Canon S100 vs Sony RX100

[DCM1024]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

[powershot2012]

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.

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]

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.

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

[jm345]

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]

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]

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

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...

[sarangiman]

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]

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/