- Hey guys, in this video,
we're gonna be doing
an in-depth comparison
of four compact cameras.
(mellow music)
Like most of our gear reviews,
this is an actual honest desire
to determine which of
these four compact cameras
are gonna work best for
us, and hopefully you.
Something I'm always
preaching on the channel
is to always have a camera with you,
especially if you have kids or pets,
or just wanna document your own existence
or the existence of those
that are close to you.
Having a camera with you always
is absolutely the first
step in that process.
Of course, most of us have
a camera in our pocket
all the time, it's called a smart phone,
and that's fine for most people,
but I personally prefer something
with a larger sensor and lens,
and with more professional features
like dynamic range and
higher image quality.
So for the last two weeks, Denae and I
have been shooting with
these four compact cameras,
with the goal to determine
which is the best.
Best.
And the four cameras
we're looking at today
are generally considered to be
the top compact cameras on the market.
I realize that there are other
compact cameras out there,
but these are the top sellers
in more of the professional
end, prosumer markets,
and I had to draw the line somewhere.
I'll be comparing them in some detail,
and I'll try to be as unbiased as I can.
For those who want to know
what I enjoyed using the most,
I'll share that with you at
the very end of the video.
The first camera is one that has developed
a sort of cult following,
and I know many of you love
it, it's the Ricoh GR III.
Next we have the Sony RX100 VII,
then we have Canon's
version of that camera,
pretty much, at least their answer to it,
it's the G5X Mark II.
And finally, we have the
Panasonic Lumix LX100 Mark II.
So that's what we've got,
let the compact camera combat commence.
The first consideration is price.
We find that three of these are
within striking distance of each other,
with the Ricoh GR III representing
the most affordable option by
a slim margin over the G5X II,
the RX100 VII is quite a bit more,
and that's not a huge surprise,
considering all the bells and whistles
that go a long with this one,
and considering that Sony has
long led the R and D charge
with the RX100 compact series,
with other compact camera manufacturers
constantly trying to keep up with them.
But still, that $300
addition is quite the leap.
I think you'd have to really
be taken with this camera
over the others to swallow
that price differential.
But I also think those prices
do reflect build quality.
When we look at the build
quality of the RX100 Mark VII,
and the Lumix 100 also, Mark II,
we generally see more metal involved,
whereas we seem to see
more plastic involved
in the Ricoh GR III certainly,
and maybe a bit more than the
other two with the G5X II.
And while this isn't the long-term study,
the Ricoh GR III definitely, to me,
feels the most fragile,
with the LX100 Mark II
feeling like it could
take more of a beating,
for what that's worth.
Now as I said, the basic requirement here
is that each of these
cameras is pocketable,
or something that you could
have on you at all times,
and here's where the Ricoh
III definitely wins handily,
being the slimmest and lightest,
it can remain in your pocket all day,
and be the least intrusive.
The Sony RX100 VII is next.
Other than the lens, it's
actually quite small.
If they wouldn't have gone
with such a massive zoom range,
it'd probably be even more comparable
to the Ricoh GR III in width,
but it's still extremely slim,
and slides in the pocket quite well
since it's all metal.
The G5X II does manage to be pocketable,
but it does have that rubbery grip,
and it's not as smooth,
and so it doesn't go in
and out quite as smoothly
as some of the other cameras.
Finally, with the Lumix LX100 II,
it is pocketable, it's
definitely pushing it though.
If you wear tight or skinny jeans,
it's definitely not gonna work for you.
But, if you're really stylish like me,
and you wear cargo shorts,
then it's gonna work great.
But this is one camera out of the four
that does have to have a lens cover
when it goes in your pocket.
You want that to protect it.
But the problem there, in addition to
it just being more fiddley
when you want speed,
is that you can't truly
operate this one-handed,
like you can with the others.
And, speaking of speed, let's
talk about startup time.
No surprise here that the Ricoh GR III,
as a responsive street-shooting device,
wins it with a lightning-fast startup time
of a half a second.
The G5X Mark II takes about a second.
The RX100 VII takes a
bit more than a second,
and the lumbering Lumix LX100 II
takes almost two seconds to start up.
When it comes to grip and handling,
of course, none of these are substantial.
They're made for compactness,
not necessarily comfort.
The RX100 VII is a great example.
There is little to no effort made
at ergonomics on this guy.
There isn't a whole lot of
substantial grip on this side,
there's the least amount of width here,
and nothing on the front used
to help you grab hold of it.
There's a little bit
on the back, of rubber,
but it's not very substantial,
and you do run the risk of dropping this,
more than with any of the others.
The Ricoh GR III has a substantial grip,
more so than any of the others,
but the thing I don't like about it
is that it forces your fingers
into the lens a little bit.
There isn't that gap there,
like there is with the Canon G5X Mark II,
you have more room for
your fingers to just be
without hitting that lens,
and it's nice and rubbery,
and also has a nice grip on the back too.
By far it's my favorite of the four,
however the LX100 Mark
II is pretty good also.
When it comes to shooting experience,
I tend to like a really good EVF,
and the LX100 II definitely
has the largest EVF,
which makes it much more pleasant
of a shooting experience,
but, on the other hand,
it also protrudes from
the body quite a bit,
making it a little bit more difficult
to make it pocketable and compact.
I don't mind using the RX100
IV's little pop-up EVF,
it's nice and bright and works great.
I feel like they balanced
the need for pocketability
with the goal of allowing EVF shooting.
The only thing I wish it would do
is automatically switch on
when you turn the camera on,
or at least have the option to do so,
so it's not a two step
process to begin shooting
at eye level like it is now.
The G5X II has a similar
pop-up viewfinder,
the only difference here
is that this one has to be pulled out,
so it's a two step process.
This is fiddley, especially
when you're in a hurry,
it's an extra step to pull that out,
but that's not the worst part here,
the worst part is that it
doesn't take very much pressure
before this begins to push in,
and as soon as it even moves a little bit,
it'll switch to the LCD.
And that's a pain, because
there's been many times
where I've had it on my eye,
given it a little bit of pressure,
and then lost what I was seeing.
I definitely lost shots
in the last couple weeks
due to that poor design.
I know it's the old Sony design,
I think that Canon is buying
this technology from Sony,
so hopefully we'll see that upgraded
in future versions of this camera.
The Ricoh GR III of course
has no built-in EVF,
they do make one that
gives you the frame lines,
but it's not the same as
having a built-in EVF.
And I haven't tried that,
so I can't speak to it too much,
but the problem here for me
is that I live in an area where
it's really bright outside
almost all year round.
When I'm photographing the family outside,
say if we're mountain biking or hiking,
the LCD is really hard to use and see,
especially since there's
no articulation to it.
The need for an EVF is great
for me in those situations.
For travel, if you're gonna find yourself
in brighter tropical areas,
this is something you need to consider.
When it comes to LCDs, I
find that only one of them
isn't really up to par,
the LX100 Mark II's little LCD screen.
It doesn't articulate, which
doesn't bother me too much,
because mostly I'm using the EVF,
but it's just not very good quality.
The blacks look crushed, and kinda gross,
so you get the feeling
that your photos are cheap
as you're chimping, if you do chimp.
So it's better just not to.
As far as shooting controls,
I definitely feel like the Lumix LX100 II
wins for usability.
It has a dedicated,
numbered aperture ring,
which is nice.
It has a dedicated, numbered shutter dial,
it has a dedicated EV plus and minus dial,
and it's highly customizable otherwise,
with, I wanna say, 11
customizable buttons,
and a customizable ring on the lens.
The only weird thing
about it, in my opinion,
is this strange aspect ratio
picker here on the lens.
This feels like a feature
you change once, if at all.
It seems odd to dedicate
a hardware location
to that feature, alone, to me.
And while it doesn't have
that same dedicated dials
for a pleasant, Fuji-esque
shooting experience
like the LX100,
the G5X II does have a nice
plus and minus EV dial,
which is really nice to have
when you shoot aperture
priority with smart ISO
for documentary photography like I do.
I feel like having at
least that dedicated dial
would have helped the shooting experience
of both the Rico GR III
and the Sony RX100 IV.
But I recognize also that
not everyone shoots that way,
so maybe that's just me.
The Ricoh GR III has this
little lever-style dial,
but it feels so cheap and
plasticy, I just hate it.
I also find that I'm constantly
accidentally pressing it,
and bringing up the image control menu.
I've heard these cameras
are totally customizable,
and if I were doing a
long-term review of this,
I'm sure I'd mess with that a lot.
And I think you'd really have to
if you're going to invest in this.
You'll need to spend a lot of time
figuring out how to get this configured
in a way that it works best for you,
including how you set up
things like snap focus,
and just exposure settings in general.
As far as usability, the
RX100 VII probably loses here.
There are a lot less dials to
work with and to customize,
and you do feel more reliant
on the LCD to change settings.
It's not wonderful.
Next I wanna talk a bit about
both autofocus and focus
controls with these cameras,
but I think it's worth pointing out
that there is a lot of variation here,
and it depends hugely on
your style of focusing.
But I'll try to cover it well enough
to hit most of your needs.
When it comes to autofocus in general,
the RX100 IV mops the floor
with the other cameras
in this department.
None of them will be able
to achieve what it can
with those 357 face detection points,
and that animal and human
face detection technology.
Canon certainly has the capability,
but the G5X II does not have
face detection auto points,
causing it to rely on
contrast detect only,
like the Lumix LX100 II.
Having said that,
all three of those
cameras got the job done.
They focused well enough
for my needs in the test,
the only one that struggled
was the Ricoh GR III.
I missed an incredible amount of shots
waiting for this thing to autofocus,
especially in low light.
Our home isn't bright, and I
shoot plenty at night also.
That might be the achilles
heel of this device.
I'm not really sure if
I'm doing something wrong,
or if this was just not intended
for people who rely on autofocus.
I'm not really sure, but it's
surprising that this sensor
does incorporate phase detection,
unlike Canon and Lumix.
But I think most people
who use this camera
do so on the street.
They utilize snap focus capability,
and they shoot in a style
which incorporates hyperfocal distance.
They don't rely on the autofocus as much,
or at least that's my assumption.
And if you like that idea,
you might enjoy this camera
a lot more than the others.
But for those who do a lot of photography
with pets and kids,
and who appreciate a responsive autofocus,
especially with face detection,
the RX100 Mark IV will be
the most appealing to you.
But often, I actually prefer
to use the focus points,
and turn off the automatic face detection,
especially while using the EVF.
And in that department,
both the Canon G5X II
and the Lumix LX100 II are really great,
since you can use the touch
and drag focus feature.
That's where you can,
while you're holding the
viewfinder up to your eye,
you can drag the focus
point around the screen,
just on the side, like a
joystick, and it's all relative.
That works really well,
and I really love it on these devices.
It's highly responsive.
The only time it doesn't work well
is when you're shooting vertical,
where your nose interferes with it,
and kind of messes it all up.
But this is my favorite style
of shooting, personally,
and unless I just haven't
stumbled upon that menu item
that allows it within the RX100 IV,
then this doesn't have it.
And of course the Ricoh GR III, again,
doesn't have an EVF, so.
Getting into sensor and image quality,
this is a mixed bag.
It's hard to go apples and apples
when you have different sizes of sensors
and different types of lenses,
but I'll do my best to help
you navigate those waters.
Let's first get the lay of the land
by comparing the sensor sizes.
As we've already mentioned,
the Ricoh GR III has the largest sensor,
with that 24 megapixel APSC sensor.
The Lumix LX100 II is next largest,
with that micro 4/3 sensor,
however, it has fewer
pixels than the others,
with only 17 megapixels.
The Canon G5X II and the Sony RX100 IV
both utilize a smaller one inch,
20 megapixel backside-illuminated sensor.
When it comes to the lenses,
I'll just let you pause
the video if you want,
to go through them side-by-side.
I don't really wanna read
the specs back to you.
There's a lot of variety here.
If I had to say which of these cameras
is capable of producing
the highest detail,
sharpness, dynamic range, et cetera,
I'm gonna say that, based
on my limited testing,
the Ricoh GR III wins it here.
It has the highest megapixel
count, and the largest sensor.
That's generally gonna give
it the best dynamic range,
and the most data to work with in post,
and with that 28 millimeter equivalent,
2.8 aperture prime lens,
it's no surprise that it
provides the sharpest picture.
The center is dead sharp all
across the aperture range,
and for documentary-style photography,
where the corners are never
gonna be as important,
it's still serviceable wide open.
Regarding these other lenses,
there's nothing here to
really write home about.
To varying degrees, these zoom lenses
choose flexibility over quality.
I'd say that the Sony and
the Canon are comparable,
while the Sony lens provides
a crazy-flexible zoom range
of 24 to 200 millimeters,
at the cost of a slower aperture,
the more modestly zooming 24
to 120 millimeter zoom range
of the Canon probably is a
smidge sharper in general.
But man, the Lumix LX100
II lens was disappointing.
It's not horrible at the
wide end, even wide open,
but zoom in fully, and it's
pretty bad, especially 2.8,
but it never really fully sharpens up.
I find that most surprising,
since it has a more limited zoom range,
and it's got the Leica co-brand,
but it is what it is.
When you compare battery life,
these are manufacturer ratings,
as far as how many shots you'll get,
I have not tested this personally.
Just passing on what they're reporting,
so take that with a grain of salt.
When it comes to close
focus or macro work,
all of these, except
for the Sony RX100 VII,
will allow to get really close.
The Canon G5X II and the Ricoh GR III
both have macro modes, so
you can switch into that,
and that just moves the lens in a bit
so you're able to close focus on objects.
But don't leave it there,
or you'll never be able to focus
on anything of significant distance,
and you won't be sure what you did
to deserve such a poor
treatment from your device.
So with that macro mode
enabled, the GR III wins
as far as reproduction ratio,
but the Lumix LX100 really
has a great close focus
without having to switch
into any kind of macro mode,
and it's almost as close
as the Ricoh GR III anyway.
So that's a really strong advantage there.
And while we're here at
the close and wide end,
let's take a quick peak at the bokeh,
because I know that that
matters to a lot of you.
We are wide open on these shots.
And while we're on that subject,
let's go ahead and compare how things look
at more of a portrait field of view.
With the zooms, we'll head out
to the furthest reaches for these shots
so we can see what sort of compression
and depth of field you'll
be able to get here.
Keep in mind, again,
we're shooting wide open
on each of these cameras for these shots.
Each of these cameras has
optical image stabilization,
and this can be enormously helpful
when you're photographing
slow-moving subjects,
or not-moving subjects in low light,
allowing you to get away
with much sharper images
at lower shutter speeds
than you would otherwise.
I decided to do a quick washing machine
image stabilization test,
and see how each one does.
The last feature I wanna compare
is the continuous burst rate,
and there is quite a
difference here in capability.
It can be nice to use burst
when documenting pets and children
for a variety of situations.
And if that's important to you,
the Canon G5X II is going
to be the camera for you.
But even the Lumix LX100,
at an 11 frames per second,
is more than plenty for
what I usually feel I need.
What isn't great here,
again, is the Ricoh GR III,
which, even for street photography,
it surprises me that everyone is okay
with such a low frames per
second continuous burst.
On the streets, I love to grab bursts
when a moment is fleeting.
There really is no reason not to.
I know some people have
created these artificial rules
that say it's somehow cheating,
but isn't the point to
secure documentation
of events happening around you?
I don't know.
I don't think it matters how you got that,
as long as you're authentic,
and your images are thought-provoking.
But, I digress.
Those are all the features
that I wanted to cover, though.
I realize that there are
many, many more features
that we could have compared,
including video, integrated ND filters,
screen articulation, a lot more.
I choose to focus on the features
that matter the most to those of us
looking at devices for their
documentary capabilities,
in their day-to-day lives,
so hopefully you found that helpful.
And for those of you still listening,
who care what I personally think,
first off, thank you for
sticking around so long.
I have to be honest with you though,
if I had to choose one of these four,
it's not an easy choice,
even after the weeks of shooting
with them nearly nonstop.
So let's start by
eliminating some of them.
I have to eliminate the
Sony RX100 VII first off.
While there ar a lot of features
I find compelling about it,
there are a few things I hate.
While I love that pop-up EVF,
I hate the fact that it has
no touch-and-drag focus.
Also, the crazy zoom range that forces it
to have that really slow aperture
is not helpful to me.
I shoot almost exclusively wide,
and so 200 millimeter zoom
range, it's lost on me.
For those of you who travel, though,
you might find that glorious,
it's just not right for me.
Now, I've heard plenty of you who say
the RX105 is the one to get,
as that's the last model that
had that faster aperture lens,
but it still has phase detect auto also.
But my issue with that camera
is that it also has that
same pop-up style EVF
as the Canon G5X II, where
you have to pull it out,
and you can nudge it,
and it will stop working.
So that's a deal breaker for
me for both of those cameras.
That's actually the only
thing I hate about this,
otherwise, I think I would
actually choose this one.
But it's really a big deal to me.
I know my next camera is
going to piss off a lot of
diehard Ricoh GR III fans,
but guys, it's a great camera,
but it's not great for me.
It needs an integrated pop-up EVF,
it needs higher continuous burst,
and it needs better autofocus,
but it's probably the perfect camera
for other street
photographers, just not me.
Finally, we have the Lumix LX100 II.
There's a lot to love about this camera.
I love the shooting experience.
I wish it were a smidge smaller,
I wish that it had the Sony RX100 IV style
pop-up EVF to slim it down.
I wish that the lens would close down
so you don't have to use a lens cap,
and really so I could
use it fully one-handed.
It is pocketable, but only just,
and only with the right cargo shorts.
And the image quality,
I think that it could be a little higher,
the megapixel count
could be a little higher.
So where does that leave me?
Well, honestly, I'm not ready
to jump on any of these.
All of these could make some tweaks,
and that would make
them extremely appealing
to us documentary photographer types.
Really all of them are so close,
and even Fuji, if they would come out with
the Mark II of the X70,
that had a pop-up EVF,
like the RX100 VII, it could be perfect.
So we'll just have to wait
and see if they do that.
For now, maybe, though,
I'll just have to go
back to a film option.
But that's all for now, my friends.
I hope you found some value
or enjoyment out of this one.
I'll leave you with a
few more photos I took
from each of these cameras, on rotation.
Remember to do some good with
your camera where you can,
and we'll talk to you again real soon.
