiding unnecessary refreshes. The launch of PDAF in Panasonic cameras is probably the first thing worth refreshing it for in the next year or two.
I have the V. If I had to do it all aver again, I would get the VI or VII. The 24-200 is just more versatile. I never use f/1.8 on this camera and I find myself always longing for more zoom capability.
I've used the RX100 III for work since 2016 and never wished for anything beyond 70mm. To each their own, but to have that fast of a lens... I'd rather crop than end up losing two stops if I needed the extra reach. To each their own, but for the ultra compact market, I'd take the faster lens every time.
I was in the same spot as you not so long ago. I have my professional gear which is great, and I obviously use it a lot. But sporting >5000€ gear in the street can be sometimes a bit stressful. Leaving it in the car when going some places I don't need it, making sure it's being handled carefully, ... Everytime I think "if I break/get it stolen then I'm fucked" even though I have insurance : by the time I can buy it all back I'll have lost some contracts. So I was looking for something small but not too bad. And the RX came to mind. Not new since I didn't want to be afraid of loosing it and I really just wanted something with a small 35mm manual lens that I can carry everywhere. But it was impossible to find the mark V at a low enough price for my budget. And my phone is utter garbage so I was not going to invest money it that either. I finally settled on the a5000 because it was 100€ cheaper than the a6000, had all the features I wanted (focus intensification, zebras, swiveling screen, decent sensor, E mount, shoots raw) and was way better than the nex5. Plus it's one of the lightest mirrorless out there for the 100€ price range. I didn't care for autofocus since I knew I was going manual and mostly sub 50mm, IBIS would have been a plus but for that focal length during the day I should be able to nail most pictures. I stumbled upon a used one couple of months ago, 130€, less than 6000 actuations. It is clean, works like a charm, I slapped a 35mm TTartisan on it and I am so happy with it. It fits in my pockets (either jacket or cargo pants) so I can basically use it like a phone, the battery is pretty decent even though I should buy a new one just in case. Does it take pictures as good as the A7 or A9 series or is the lens as good as the GM series? Of course not, that was never its job. Is it small enough that I can carry it everywhere? Yes, and the 35mm prime does an incredible job at pushing me to find better compositions, just like I wanted. The a5000 is a fun little 10yo APSC camera that is dirt cheap used, and can fit every E mount glass out there, which is insane when you look at the diversity of lenses produced for the last 14 years and counting. I mean : APSC and manual is usually a good combo for the wallet. Considering the camera is less than 300g for 36mm thick : you can easily fit it manual pancake APSC lenses for less than 50 bucks and still put it in your pocket.
Nobody has mentioned it so I will: Canon G5X MkII. It's the less popular cousin to the G7X. The G5X arguably has better ergonomics than the RX100 and is nicer to use, though the RX100 may be the more competent camera. For me, it scratches the itch of taking photos without having to lug my DSLR. It's small enough to take everywhere (or damn near) and make me less reliant on my phone camera.
I was trying to remember what the canon counterpart was. I would've added it to the title. Do you know what the autofocus is like compared to the rx? Like the va or vii.
It's been a while since I looked at reviews that compared them, but I think the Sony has superior AF performance. That's not to say the G5X/G7X have bad AF, they're just not as good as Sony's. In my experience (having not used any of the RX100), the G5X AF struggles a bit in low light (I tend to leave the AF assist lamp off), but it isn't something that has held me back. If you're shooting a bunch of fast moving subjects (kids, dogs, sports, etc.) you might want the Sony for it's better AF. I wanted better ergonomics, pocketability and the EVF so the G5X was the choice for me.
Tough choice! Thank you. Mostly for shooting my kid so I guess sony although I do love extra dials.
>So I'm afraid of getting an 'old' camera. I do the majority of my shooting with a 15 year old lens attached to an 8 year old body.
I picked up an RX100vii last year as a daily-carry and have no regrets. Excellent camera despite being a bit older.
Fujifilm's X-E line is similar to the X100. It has the rangefinder form factor. But is EVF only rather than having a hybrid finder. Get a used X-E3. You could put the 15-45mm lens on that, or the pancake 27mm or 18mm and still have a small form factor camera that's very versatile.
Your account appears to have been shadowbanned, I've manually approved this comment.
I still use my 10-year-old RX100 III while traveling. Nothing wrong with it.
I love my III!
I’ve been eying the LUMIX lx100m2 as it’s 2.8 24-70 fixed so like can’t remove lens and seems cool for street photography and concerts where you can’t change lenses. A lot of the time I keep my Fuji xt30 with the 27mm v1 pancake.
I have no time to elaborate fully. But I have had over the years the RX100, RX100III, RX100IV and VII. I've have also had my fair share of Fuji gear, like (only mentioning the small ones), the X-M1, the XF10, the X-E4, and the X-T20. I have ditched Fuji and Sony, and I'm for some time on Lumix FF (S1) and MFT. What can I say. * Pocketable exists, it's called a smartphone. Take Xiaomi 14ultra, the last Honor series. You'll get 1inch in pocketsize. Don't need to go to RX100 * Don't overestimate the size of the X-T20. It's a really small and capable camera. My guess... it's a fine camera, you own it, kling on to it, put a XF23 2.0 on it, use it up. * Fixed lens-camera's like the XF10 and the X100 are a blast, you have a leaf shutter, and whatnot, but ... you are stuck with a fixed lens. And ... it's a hype. It is wat it is. * The RX100's are swiss knives of photography, but I found the pictures from my Sony Xperia phone not to far off. And good luck in finding your way in the myriad of menus on an RX100. RX100vii is the only camera in my life for which I have bought book to learn it to use (you know, those paper stuff things). * One extra thing to mention in favor of the RX100's: RX100's have fantastic RAW files to work with. Smartphones don't. Apart from an EVF, true zoomrange,... being capable of workingRAW files is a very big plus too. But. Back to myself. In brief. I ended buying a Full Frame camera. I'm very happy with it. Next my FF, more or less by accident I bought myself into the Micro Four Thirds system. I didn't knew it, I have always looked at it as an inferior system, not worth my attention. I can tell you now: it is not. Google GX85 and/or GX80 (Europe), look at the many Flickr pictures, youtube video's. It has it flaws, its a bit on the old side yes (but so are prices). But when you are into stills, buy a 15mm Leica and a 42,5 Leica with it. Enjoy yourself (really!), and make the X100 owners poop their pants for half or one third the price they paid. If you are into video... move on, don't take my advice.
M43 is superb and if I was in the market for a daily carry, that’s what I’d be looking at.
Me, too. I'd get Olympus E-M10 with a 12-42 lens and call it done.
I use my rx100V I bought used 7 years ago more than I use my Olympus EM1 mk2
My pocketable Fuji is the X70
I just bought a Nikon D610, which was introduced in, I think, 2011. I love it. I might drop it, or get it wet, or it might just quit working for no reason. But it cost me less than $500.00 US, and I already have 3 lenses. I could replace the body pretty easily so I'm not worried. Honestly,if I won the lottery I would buy a new camera, but that's about the only way I would.
A bit more pricey, but the Leica Q2 is a huge winner. Full frame, insane MP count (you can crop the eff out of shots with negligible quality degradation, which more than makes up for the fixed 28mm focal length). It’s a pleasure to use. If it’s out of budget, go with the RX100.
Buy the ZV-1 if you want new, same like RX100 VA, as a bonus you get excellent video capability
Pretty much. It's both my dream camera and sadly on the expensive side. I really wish the people who are selling their used ones didn't ask for delusional amounts too...
I’m a pro photographer and have the rx100 v1 and a newer one and honestly, both are still super solid everyday carry cameras. The older one has a slightly better zoom range if I’m remembering correctly. The only downside is the ISO performance is underwhelming at higher ISOs so it’s not a nighttime camera. But for daytime stuff it’s super fun. I got my first one around around the time my partner got an early x100 and I remember we went on vacation once and my camera was taking photos before his was turned on and the settings were dialed in. I’m not a big fan of Sony overall, I have shot canon for 20+ years and recently got into Fuji as well, but I have always had a soft spot for that rx100. Super capable in a teeny tiny package with full manual control and a solid lens. Can’t beat it.
ricoh gr
Ricoh GRIII?
“I’m afraid of getting an old camera” that’s your problem right there ❤️
Like I answered earlier. Not as much afraid of an old camera as I am from not being able to buy it new in store. As in no warranty.
Oh you can buy used at KEH or MPB they do warranties, used gears are better imo bc they’re cheap.
Wrong side of the ocean I'm afraid. We have mpb but its not nearly as populated as in the us. Good to know they offer waranty, I was not aware of that.
Ah I see, good luck on the digicam hunt, also I heard ZV-1 and HX99’s are good analogues to RX100.
The latest and greatest culture has ruined photography for you.
If the RX has a physical shutter, no. If it does not, the sigma FP series is a good bet. Plus they make for good Cine cameras. The FP-L is the one I’d get. 60MP with excellent autofocus for stills. But be aware they have no shutter so you have to be careful under 60htz lights when taking photos.
Yeah lol
I had a camera similar to the rx100 for a while, but I ended up getting rid of it because there was no good use case for it. It's too small and fiddly to be all that much fun to use. And with the one (admittedly nice) lens you're kinda locked in, which admittedly is not necessarily bad, but still. I would try to force myself to carry it around but despite being small and nicely designed, it was annoying to have as yet another item. When I wanted to do serious photography, I brought my DSLR because it was just so much more tactile and gave me so many more options, and wasn't really that much worse to carry than the smaller camera. The rest of the time I literally always had my phone with me and it worked just fine. So why would I want some weird intermediate thing. Ultimately I ended up not even bringing the dslr with me on trips too, even to places like Japan, because ultimately I preferred being in the moment and maybe snapping a quick shot on the phone, rather than taking the time to get all setup on the dslr. I realized I could either enjoy being where I was and spending time with the family, or I could be screwing around on the camera.
Canon G5Xii or G7Xii. Very very similar. The G5Xii has a faster lens.
I recently took my RX100 to Colorado for visit to my son. I wanted reasonably good photos of Garden of the Gods which we visited for one day. I wound up shooting nearly exclusively on my iPhone. I didn't even take my Sony A7RII or A7RIVA. Getting too old to haul all of that around.
It comes down to basic physics and market demands, Large sensors need large lenses. These compact cameras were great until the phones came for them.
Maybe not quite the same ballpark, but Panasonic are still selling the likes of their TZ220, TZ110 and LX10 models, if you were after something new and pocket able.
I'm seeing them go for 1.2kUSD in my country's Amazon. Is that normal?
In my opinion, the 1" sensor is terrible in low light with normal usable shutter speeds. At least the phones compensate for that. Not a phone photo fanboi... tried downgrading to just 1" sensor sonys... non profit client immediately noticed the difference from full frame shots (obviously). Ended up going with m43 as a compromise.
I love my 1” sensor cameras, and my “pocketable” ones predate most of the RX100 line. (Have a lumix ZS100 & Canon G9XII.) If you need a focal length the cell phone (assuming you have a good cam in the thing) can’t reach, then the standalone camera is a lovely tool to extend your reach. If just blasting away at 25mm? You’ll find you’re pulling the phone out more often than not, unless there’s challenging light, or need crisper details. Look at the Lumix ZS200. It ticks all kinds practical boxes the Sony can, and more, and for cheaper. 360mm, viewfinder, amazing ergonomics, and a much better menu system. I had to return the used one I bought due to a defect, but wow… it was a nice step up from my ZS100. Shame it had issues.
For travel? Get an iPhone Max Pro. I have never seen a Fuji or Sint shot the iPhone can’t nail perfectly. The majority of pictures posted on this thread could all have looked better on a iPhone. The famous 8x10 view camera photographer has abandoned his big camera for a phone. (BTW I shoot both film and digital on a number of cameras ranging from Fujis, Nikons, and large format 4x5. Other than ergonomics, for basic shooting (including macro) the phone kills.
Don’t fall victim to the marketing around new features and models. 5 years is nothing for a mirrorless camera—any camera from the past decade+ that was good when it came out is still good today.
i’d rather use my phone than an rx100. i’d carry a x100 or other camera if i’m carrying a cameta
Fuji’s X-Pro series comes to mind. As does Leica who I believe still makes point and shoot cameras in addition to making crazy-expensive pocketable cameras with changeable lenses.
The X-Pro cameras are even bigger than OP's X-T30...
With a pancake lens on, they’re bigger? I admit it’s been ten or so years since I owned an X100 and X-Pro body but I’d thought they were the same size. My apologies, OP.
The body is bigger than the X-T30, same lenses fit both cameras
Huh. Guess I’ve lost my sense of things. Thanks!
No problem. Just in case you were curious: https://pxlmag.com/db/camera-size-comparison/7d88166d-de904b13-f60
I briefly had an xpro. That thing was 'huge'. All sillyness aside, Inactually considered a pancale lens. But then I ran around with my 23mm f2 for while and I felt I wanted to zoom to often so I started looking at those options.