Equipment

What to Look at to Find the Best Compact Camera for You

Why Point and Shoot Cameras?

Well, duh, because I wanted to use one. I go to the beach once a month. I wanted something that took better pictures than my cell phone, doesn’t involve carrying a bunch of gear, and doesn’t include changing lenses in blowing sand.

Since I don’t use this type of camera often, I thought maybe I’d try out a couple and see which one I liked the best, so I dropped over to the Lensrentals website to see what we stocked. I found out we carry like 28 compact cameras and I didn’t have the slightest clue which one was what. I wouldn’t buy a camera without trying one or two out, but I’m sure not going to try out 28, so a little narrowing down was needed.

The names don’t help. A Canon G1X Mk III isn’t an upgrade from the Canon G1X MkII; it’s an entirely different camera. A Sony RX100 V is a slight upgrade from an RX100 IV, which is a major upgrade from the RX100 III. But the Sony RX100 VI, of course, is a different camera.  The Fuji 100F is much newer than the Fuji 100T (I guess they rolled right through the end of the alphabet and started over).

The manufacturer’s blurbs don’t help much either. Everyone screams out whatever gimmick the marketing department pushes for that particular camera, most of which is, well, a marketing gimmick. Despite their claims, something that weighs 2 pounds and is 5 inches thick is not pocketable. A sensor smaller than the one in my cell phone is not a ‘large sensor,’ and no 24mm to 3,000mm lens is ‘high quality.’

So, me being me, I made a spreadsheet and started filling in the blanks, to narrow the field down to some logical choices. I thought I’d share this, so no one else ever has to do that again. Is it a complete list? Oh, hell no. It’s just the ones Lensrentals carries. There’s about 450 more out there I didn’t even look at. Are the conclusions fair? Again, no. It’s the ones I liked the best. But I will tell you what I considered important so you can see why I chose what is best for me and give you some tools so you can modify the list for your own tastes.

So What Do I Care About?

Sensor Size

Well, as I’ve already said, it has to have a better sensor than my cell phone. The manufacturers are quick to tell you it’s got 27 Megapixels, but not usually so quick to tell you if the sensor is smaller a  mustard seed. If it’s tiny, they’ll often try to make it sound big by using archaic terms from when sensor size was measured by the vacuum tube it came in, like 1/2.5″. So let’s start with a quick table showing the approximate size in mm² of the various sensors.


Format

mm2
Full Frame860
APS-C370
micro 4/3225
1.5"250
1"116
2/3"58
1/2.5"27
1/2.3"24

A good cell phone camera has a sensor of between 25mm² and 40mm². So I put a premium on a compact camera at least having a 1″ sensor. If I’m going to use a cell-phone size sensor, I might as well put one of those horrid clamp-on lenses on my cell phone.

The Lens

Lenses are what I do, so I’m into high-quality lenses. Now I’m not going to test compact camera lenses for you, but there are two basic principles that apply: Prime lenses are better than zoom lenses and the longer the zoom range, the worse the lens. There are very, very few exceptions to those generalizations. I want ‘better than my cell phone’ capabilities, so I would like a little zoomability, and I’m going to prefer good 3X or so zooms. On the other hand, a high-quality sensor lets me do some aggressive cropping so I’d consider a prime lens if the sensor were stellar.

There’s another sort-of-marketing BS that applies to the aperture label on compact camera lenses – if the camera has a small sensor, the ‘real’ aperture is much smaller than what it claims to be. It’s geeky stuff, but if you’re interested, there’s an About Apertures appendix.

Anyway, I ended up making a table of cameras, lenses, megapixels, and sensor size for your amusement. You can click to show all 26 cameras and then sort by whatever column(s) you’re interested in. You’re welcome.


Lens

Lens (FF Equiv)

Mpix

Sensor
Canon G1X MII24-120mm f/1.8-2.812.81.5"
Canon G1X MIII24-72mm f/2.8-5.624.2APS-C
Canon G3X24-600 f/2.8-5.620.21"
Canon G5X24-100mm f/1.8-2.820.21"
Canon G7X24-100mm f/1.8-2.820.21"
Canon G7X MII24-100mm f/1.8-2.820.21"
Canon G9X28-84mm f/2-4.920.21"
Fuji X100F35mm f/224.3APS-C
Fuji X100T35mm f/216APS-C
Fuji X7028mm F/2.816APS-C
Fuji XF1028mm F/2.824.2APS-C
Fuji X3028-112mm f/2-2.8122/3"
Leica Q (Type 116)28mm f1.724.2FF
Leica D-Lux24-75mm f/1.7-2.812m4/3
Ricoh GRIII28MM F/2.816.2APS-C
Sigma DP1 Quattro28mm f/2.820/39APS-C
Sigma DP2 Quattro45mm f/2.820/39APS-C
Sony RX100 IV24-70mm f/1.8-2.820.1 BSI1"
Sony RX100 V24-70mm f/1.8-2.820.1 BSI1"
Sony RX100 VI24-200mm f/2.8-4.520.1 BSI1"
Sony RX10 III24-600mm f/2.4-420.1 BSI1"
Sony RX10 IV24-600mm f/2.4-420.1 BSI1"
Sony RX1R II35mm f/242FF
Nikon Coolpix P90024-200mm f/2.8-6.5161/2.3"
Nikon Coolpix P100024-3000mm f/2.8-816 BSI1/2.3"

The Camera Size

Here’s where I have to group things a bit. I want a pocketable camera, not a hang-around-my-neck camera. Since I have absolutely no fashion consciousness at all, I’m willing to go with ‘fit in a cargo pants pocket’ (don’t judge). You may always carry a backpack or big purse (or if you judge me on cargo pants, probably a fanny pack).

By careful trial and error (I walked down some aisles in the warehouse stuffing various cameras in my pocket, which should make for interesting security camera footage), I found 4.5 x 3 x 2 inches fits in my pocket. A little bigger shoves in a pocket. When you get to 5 x 4 x 3 inches and weighing a pound or more, it just doesn’t pocket.

I’ll put a table of camera sizes at the bottom of the article for both of you who like facts. Size eliminated the ‘superzoom’ cameras (Nikon P1000, Sony RX10s, and Canon G3x) from my overall consideration, but I will give a separate ‘best of’ for the super telephoto compacts for you closet paparazzi out there.

A Viewfinder

This may not be critical for you, but I’m using this at the beach in bright sunlight most of the time. You may be able to compose a shot on the LCD, especially if it’s articulated, but I find it clumsy, so a built-in viewfinder is important to me. An add-on viewfinder would be acceptable, but not ideal.

The Paparazzi Winner (s)

I think of superzoom point and shoots as gimmicks, but if I wanted one, it would be one of these two.

I eliminated all of the super telephoto ‘compact’ cameras because they’re too big for me. (I guess for completeness sake I should add I have less than zero interest in them.) I would entirely (despite one of my colleague’s recommendations) also eliminate the Nikon Coolpix P1000 because of the small sensor (and yes, I think the lens is more gimmick than reality). That leaves the Canon G3x and Sony RX10s.

The Canon has a much lower price, but I’d have to add $300 for the EVF-DC1 add-on viewfinder which narrows the gap and makes the camera even uglier. The Sonys have better sensors, video capabilities, and wider lens apertures, but are larger. Despite being an older camera, I find the Canon’s wireless system to be a lot easier to use (well at least a lot less intrusive). The Sony looks a little more modern while the Canon (with viewfinder) is $150 cheaper. I don’t find the upgrades from the RX III to RX IV worth the $300 price for me.

So I’m calling a tie here; I’m happy with either the Canon G3x or Sony RX10 Mk III. If I were into shooting 600mm video with a compact camera I’d give an edge to the Sony, but I’m not into that. (You shouldn’t be into that either. If you are, I’d recommend you keep quiet about it.)

The Useful Compact Cameras

So I Ruled These Out

I start this kind of process by eliminating non-contenders, so I’m going to start by removing the two best cameras remaining. The Leica Q (Typ 116) and Sony RX1R II are multi-thousand dollar flagship cameras with a fixed lens. They’re cool, they take fantastic images, but at this price, I’ll change my lenses when I please, thank you.

The Sigma Quattros are even cooler, and I’ve enjoyed playing with both to get a feel for Foveon sensors, but their length makes them not pocketable, and other issues make them not ‘all around camera’ to me.

Best Compact Camera

We still carry the Fuji X70 and X100T, but both are surpassed by newer models. The Fuji X30 was a good little camera in its day, but the small, 12-megapixel sensor just doesn’t cut it against the other compact cameras. The Canon G1X Mk II is only 12.8 megapixels. The 1.5″ sensor is very large, though, and the lens is good, although I’d need the external viewfinder again. Still, I want more megapixels than that, so it drops off the list.

That still leaves me 12 models to seriously consider, and they fall into two broad categories: APS-C sensor cameras with prime lenses and 1″ sensor cameras with zoom lenses. Oh, and there are the two exceptions, the Leica D-lux, and Canon G1X III which have zoom lenses and larger sensors.

The Fixed Focal Length Cameras

All of the fixed focal length cameras are really good. The Fuji X100F has awesome image quality and a very cool hybrid viewfinder and is priced like it at $1300. The Fuji XF10 and Ricoh GRII are incredible values, and I might buy either just because they’re such bargains. But alas, neither has a viewfinder.

Good as they are, none of them are so good that I’d rather crop their images than have the convenience of a zoom, though. If my needs were more for ‘pictures indoors at the party or museum’ rather than ‘pictures wherever, whenever’ I’d probably grab the Fuji XF10, though, so I’ll name that my ‘indoor compact camera winner.’ With a 28mm (equivalent) f2.8 lens, a 24-megapixel APS-C size sensor, and a $450 price tag it’s the perfect pocket camera for a trip to the museum.

 

 

Typical Roger: the Fuji XF10 doesn’t meet my needs, but it’s awesome and cheap, so I want it anyway.

The  Zoom Cameras

Of the 1″ zoom cameras the Canon G7x and Canon G9x have no viewfinder. I hesitated about the G9X because it’s genuinely tiny, very cheap, and has a nice ‘control via app’ function, but the lack of viewfinder kept both of those off the list.

The Canon G5X and all the Sony RX100s meet all my requirements. The Sonys look much smaller than the Canon, but actually are just a bit smaller; the Canon is designed with the aerodynamics of a shoebox. The Sony 1″ stacked CMOS sensor is a bit better than the Canon 1″ sensors, so the Sonys start with an advantage there.

The RX100 IV has been our most popular compact camera for a while. The Sony RX100 V is a minor upgrade, and the IV meets all my needs at a lower price. The Canon G5X has a bit more lens range and is significantly cheaper, which offsets the rather bad case of the ugly it has. The RX100 VI has that longer zoom range, which is attractive, but the lens has a smaller aperture and not quite as good image quality, so I’ll call that even: no advantage, no disadvantage. The RX100 VI has a big price disadvantage, though.

Of the two larger sensor zooms, the Leica D-lux is somewhat dated and rather low resolution. The Canon G1X III, though, has a large, high-resolution sensor, decent lens, built-in viewfinder, and meets my ‘pocketable’ criteria (although just barely). The f/5.6 aperture at 72mm isn’t all that attractive, but it’s not as different from the others as it sounds (again you can read the aperture thingie at the end of the post if you’re curious).

So what did I choose? The Sony RX100 IV on the basis of smallest size, excellent image quality, and reasonable price. The Sony RX100 VA is at least as good, but also more expensive. When the IV disappears, then the V would move up.

The Sony RX100 IV is my choice at this moment, but it’s getting hard to find already and may disappear soon.

 

The Canon G5X was just a hair behind; the Canon has the better lens range and is a little less expensive; the Sony a slightly better sensor, video, and is a bit smaller. While it’s as sleek as a shoebox, the ergonomics are pretty good, and if you use Canon SLRs, the layout will seem very familiar.

The Canon G5X is homely but otherwise excellent. It’s close enough to the Sony that I’ll take it for a test drive.

 

I wanted to put the Canon G1X Mk III right with those, and it may actually be the best camera of the bunch, but it’s significantly more expensive. It might be worth a test drive, though, the bigger sensor and zoom make it attractive.

 

 

Roger Cicala

Lensrentals.com

February, 2019

 

Camera Size Table

CameraPriceLength "Height "Depth "weight (gm)
Canon G1X MII3994.62.92.9553
Canon G1X MIII10994.53.12399
Canon G3X8494.934.1734
Canon G5X6994.431.7377
Canon G7X53942.361.57304
Canon G7X MII6494.22.41.7320
Canon G9X4293.92.31.2206
Fuji X100F129952.92.1469
Fuji X100T65052.92.1469
Fuji XF104994.42.51.6280
Leica Q (Type 116)49955.13.13.7640
Leica D-Lux11954.62.62.5403
Ricoh GRIII4964.62.51.4221
Sigma DP1 Quattro8996.42.63.4425
Sigma DP2 Quattro8996.42.63.2395
Sony RX100 IV79842.41.6298
Sony RX100 V89842.31.61299
Sony RX100 VI119842.31.7301
Sony RX10 III12985.23.751095
Sony RX10 IV15985.23.75.71095
Sony RX1R II3298452.62.8507
Nikon Coolpix P9005705.54.15.4899
Nikon Coolpix P10009975.84.77.11415

 

About apertures:

The manufacturer tells you the ’35mm equivalent focal length’ of the lens but then claims its absolute aperture. Here’s an example. Let’s say the camera has a 1″ sensor, which is a 2.7X crop factor. If they claim it has a 24-70mm full-frame equivalent lens, it’s actually a 9-28mm f/2.8 lens. OK, fair enough.

But then they calculate the aperture at the actual focal length actual (not FF equivalent) focal length. So the lens is a 9-28 f/2.8 aperture is 28mm divided by 2.8  = 10mm. That’s the actual size of the aperture. But if you then list it as a 24-70mm, well, a 10mm aperture at 70mm = f/7 (same math, different direction). It’s not a huge problem, but it makes you think that the lens might act like a 24-70 f/2.8 lens on your SLR and it won’t.

To use an example from the actual cameras, the Sony RX100 (1″ sensor) lens goes to 70mm at f2.8, and Canon G1X (APS-C sensor) goes to 72mm at f/5.6. The actual (not FF equivalent) reach of the Sony lens is 26mm and the Canon 45mm. If you do the math, the Sony absolute aperture is 9mm; the Canon is 8mm. Not nearly as different as f/2.8 to f/5.6 would seem.

Most importantly, when you pick up a compact camera with a small sensor and a telephoto lens, even at widest aperture it’s like shooting on your SLR at f/22. It still makes a picture, don’t get me wrong, but it will not make a very sharp picture. Does it matter much? Probably not, but I hate me some marketing BS.

 

Author: Roger Cicala

I’m Roger and I am the founder of Lensrentals.com. Hailed as one of the optic nerds here, I enjoy shooting collimated light through 30X microscope objectives in my spare time. When I do take real pictures I like using something different: a Medium format, or Pentax K1, or a Sony RX1R.

Posted in Equipment
  • Yves Simon

    Why did you leave out Panasonic cameras? The LX10, LX100-II, FZ300, FZ1000, FZ2500, TZ100 and TZ200 are interesting.
    The LX100-II (Leica D-Lux 7) is my preferred camera among all non-interchangeable lens cameras, nothing less.
    And yes, the FZ300 has a small sensor, but it is the only one in his category with a constant relative aperture of f/2.8.
    Another thing, I am astonished that you prefer the RX10-III to the RX-II. The later has a larger relative aperture, and is more portable (the mkIII is really heavy).
    What I am using / plan to use (I don’t have the Sony yet):
    – Casual, low light, and high quality photography: Leica D-Lux 7 / Panasonic LX100-II
    – Sports, urban travels: Sony RX10-II
    – Wildlife: Panasonic FZ300
    The two Panasonic carried together cover already 95% of my needs.

  • Friedhelm

    Thank god, this is only your opinion.
    Too biased, but this is only my feeling.

  • WE always carry one of those, and I agree with you.

  • Vladimir Gorbunov

    Dear Roger, could you please fix the date under article? It says 2017.

    The mobile phones are narrowing the gap with 1″ P&S, quite soon only 4/3 and up will make sense in normal zoom range. I personally replaced my Panasonic LX100 to Sony A6300. A very slight size and weight penalty (with kit lens), but there’s a lot more potential abilities, like mounting the 60-600 mm lens and external mic and video light.

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/8883bf1fc8cc934021bbfb86c295b73a5089ac2c4b7e87a7dac661a661902c2a.png

  • Raimo Korhonen

    Nice to see Canon G5X (which I have had for 3 years) featured – it is often overlooked. I like it.

  • Sam Cudney

    You’re thinking of the lx100, the c-lux clone. Very different from the zs200.

  • DrJon

    Not a problem and I hope there is something in all that which is of some use.
    (Oh and thanks, I spent a while on it.)
    This bit went missing in case of use…
    RX100 IV vs V HFR (wrong in Friedman book and Sony website):
    http://www.hispeedcams.com/sony-rx100-v-manual-shows-higher-hfr-resolution/
    Filter adaptor (note I haven’t used this):
    https://lensmateonline.com/collections/sony-rx100-iii-rx100-ii-rx100-accessories/products/lensmate-rx100-iii-rx100-ii-rx100-quick-change-adapter-kit-52mm?variant=998641683

  • Civilitas

    Great post, and very informative!

    One thing though: if I am going to the beach (sand, water, suntan lotion….) I think I might want a camera that can go with me into the water! (At least for some visits to the beach, if not always) What was missing was a category for “all-weather” cameras. Maybe you don’t stock those for rental purposes, but it just seems like a category that might be useful to cover (I have a TG-4 myself, especially and exclusively for these kinds of situations, since otherwise the sensor is just too small).

  • Not THAT Ross Cameron

    I went through something similar, tossing up 1” vs m4/3. Ended up settling on used Nikon 1 bodies – V2 & AW1. AW1 is good for beach etc, but even a little big for cargo pants. V2 smaller, but I need to find a decent used 10-100mm for walk-around, and a 6-13mm to go with my 30-110. The 18.5mm lens is really good, the 30-110 starts to fall down indoors, so thanks for the aperture discussion. I can use MF F-mount glass with adaptor, as well as C-mount, which is interesting, but difficult. Nikon killed it by charging too much.

  • Bill Slattery Jr

    Been going through this decision for some time and finally bite the bullet, sold the X100F and bought a used Sony RX1R II. Need the extra low light ability and the resolution difference between the D850 and the Fuji has me spoiled. Ya the Fuji fits in the pocket of my cargo pants. But it was so uncomfortable there that I got a Spider Holster and the difference between carrying a RX1R II and the X100F in a holster is zilch. Figure if I need more than the RX1R II’s 35mm 42MP FF photo it’s time to bring in the real boys not a compact.

  • DrJon, although you’re a frequent poster, I think there’s been so much spam hitting the blog lately that they’ve tightened a bunch of stuff about links. I reactivated the one thread I could find, but I am not skilled in the ways of Discus, so my apologies if something else got nuked.

    Roger

  • Athanasius Kirchner

    Your approach is similar to mine. I shoot an RX10M4 for travel and birding, and an A7S for low light, portraits and landscapes. Both do amazing video, which is also important to me. I’ve found that the 1″+35mm sensor combination is close to ideal.

  • Athanasius Kirchner

    Oh no, the G9 is absolutely *not* better sensor-wise than the K-5. That 16 MP chip is still a super champ, with tremendous DR and very good low light performance.
    As good as the G9’s handling is, it just falls flat in other aspects. And if I’m carrying a camera of that size and weight, I’d rather have it be APS-C or 35mm.

  • tugwilson

    The Ricoh GR II has a choice of two viewfinders which fit on the hotshoe http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/gr-2/accessories/index.html I have the GV-1 and it is excellent.

  • John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmid

    In that case, why not just go for a top of the line M43 rig, like a Panny G9?

    Better sensor than the Pentax, better selection of absolutely world-class lenses, handles like a dream, easily prints large, etc….

  • DrJon

    I wrote a couple of long comments (the second being the first with less links), but seem to have both got nuked, maybe due to the links? (There was a lot of tips on RX100 use.) They started like this:

    I’d have got the RX100V over the IV (and actually have, BTW) as while all the other RX100s are still available the V has been replaced by the Va, which I assume will have a nice effect on the prices of the remaining Vs out there (and the PDAF is good, extra slow-mo time, etc.).

    Also the 1″ sensors in the Canons are, I understand, all made by Sony (and presumably the same BSI sensor that’s used in most of the RX10s/RX100s, sometimes with PDAF masking, sometimes stacked). What they don’t get is the stacked sensors.

    Oh and while I’m at it I should say Sony don’t do an Advanced Manual for the RX10/RX100 cameras, you just get the Basic one. To work out how non-simple stuff works, or what obscurely-named menu items do, you’re supposed to use the online help system, so presumably not get out of cell signal range when you have an issue. (It’s also useful to understand that Sony calls the cameras RX100M4, RX100M5, etc., not IV and V, when looking for stuff.)

  • DrJon

    I’d have got the RX100V over the IV (and actually have, BTW) as while all the other RX100s are still available the V has been replaced by the Va, which I assume will have a nice effect on the prices of the remaining Vs out there (and the PDAF is good, extra slow-mo time, etc.).
    Also the 1″ sensors in the Canons are, I understand, all made by Sony (and presumably the same BSI sensor that’s used in most of the RX100s, sometimes with PDAF masking, sometimes stacked). What they don’t get is the stacked sensors.

  • GulliNL

    You are both wrong! Now that that’s out of the way, I’m going to search for facts that rule in my favor to back my claim.

  • Sam Cudney

    V, for fiVe. siXth will be X, unless they get creative and do it in Italian or something; E, for sEi. 🙂

  • Panasonic ZS100/TZ100 (which I own) or the Panasonic ZS200/TZ200 (which I don’t own, but would like to), and if you want to get the latter with a Leica red dot on the front, it’ll cost you a few hundred bucks more as the C-Lux. 1″ sensors, “Leica” lenses (my TZ100 lens is noticeably inferior to the “Zeiss” lens on my Sony RX10iii; however, the lens on the Sony is HUGE in comparison: there’s a lot of sophisticated glass in there).

    So my pecking order for cameras is as follows (which is also in order of increasing image quality:

    Everyday carry around camera:
    Panasonic TZ100

    Travel camera:
    Sony RX10iii

    Serious camera for best image quality:
    Pentax K-5 with three Limited primes (14/5, 2.8/35, 2.4/70), a couple of manual-focus Pentax-A primes (2.8/135 and 4/200), and for portraits, a Soviet Helios-44K-4 2/58. Yes, the Pentax is ancient in digital camera years, but it handles beautifully, the lenses are exquisite, and the 16 MP Sony APS-C sensor has decent-sized photosites to ensure that the image quality is plenty good enough for A3+ prints.

  • Yep. I’m getting educated all over the place today. But what’s fifth gonna be? FF?

  • 100S S for second
    100T T for third.
    100F F for fourth.

  • I don’t think you missed anything, Sam. Although I’m sure there will be lots of people around shortly to tell us we’re both wrong. There are a couple of ways of looking at it; but I think it’s important to look at it, not pretend it’s not there which is what I think the manufacturers do.

  • Sam Cudney

    The discussion of focal length is something I hadn’t thought about. It goes some way towards explaining why Looonnnnggg superzooms are crappy in compact cameras (aside, that is, from the optical issues).
    Consider Panasonic’s ZS100, reviled for its marginal performance at full zoom of 91 mm, 250 mm “equivalent” (ha). I hadn’t thought about it before, but I make the actual aperture to be 91/5.9, or 15.4 mm diameter. 15.4/250, the “equivalent” length, is f/16, well into diffraction territory for a 1″ sensor. So, setting aside the optical issues of making a 10:1 zoom that folds up, it’s already crippled by diffraction even if the optics were perfect.
    Or did I misunderstand something?

  • We stock the D-lux, we don’t stock the LX100 or any other Panasonics at the moment. Like I said, I wrote about what was in stock because that’s obviously what I can try out.

  • Roger Cicala

    We didn’t have any in stock at the time I wrote this. Like I said, we had 28 cameras in stock, that’s what I looked at. Although I’ve been told we’re getting some.

  • Sam Cudney

    I notice the Panasonic LX100, twin to the D-Lux, isn’t in the mix. In fact, none of the Panasonics are present. What’s up with that?

  • Thank you! The Fuji letter sequence is an awesome factoid I’d never heard.

  • Deanaaargh

    Thank you for the write up.
    Especially for the inclusion of sensor sizes it would be fantastic if you used sensor area more frequently than other indicators. Especially in a case such as this where APSC does not always mean the same thing between different cameras. Furthermore it strikes me as odd that manufactures don’t use the area in their marketing material, surface area as a number goes up much faster than diagonal distance, and we know how much they like to advertise big numbers.

    It was understanding that Fujifilm appended the letters S(econd) T(hird) F(fourth) to the X100 indicating model revisions. If that was done to avoid the Chinese bias against the number 4 or just an effort to alienate the non English speaking world I have no opinion. However what they will do with the next iteration the F(ifth) I can only guess. Maybe they will follow sony and append an A ala RX100 mk VA

  • DD D

    I largely agree with the discussion but not the conclusion. I have owned the Sony rx10iv (24-600) the rx100iv, now the rx100vi (24-200), and the Panasonic zs100. Searching for the perfect walk-around camera.

    I prefer the Sony rx100vi (24-200), although it costs twice as much as the zs200 and 50% more than the zs300.

    Once you step down to a 1-inch sensor with a zoom lens you might as well get the longer zoom unless you never need it. You’ve already acknowledged quality is secondary to convenience and versatility and for me that extra zoom is worth it–especially for action and nature subjects.

Follow on Feedly