turbo said:
Again, I would suggest a high-quality pocket sized camera.
That's what I'm leaning towards as well. I'm debating between the Canon S100 or waiting for the Sony RX100. The only thing is I'm not sure if the Sony will be worth the extra price for my uses.
I'm looking at the comparison
here.
The main advantages of the RX100 for me seem to be:
- Longer battery life (330 shots vs. 200 shots for the S100)
- Light sensitivity (25,600 ISO vs 6,400 ISO)
- Less lag (13 ms vs 250 ms)
I could buy extra batteries for the S100 for under $50, so the battery life is not a big deal, just a bit of a nuisance to have to carry/remember to swap them out. [Edit: Make that $10 + S/H, after a bit of searching]
I don't know enough about light sensitivity to know how much this difference will affect my photos. I imagine for outdoor shots it won't matter, but what about indoor shots? As a beginner photographer, will I notice much difference between the two? I'd like to be able to take photos of my son at his gymnastics and swimming classes, photos of people at family events and/or parties I attend, and maybe photos of displays at museums/zoos/other attractions I visit. Would the S100 be more than sufficient, or will I be disappointed with the image quality in any of these situations?
Does anyone know how noticeable a 250 ms shutter lag is? Will I find myself missing things at my son's gymnastics class, or will that be good enough for most shots?
I don't intend to be doing many (if any) large printouts, so the higher MP of the RX100 doesn't matter too much to me. The other advantages of the RX100 listed on that site don't seem like they would affect my usage too much (unless you guys think the aperture or number of focus points will be a big advantage?).
On the flip side, the S100 has a few features that look like they could be useful as well:
- 240 fps movies
- Integrated GPS
- Better zoom (5x vs 3.6x)
Has anyone here used the S100 high speed video? How is the video quality? Does it work well both indoors and out?
It also mentions that the S100 has better wide angle and better macro capability, but I don't know how much either of those would help me out.
They're both pocket cameras, but the S100 is slightly smaller and lighter, which is a plus (though not a huge deal, as they're both very portable).
Any thoughts on these features? Will I even notice the improvements of the RX100, or is it just a waste of money for me? Are there any other features/specs that I should consider in deciding that I've missed here?
Edit: Or any other pocket cameras that offer similar features/performance?
