2015 Roundup: Advanced Zoom Compacts

I do love the way dpr compares several p&s cameras with a graph of equivalent aperture and focal length. But it only appears in the camera news and later we can never find it again. Could you make such a chart tool and embed it into your comparison system? And it would be greater if dslr lenses are also included in this tool!

These are all compromised in one way or another, one just needs to choose according to one's needs. I chose the Canon G7X over the RX100IV simply because: it was a lot cheaper, and I don't need an EVF on this class of camera. The G7X does what it does very well; if you can't take decent photos with it, it is not the camera's fault.

In experienced hands, any of these cameras can take very good photos.

Five Canon models - but no room for a single Nikon camera ?

What am I missing ?

Surprisingly [or not], there's nothing about the build quality and the durability of these cameras. They are supposed to be "pocketable", so we should be able to take them everywhere without special precautions. I have purchased 2 "G" Canon in the past: G2 in 2001, G10 in 2008. 14 (!!!) and 7 years later, respectively, both cameras work perfectly and have only minor scratches.

In contrast, my X30 went back to Fujifilm for repair twice and has now a loose hot shoe :-(

I do not have a Sony, but I know that RX100s have quite notorious reliability and durability issues. They have certainly brilliant studio performance, however I do not live in a studio.

Sadly, reliability and durability are not even discussed in your roundup.

Just bought a LX100 because I can't get used to the ergonomics and formfactor of my RX100 III. I absolutely love the LX100 and the RX100 III therefore will be used by my kid. His "My First Sony".

And in this segment, the winner is.......

BUYERS!

For those in the market for one of these that is a tremendous choice.
Even the lesser one are good it seems.

I can't help but think that Canon sometimes gets a bit of a harsh ride in some reviews and forums, and that some more recognition should be given to real world pricing. You can currently pick up a Canon G7X for under £300 online in the UK, while the equivalent discounters will charge £430 for a Sony RX100 iii and £600 for an RX100 iv. Granted the Canon has no EVF, is slow in RAW continuous, has less advanced video and less than ideal corners at wide angle / open, but it has a control set-up that looks much better than the Sony (including touch screen focus point selection for a start), has a brighter lens over a significant portion of the range, has a usefully longer reach at tele and (I can say having spent more time than I ought looking at samples online) sharper results in many cases at the 50mm+ end of the range. For many users (myself included I suspect) it would be a better buy than any of the RX100 family.

The Canon G9X is for me the only true pocketable candidate here. I don't understand why dpr mentioned the pocketable size on the pro side but fixed LCD and no hot shoe on the cons side. There is a reason why it is so pocketable.

There is something wrong with the line-up where 2 years old Canons and Panasonic LX100 are competing in the 2015 round-up. RX100 is the king of progress and sophistication, just crashes the competition especially up to date Canon's "advanced compacts" which BTW use Sony made sensor.
Remembering the great G and S series of Powershots, it is truly remarkable that Canon let the whole segment of best (at their time) advanced compacts (which they sold a ton), slip into such sad stage.
My believe is that being too careful and sleeping on the job are two of the most dangerous things if you want to lead in ever changing environment. There is no business as usual comfort when you become the follower.
R

Words ending in -able or -ablilty don't need hyphens. Just sayin'.

Despite its lack of of any standout features and some significant deficits, I find myself most drawn to the G9X out of all of these.

It fulfills - better than any of the rest - arguably the most important goal of a pocket camera, which is to fit into a pocket.

The RX100 series have ballooned in thickness to the point where they can be fit into a set of pleated dress pants, but not any jeans that are in style, and no pants at all if I want to do my daily commute by bike.

The G9X is nearly a full centimeter thinner. The current RX100 is like putting an iPhone 5 into the same pocket as the G9X and expecting it to fit comfortably.

If I don't need something that fits in a pocket, I'll just take my GX1 + 20mm/1.7 and enjoy superior image quality in a package only modestly larger than any of these. But that's me!

hmm, LX100 by far :-D

It looks like Canon fodder. Five camera's sent to the front but none make it to the end.

You say in the introduction that "the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX100 use a slightly smaller Micro Four Thirds chip." Surely there is no such thing as a Micro Four Thirds chip. It is Four Thirds and the "Micro" part refers only to the lens mount.

Hopefully soon we will see, compact 1" sensor Compacts with a fast 24-120/140 lenses (I'm talking about you fuji x40!!)

Canon S120 is included, but Panasonic DMC-LF1 is not? Why?

Both S120 and LF1 were in the high-end pocketable compacts roundup last year. The LF1 was even chosen as best affordable high-end pocketable camera. It offers more zoom than the S120. It's still available.

I really like and want the lx100. But QC issues that plague the lens of the camera really throws me off. I just don't want to have to take a chance of getting one with a decentered lens. Also I dont want to feel the need to baby the camera, to keep from messing up the lens. If you out it into a coat pocket the chances of it running into something are high with it unzipped.

The RX100 mkVI is just stupid expensive.

What about "best cameras for your mom" ? Seriously - a large number of your readers are able to pick up a camera. But I fall into a stupor when the task is to buy a camera for a gift to snapshoter.I mean a person, who will not do anything, except to press a shutter button. And then come to the fore completely different priorities. In this case is very important Automatic.Like color rendering and quality of Face detection AF. It is also important dimensions and design to the camera does not burden your grangma/mom/siste/child and liked it looks. Moreover, in this test can take part as a camera with a sensor 1 / 2.3, and the cameras like RX 1 and x100 - they are large and expensive, but provide a "bokeh", which is so pleasant to people. But still far more important automation - Chinese smartphone for $40 can be useful for such a person, if we assume that the RX 1 in "green mode" inclined to make unnatural colors or uncorrect exposure. Sorry for bad english.

thanks for it and also the "upcoming roundups". :)

I must say as a Canon user I am mightily unimpressed with the pedestrian if not downright insulting Raw performance of the G5X !

Just like the G3x which initially looked quite attractive but the 1 frame per second raw shooting just like the G5X crossed that off my list immediately...

Are these cameras deliberately handicapped or not?

Canon, quantity over quality. Always making sure that their cheaper products don't ever outperform their more expensive ones. It used to be an effective formula when they had the best IQ.

G5X has an auto switching ND filter, might want to fix that guys :)

"The Force is strong... on all of them!" - Darth Shutterbug (whizz, puff. whizz, puff, whizz puff).

.

"The Canon G5 X offers a microphone input for video recording", really? Check this video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpUTjaSyc-g, clearly it does not offer any external microphone input. It is a shame the reviewer here has not done his/her homework by checking the facts, one have to question the professionalism.

Sony's dominating these roundups....