Jump to content

Canon G1x 11 v Sony RX100 11


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, TeeCee said:

eventually bought the G5X

 

I was thinking of this to replace my deteriorating RX100 I but the image quality didn't look quite good enough for Alamy (blurred corners very evident, grainy in low light). Don't you find that? My original RX100 was also very hit and miss and I only submitted a few photos from it. Got a RX100 III instead, which is very noticeably a lot better and hopefully will give me lots more usable shots. The main difference is lens quality, and a brighter lens meaning you don't have to raise ISO so much. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I have both Sony RX100 mk1 and the mk3 and not had any trouble with either. both excellent cameras in my opinion.

 

Got the mk3 for the benefit of wider lens, tilting screen, eye level viewfinder and better in camera processing.

 

Allan

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the G1X MkII. One nice thing is it has the same color characteristics as my Canon DSLR's.  It doesn't have a lot of megapixels, but the lens is very sharp and the touchscreen is nice.  If it only had a built in electronic viewfinder it would be perfect.  It has good close focusing ability.  Its a little bigger than pocket sized and feels solidly built.  Here is an example photo with the G1X.  Check out the Sony A6000 or A6300 they are 24 mp lightweight, electronic viewfinder, and if you wait a bit they should start offering discounts for Christmas soon.  With 24 megapixels you get more flexibility to crop the photos.

 

a-vermeer-horizontal-directional-boring-machine-and-crew-working-in-JKJ57H.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Robert said:

 

I was thinking of this to replace my deteriorating RX100 I but the image quality didn't look quite good enough for Alamy (blurred corners very evident, grainy in low light). Don't you find that? My original RX100 was also very hit and miss and I only submitted a few photos from it. Got a RX100 III instead, which is very noticeably a lot better and hopefully will give me lots more usable shots. The main difference is lens quality, and a brighter lens meaning you don't have to raise ISO so much. 

No issues so far, though I never use it in really low light, default back to the 5d II or the 6d at that point.  Certainly no blurry corners, everything sharp edge to edge even at 2.8....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.