# Canon S100 vs Sony RX100



## DCM1024 (Sep 10, 2012)

I want a compact, fixed lens camera to take everywhere when I'm not carrying my 5d2 or 7d. Have previously tried m43, E-P1 and E-PM1, and felt they were too slow and didn't want to buy multiple lenses for them and my dslrs. Bought an S100, it takes sharp, detailed shots but also tempted to exchange for RX100. I keep reading that the Sony has a sensor that is triple the size, and the price is double what I paid for the S100. Can anyone who has used both offer insight as to whether I should stay with the Canon or return it and get the Sony? Can the Sony offer double or triple the iq to justify the price? Thanks, Debbie


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 10, 2012)

The grass is always greener  
However, if your current camera is missing something (like a viewfinder) --- oops, no help there.
Seriously, the Sony is going to give a higher IQ. The G1X is going to have even more of the advantages you get from a large sensor.
Read the reviews, there are several competent ones, and if there is something there that solves a problem, go for it.
I'm still waiting to see what Canon announces over the next few days. So far, I haven't seen a big enough of a improvement in the new models to make me replace my G11.


----------



## thelebaron (Sep 10, 2012)

Sold the s100 for the rx100, the rx is significantly better at lower iso's, at the highest isos the advantage didnt seem as great, although I cant recall if this was due to jpg in the rx vs raw from the s100(due to lightroom not supporting the raws for the sony yet). 

performance is way way faster too, its almost instant autofocus compared to the s100, I think street shooters would love it. 

I think its real downside is sony interface, Ive always felt very at home with canon's ui. I had a nex before both cameras as I thought like you it would be a nice complement to my dslr, and also ditched it due to switching lenses/still too clunky. The nex really was awful to use, the rx is better but it takes some getting used to. Also the rx100 feels solidly built, but its just not ergonomic compared to the s100. Its like they took all the specs of the s100 chassis but then got rid of all best bits, the nice grip and the tactile buttons, and put in smaller fiddlier controls, it definitely doesnt feel as good to handle as an s100.

I think its worth it if you really care about the image quality, to me it fits quality wise between 7d the s100. If you are happy with the s100 produces, it may not be worth it.
The tipping point for me was that the video it takes is leaps and bounds better than the s100(with af during filming).


----------



## te4o (Sep 10, 2012)

Unfortunately I haven't used a S100. But I use the RX100: I forgot the price paid already, still enjoying the excellent IQ, the excellent colours, the rapid AF, the excellent AF-ed registered Face-detected sharp video in stereo, the fun picture modes, the OOF blur @ 1.8, and the form factor. I put it in a soft cover for sunglasses into my pocket. 
The UI is good, the customisation is good, yes, it slips a bit in my big hand but hey, I am not throwing it around. 
Could be 24-105, but well, you can"t get everything. I shoot it without hesitation up to ISO 1600 but even 6400 is usable for me if needed. I'd say, no mistake. 
And,  as we are all going to end up with a Sony FF in the long term  it is better to start getting used to their interface sooner than later - it gives an evolutionary advantage...


----------



## cliffwang (Sep 10, 2012)

I actually did some quick research for both S100 and RX100 for the replacement of my S95. I believe RX100 is much better than S100. You can see RX100 having many good reviews and you also can see a lot good samples from flickr.com. I think you can check reviews and samples first. The only question for you is if RX100 is worth for double price of S100.


----------



## DCM1024 (Sep 10, 2012)

Thanks everyone for your input. I am impressed by the level of support for the RX100 on a Canon oriented website. So, I put the RX100 in my shopping cart, but then the phone rang. It was my boyfriend, letting me know that layoffs have begun at his company. He has survived the first round but asked me to avoid buying anything new at the moment. Guess I'll stick with the S100 for now, but again I wanted to thank each of you for your comments and insight.


----------



## Gman (Sep 16, 2012)

Now there's the Lumix LX7 and the Canon G15 possibly there will be a few G11 and G12s going second hand you could pick up cheap?


----------



## Michael_pfh (Sep 16, 2012)

I got my RX100 today - very positive after playing around with it for a while.


----------



## powershot2012 (Sep 16, 2012)

Really comes down to price and size. If you want the smallest camera with the best image quality, RX100 is it. No other camera will fit in your pocket with a built in flash and sensor size larger than 1/1.7" and offer the same or better performance, not the S100, S110, G12, G15, LX5 or LX7, EX2, or XZ1 or XZ2.



DCM1024 said:


> I want a compact, fixed lens camera to take everywhere when I'm not carrying my 5d2 or 7d. Have previously tried m43, E-P1 and E-PM1, and felt they were too slow and didn't want to buy multiple lenses for them and my dslrs. Bought an S100, it takes sharp, detailed shots but also tempted to exchange for RX100. I keep reading that the Sony has a sensor that is triple the size, and the price is double what I paid for the S100. Can anyone who has used both offer insight as to whether I should stay with the Canon or return it and get the Sony? Can the Sony offer double or triple the iq to justify the price? Thanks, Debbie


----------



## powershot2012 (Sep 16, 2012)

Enjoy! Seems to be a very impressive camera. Unfortunately, Canon nor Panasonic nor Olympus have offered anything as impressive let alone better than what Sony is offering.



Michael_pfh said:


> I got my RX100 today - very positive after playing around with it for a while.


----------



## jm345 (Sep 16, 2012)

How well does the RX100 autofocus in low-light? I have found the Canon Powershots (although cheaper) to be frustratingly slow.

Also, does the RX100 have autofocus and auto exposure in Movie mode? Thanks.


----------



## sarangiman (Sep 16, 2012)

te4o said:


> And,  as we are all going to end up with a Sony FF in the long term



+1
Haha, I'm glad someone just went ahead & said it 

The center resolution/contrast of the Zeiss lens is itself reason enough to get the RX100, not to mention the fact that it's a Sony EXMOR sensor (but don't expect the pixel level dynamic range to match that of the, say, D800).

Furthermore, I can't believe the bounce-able flash isn't better marketed-- such a simple idea, yet a game-changer for P&S flash photography. Sony really does seem to be the more innovative camera company these days...


----------



## powershot2012 (Sep 17, 2012)

True, but that 1" sensor is the clear advantage. 




sarangiman said:


> te4o said:
> 
> 
> > And,  as we are all going to end up with a Sony FF in the long term
> ...


----------



## sarangiman (Sep 18, 2012)

> True, but that 1" sensor is the clear advantage.



To an extent, yes. But remember that that 1" sensor has better dynamic range than my much larger Canon 5D Mark III full-frame sensor.

So there are a number of factors, not the least of which is the pixel-level read noise, which is extremely low for Sony sensors. As well as for the Canon S100 sensor, in fact). Pixel-level DR on the RX100 is only slightly better than on the S100, but given the extra pixels (~20 vs. ~12), normalized DR is significantly better.


----------



## sarangiman (Sep 18, 2012)

> Sony really does seem to be the more innovative camera company these days...



Actually, I should add Fujifilm to that list.
http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/f/finepix_f550exr/features/


----------



## verysimplejason (Sep 26, 2012)

Definitely RX100 is better unless you don't want to spend that much.


----------



## powershot2012 (Sep 26, 2012)

True. The S100 is a great camera, the RX100 is just even better.



verysimplejason said:


> Definitely RX100 is better unless you don't want to spend that much.


----------



## Michael_pfh (Sep 26, 2012)

Tested the RX100 in Cyprus for a week - when I don't need AF in broad daylight I won't bother bringing along my 1D4 any more... ;-)


----------



## sarangiman (Sep 26, 2012)

Michael_pfh said:


> Tested the RX100 in Cyprus for a week - when I don't need AF in broad daylight I won't bother bringing along my 1D4 any more... ;-)



?? Are you trying to say the AF on the RX100 doesn't work in broad daylight? Confused.


----------



## MARKOE PHOTOE (Sep 26, 2012)

Have both of these and my experiences are as follows:

S100 is definitely more pocketable than the RX-100.
S100 UI is easier to use and navigate than RX-100.
S100 is much cheaper than RX-100.

RX-100 is better at low light.
RX-100 IQ is MUCH better.
RX-100 feature set improves the functionally of this P&S. 

In summary: RX-100 goes in the bag. S100 sits alone on the shelf. :-\


----------



## Michael_pfh (Sep 27, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> Michael_pfh said:
> 
> 
> > Tested the RX100 in Cyprus for a week - when I don't need AF in broad daylight I won't bother bringing along my 1D4 any more... ;-)
> ...



It does work in broad daylight but I was referring to fast moving objects where I would need the AF speed of a DSLR.


----------



## verysimplejason (Sep 27, 2012)

MARKOE PHOTOE said:


> Have both of these and my experiences are as follows:
> 
> S100 is definitely more pocketable than the RX-100.
> S100 UI is easier to use and navigate than RX-100.
> ...



or, if you have S100 and you just like facebook-worthy pictures and you just want to have a pocketable camera. RX100 I think is more comparable to G11/G12 though it's smaller. For me, a S100 / DSLR combo is still hard to beat. Where S100 fails, you have the DSLR to cover it. Of course, no one is stopping you if you have the money to buy an RX100. But for me, I'd rather use the extra money in pampering my DSLR with better lenses.


----------



## sarangiman (Sep 27, 2012)

Michael_pfh said:


> It does work in broad daylight but I was referring to fast moving objects where I would need the AF speed of a DSLR.



Gotcha.

Actually I was trying to shoot some clouds out of an airplane window & the RX100 just wouldn't focus. I thought the clouds had enough contrast to focus easily... but it was extremely difficult. 

Maybe any compact would've had trouble; I'm not sure. I really do love the RX100. The bounce-flash, the larger sensor, the longer focal length lens for equivalent FOV compared to S100 guarantees that your diffraction-limited aperture is higher (e.g. f/4-f/5.6) --making those smaller apertures actually useful, the contrast of the lens (in the center anyway), etc.


----------



## wickidwombat (Oct 4, 2012)

sarangiman said:


> > Sony really does seem to be the more innovative camera company these days...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



main problem is fuji diservice departement = utterly useless
so if you go fuji pray nothing goes wrong with the camera

at least canon have good service


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 4, 2012)

wickidwombat said:


> sarangiman said:
> 
> 
> > > Sony really does seem to be the more innovative camera company these days...
> ...



+1 to Canon service. Maybe that's one of the reasons you pay premium with Canon even if their product is a little bit underspec'd and overpriced.


----------

