Camera Decision: Sony RX100 III or Canon M3?

• 

  KitchenSink on 21/04/2017 - 00:25

  Here's my 2 cents. Both are different cameras for their purposes.

  RX100 - excellent point and shoot (All in one), very portable (pocketable) = easy to carry around everywhere like a smartphone. Its there when you need it. Also has a built in EVF too.
  M3 - Interchangeable lens, bigger sensor but also "bulkier" in comparison to the RX100. I don't think its as pocketable.

  Are you willing to invest in lenses or be happy with an all in one solution? That's what you should be thinking about.

  But if i had to choose, RX100 (I had the mark 2 and its an excellent portable travel camera for all types of situations. But I now have the A7ii which is completely different and more serious). Cannot say much on the M3 except from reading the specs.

• 

  Hornpub on 21/04/2017 - 03:49

  -2

  entry DSLR sucks. nowadays, even phone can long exposure. ……

  • 

    cheepwun on 30/04/2017 - 01:30

    Strange comment.
    DSLR/APS-C/MFT mirrorless advantages:
    * remarkably lower noise at any given ISO (far better than any phone)
    * great control over depth-of-field (smooth background blur when you want it)
    * controls and buttons typically very helpful for picture-taking (fast manual focusing, faster AF, tracking AF, etc.)
    * image stabilisation, etc. which not many phones have
    * remarkable lens choices
    * remarkable flash gun / flash triggering choices and performance

    Those are the bigger advantages to me. There are many others

    • 

      Hornpub on 30/04/2017 - 15:10

      but cant put in pocket….

• 

  ddxsamx on 21/04/2017 - 10:29

  RX100 hands down.
  One of the best point and shoots.

  It also has awesome video capabilities. I actually shoot 80% video with it

• 

  Braintrain1000 on 22/04/2017 - 11:17

  Go with R100 M3 or above. I did my research on this one but didn't have fund to buy this. Btw i have a Nikon d5100 DSLR which takes horrible picture.

  • 

    Certified Angus on 23/04/2017 - 11:13

    I don't know what Nikon is doing. I bought a D3200 last year (24MP etc) and had to sell it because the image quality was crap compared to my old D90 (12MP from 2009) using the same lenses.

• 

  deltaray on 22/04/2017 - 18:10

  Just curious, where did you find that RX100 for around $600? I cant seem to find anything below $800

  • 

    anthonyyladd on 23/04/2017 - 23:06

    I found mine on eBay, I've just purchased it and it is on the way. I'd suggest turning on email notifications for new listings if you can and also participating in auctions if you come across any. Hope this helps!

    • 

      grimo82 on 05/07/2017 - 13:47

      so second hand?? sale retail on the m11 to was recently $599?

      • 

        nubix on 05/07/2017 - 17:58

        i got a refurb from sony ebay store. turned out to be like new for 680. by coincidence i also have the canon m3 which i got from jb for $350. can say we are much happier paying double for the rx100

• 

  jerjergege on 27/04/2017 - 13:24

  -1

  RX100 Mk V for me instead.

• 

  cheepwun on 30/04/2017 - 10:37

  I am looking for my first camera. In the past I've used my phone to capture portraits, selfies and food.

  Which is the better option for these uses? I've heard a lot of good things about mirrorless changing the game and competing with DSLRs but then again I've also heard so many people vouch for the RX100.

  ---

  I would have bought the M3. But actual picture quality is more important to me than portability. The 22mm is an excellent lens but offers no zoom though. That can be limiting in many situations. But you have the option for more lenses in future, which is quite liberating - at a cost. The output of the Canon should be worlds above what the Sony can offer, owing to the far larger sensor. And you'll be able to blur backgrounds effortlessly for your portraits, really making them pop. For your uses I think the M3 would have been a far better choice. But the Sony has a built-in zoom and better portability, so you gain in some areas.

• 

  hypie on 01/05/2017 - 23:49

  I've got the RX100, the sensor is unbelievable and so is the lense.

  Don't forget the RX100 III has a f1.8-2.8 zoom lense. Which would be pretty damn expensive on an APS-C camera. The RX100 is pocket sized which is awesome and the quality is phenomenal. I had the RX100 (original) on release and decided to upgrade a year ago.

  The features on the mk3 are also amazing, including the flip screen, ND filters, wifi etc.

  I have a Canon 5D mk2, and I don't really take it travelling anymore because of the RX100m3.

  • 

    cheepwun on 03/05/2017 - 14:09

    Don't forget the RX100 III has a f1.8-2.8 zoom lense. Which would be pretty damn expensive on an APS-C camera.

    Actually might not be expensive if you take into account equivalence. https://www.dpreview.com/articles/2666934640/what-is-equival… but it all depends on what you are looking for. In terms of noise & low light capability, a larger sensor camera can easily match an "f1.8" from a tiny sensor camera while using a far higher F number (smaller aperture), so these F1.8 specs cannot directly be compared between totally different sensor sizes.

    • 

      hypie on 08/05/2017 - 23:59

      Yes a full frame camera can take similar photos with a higher F number lens, but I'd like to see someone fit one in their back pocket (I am aware of Sony's a7 range). The f1.8-2.8 zoom may not be expensive in SLR sense, but it's definitely worth a hell of a lot more than a standard lens in a compact, including the f1.8-4.9 available in the mark 1.

  • 

    grimo82 on 10/07/2017 - 17:41

    excuse the very novice compare whats what the main selling points of the m3 over the m2??

    from what i can see the m3 has viewfinder, less zoom?

    both have tilt-able screen, nfc, wifi etc etc

    • 

      grimo82 on 10/07/2017 - 17:49

      just did some googling, not sure for me the m3 is worth $400 extra over the m2

      http://newatlas.com/sony-rx100-iii-vs-ii-comparison/32227/

      • 

        hypie on 12/07/2017 - 23:25

        m2 = m1 with wifi and tilt screen

        m3 = f1.8-2.8 lens, better manual features. If i remember correctly the m3 tilt screen is improved too.

        The mark 2 is discontinued.

        The author of that review is moronic. 2 most important parts of a camera are sensor and lens. He completely discounts the fact that the lens is significantly better in low light (when zoomed in).

• 

  TurkishDelight on 13/05/2017 - 18:04

  sony a7r ii