just because you can afford something does not mean that you can justify buying it. Perhaps if the RX-1 was 24 or 28mm I'd be a little more tempted. When the lens comes off, i'll definitely bite.
Most of us would buy FF if we can afford it - right?
Eventually, we all (myself included) need to realize that there is no such thing as most of us.
Just been looking at some rx-1 reviews. For me I can't see why it costs $3k. The AF is still contrast detection right? Can't be all that faster than the EOS M, can it? And no removable battery?? No charger in the box? Just a USB cable? How is that useful for travel?
Quite happy knowing I have something that costs $299 and does pretty much the same thing. (Takes puctures). Full frame? So what.
I had the RX1 and I can objectively and subjectively see why it costs $3k; the Zeiss lens has been specifically matched with that body/sensor and all within a very small, manageable form factor (albeit too small for some). After trying the EOS-M at a local store, I can confirm that the AF speed of the RX1 is noticeably faster. Is it 10x faster (at 10x the price)? Well, that's something you'd have to decide for yourself after actually trying it out
. Notice how I said that I "had" the RX1? Although it is a superb little camera, it is still somewhat niche with that single 35mm, non-interchangeable focal length, and it doesn't quite match the AF speed of modern DSLRs. Therefore, I sold it. To each his own I suppose, but I've never gotten that "Wow!" factor as consistently as I did with the RX1. It was just so easy. As for its full frame sensor vs. APS-C in the EOS-M: I'm not a betting man, but if you were to slap on the 22mm f/2 STM, or even a Zeiss 35mm f/2 ZE (or 21mm f/2.8 for an almost equivalent FOV) on an EOS-M and compared it to the RX1, I'm almost positive you'd pick the latter as a more pleasing image 9/10 times. That's how good the RX1's IQ is. However, at $299 w/ an f/2 prime, add on the EF adapter for full compatibility with all of your existing Canon lenses, the EOS-M truly is a steal. So if you're looking for affirmation for your recent purchase, I'd be more than happy to give you a pat on the back; but it'd be ridiculous to disregard the RX1 simply because it is too expensive for your taste, especially if you haven't even tried it out. Both are excellent cameras for their intended purposes: the EOS-M as a pocket cam and/or backup to its much larger DSLR bretheren, and the RX1 as an IQ monster in a smaller form factor (which you pay a premium for); but neither excel in fast-paced action.
P.S. The RX1 uses the same removable battery that the RX100 does, but you have to purchase the battery charger separately.