Even if I somehow wanted a pocket camera, I wasn't really looking for anything specifically when I found this one for a good price: the screen coating was literally disintegrating, it was ugly and the seller didn't know better. The LCD was quickly fixed and the camera looked brand new again.
There are 7 models of RX100.
The RX100m3 got a popup viewfinder, a great 24-70mm F/1.8-2.8 equivalent lens, and an almost fully articulated screen. It is definitely a much better camera than the two first iterations.
The next models have a better viewfinder, 315 phase detect AF (starting with the m5), but starting with the m6, the lens is in my opinion a downgrade, and I don’t care about the touch screen. Their used price tags are also much higher than the m3.
The m3 is the best compromise between price and functions
It turns out I really like the form factor and image quality. Most of the time, when I go take photos with a “bigger” camera I don’t bother carrying any lens shorter than 100mm. This little sony just does the job, and I can even crop a little when needed.
The 20MP image quality is really good. Maybe the best image quality in a pocketable camera.
Noise (I know, I keep saying that) is not an issue with modern post processing software like DXO Photolab or Topaz Denoise. Dynamic range is good enough. Color rendering is good. There is  really nothing to complain about the image quality: the raws are a real pleasure to work with.
I won’t talk about the jpeg or the videos: I don’t shoot jpeg or videos. 
The lens is also surprisingly good and versatile. Chromatic aberration is very well controlled, so is distortion, and both can be easily fixed in post. The close up capabilities are good too. There is even a useful integrated ND filter. Of course, on such a small sensor, don’t dream of achieving any super shallow depth of field, the lens behaves like an F/4.5 - 7.5 35mm equivalent lens when it come to DOP.
Basically, a lot of this camera is simply “good”, therefore it may be more efficient to list what I think is not totally good.
Battery life… well, what can I say? It sucks. I can barely take 200 photos with the viewfinder… But you can take a portable usb charger on the field… yuk. Better than running out of juice.
Handling: in aperture or speed priority, it’s not too bad. The ring around the lens works as a control dial. Too bad it doesn’t click. There is a click sound, but it just doesn’t work well enough.
The screen can be used to frame if you’re into that kind of shooting. I think it is especially useful for low angle shots or macro (it works great with the Raynox dipters!)
Viewfinder: not bad at all. Definition is not the best, but the refresh rate is OK with me, at least in good light. It’s notably small, but it’s a pocketable camera. If you want more pixel, you’ll have to pay more and get the next models… Anyways, it really does the job. One little annoyance: retracting it turns the camera off instead of simply switching to the rear screen.
AF: the 25 contrast detect points AF is pretty basic, especially compared to the 315 points PDAF of the m5, m6 and m7. But it’s fast and accurate in good light in single and even continuous AF modes (3fps). In low light, it can hunt a bit. You can also definitely forget the tracking and face recognition: they are unreliable and therefore basically useless. The fast frame rate capabilities are also useless: the AF can’t follow. This is not an action camera. 
The menu… is very close to the Alpha menu. This thing doesn’t really make any sense. But at least you can configure the fast menu quite extensively.
The integrated flash is actually not bad at all. Better have it and not use it than need it and not have it.
Wifi would be useful if an app was actually capable of real tethering. But all it does is sucking the battery dry and allowing thumbnails to be shared with your phone. Just turn it off. A GPS would have been a better option.
In conclusion?
The RX100 m3 is a very practical pocketable camera that can replace a bigger camera for the most common shooting scenarios. So, no birding, no fast action in low light, no insanely shallow DOP portraits. That being said, carrying this little camera instead of a 24-70mm zoom for a bigger camera is a life saver: no need to swap lens on the field, it’s always ready to shoot, it’s light and takes no room. It’s also perfect when you don’t want to attract attention.
I added a 49mm filter support, so I can use any filter I need: mostly a polarizer.
If I wanted to spend more money today, I would maybe buy the m5 and forget all the other models. The M5 is the same with a much better AF and viewfinder. But it is also much more expensive on the used market… 

You may also like

Sony alpha A200: a Nikon D80 with IBIS
After Sony bought the Minolta photography department, they released the A100 in mid 2006, the A700 in mid 2007, and the A200/A300/A350 in early 2008. Two years after the Nikon D80, we find the same SONY ICX493AQA CCD sensor (wich is basically a slower ICX483AQA that was in the Nikon D200 released 3 years earlier) in what is basically a Minolta body with Sony branding imitating a Nikon D80..
Shooting the Olympus OM-D E-M1 in 2023, 2024 and later.
One month ago, I was fed up with travelling with camera gear. Air travel became a miserable experience: arguing with check-in people, Unpack all that expensive shit at security, having gear damaged in the plane when frantic fellow passengers trow their hard cases in the overhead bins. I want to travel light: then a classified caught my eye: EM1, grip, charger, 2 batteries and 45-150 for 300.
Improving cheap flatbed scans
I still shoot film from time to time, not enough to invest in am excellent neg scanner or bother trying to shoot my negs with a camera. I tried that, don't like it. I love the scanning - editing process.
Nikkor Plastic 70-300 F/4-5.6 AF-D ED
This Nikkor 70-300 has been one of the most poorly reviewed Nikkor lens ever.
Shooting the Nikon D2Xs in 2022
During summer 2005, after a very long wait, the Nikon D2X was released. At the time my go to camera was the Minolta 7D that replaced my Nikon film cameras for my digital needs. I also shot the Nikon D70 but I prefered the Minolta. Both cameras were quite slow, and 6MP only. I wasn't really convinced by the Nikon D1/x/h/d2h. Soon after buying the D70, the D2X was announced, making me question that early GAS compulsive buy.
Shooting the Sony A77 in 2022
If you have some A-mount lenses and want an APSC DSLR that can take them natively, you don’t have many options. Especially if you can’t / don’t want to spend a lot of money.
Shooting the Nikon D70 in 2022
2004... Jesus, time passes quite fast. I won't review that Nikon D70, the specs sheets and reviews are everywhere on the internet. Only 3 figures are significant anyway: 6.1 megapixel CCD sensor, 1\/8000th second max shutter speed and 1\/500th second x-sync. I decided to buy and shoot this camera again with the Nikkor 18-135. For 20 bucks, what could go wrong?
Sigma 500mm F/7.2 AF APO
How good can be a Sigma 500mm F/7.2 AF lens from 1990? Simple answer: definitely worth 89 bucks BUT there are lots of BUT...
Can you take any photo with an outdated crappy camera?
A short essay I wrote back in 2019.
Shooting the Nikon D200 in 2022
The D200 is a camera I always loved. At the time it came out, it was a hell of a camera for the price Nikon asked. Shooting it in 2019 is still a pleasant experience. 2005 specs? that's outdated, nobody wants that. Photos taken with that camera will be ugly, especially compared to the Sony A9 ($4500), the Nikon D850 ($3000) or the Canon 5D mark whatever ($2700). Or will it not?
Back to Top