Sony RX100 compact camera £389.99 CHEAPEST EVER AMAZON PRICE (Sold by Britain Deals and Fulfilled by Amazon)
305°Expired

Sony RX100 compact camera £389.99 CHEAPEST EVER AMAZON PRICE (Sold by Britain Deals and Fulfilled by Amazon)

£389.99Amazon Deals
64
Found 11th Sep 2013
This is by far the best compact camera available, rivalling results from decent mid range dslr's. The mk2 is out now but costs an absolute fortune (as this model used to!) with marginal improvements. It's also worth noting that this model was manufactured in Japan but the mk2 is made in China so at this point, the tried and tested mk1 is probably the best buy. Not cheap but for pro results from a pocketable camera, there's no competition... The reviews speak for themselves!
Shared Via The HUKD App For Android.

64 Comments

Great camera, slippery like a bar of soap though!

Hot deal.

Avoid Sony case for this, overpriced and doesnt fit that well.

Good camera. Needs a better hand grip but these can be bought online and make the camera much better to use.

Failed to notice this is sold by a third party seller, no way of knowing if this is European sourced stock or grey import? This will affect your warranty.

Love mine and miss my DSLR a little, but the RX100 is an incredible camera for it's size.

Heat....Hmmm worth upgrading from the Canon S95 I use when not wanting to lug the DSLR around....

Anyone with real world experience of this against the Nex6/7 ? or for that matter against a Canon 1100d with pancake lens ?

Ta.

It's £420 ish from Amazon themselves - I wouldn't want to risk a grey import / outlet refurb for £30.

£375 from digitalrev. Of course this wouldn't be European stock though. What does this mean? Should I be worried that it's non European? Its still the same camera right?

capriboycraig

It's £420 ish from Amazon themselves - I wouldn't want to risk a grey … It's £420 ish from Amazon themselves - I wouldn't want to risk a grey import / outlet refurb for £30.



Um, this is fulfilled by amazon, does that not mean it is the same stock that you would purchase from amazon for a higher price.

thezoidberg

Um, this is fulfilled by amazon, does that not mean it is the same stock … Um, this is fulfilled by amazon, does that not mean it is the same stock that you would purchase from amazon for a higher price.



It means that the company selling the camera would have sent part of their inventory to Amazon for them to store in their warehouse, and any sales made Amazon would send from their warehouse with the stock given to them.

ec9wrr

£375 from digitalrev. Of course this wouldn't be European stock though. … £375 from digitalrev. Of course this wouldn't be European stock though. What does this mean? Should I be worried that it's non European? Its still the same camera right?



You would need to check warranty situation I guess, if its covered by a worldwide sony warranty I wouldn't worry too much.

twe

It means that the company selling the camera would have sent part of … It means that the company selling the camera would have sent part of their inventory to Amazon for them to store in their warehouse, and any sales made Amazon would send from their warehouse with the stock given to them.



Is that right, I never knew that!

Amazon cover the warranty though in my experience as I've purchased stuff from the marketplace before but fulfilled by Amazon and they sorted it out when I had a problem.

I

thezoidberg

Is that right, I never knew that!Amazon cover the warranty though in my … Is that right, I never knew that!Amazon cover the warranty though in my experience as I've purchased stuff from the marketplace before but fulfilled by Amazon and they sorted it out when I had a problem.



I bought a portable speaker a few weeks ago made by Audio Dynamix; it had just been released and they were sorting out pre-orders. The customer service guy said he sent 2 over to Amazon that were spare and allocated one to myself. So am guessing that is how it works that a company would send stock to Amazon's warehouse for them to later sell from.

twe

I I bought a portable speaker a few weeks ago made by Audio Dynamix; it … I I bought a portable speaker a few weeks ago made by Audio Dynamix; it had just been released and they were sorting out pre-orders. The customer service guy said he sent 2 over to Amazon that were spare and allocated one to myself. So am guessing that is how it works that a company would send stock to Amazon's warehouse for them to later sell from.



You are totally correct, that is indeed how it works...

services.amazon.co.uk/ser…_fb

Im glad I know that now, when you see a product from a marketplace seller fulfilled by amazon and its cheaper buy £100 there's nothing to say it isn't counterfeit/grey market/refurb, I just always assumed it it was fulfilled by amazon it would be legit.

Im going to have to check serial numbers with manufacturers for a few things now.
Edited by: "thezoidberg" 11th Sep 2013

Major_Lee

Heat....Hmmm worth upgrading from the Canon S95 I use when not wanting to … Heat....Hmmm worth upgrading from the Canon S95 I use when not wanting to lug the DSLR around....Anyone with real world experience of this against the Nex6/7 ? or for that matter against a Canon 1100d with pancake lens ?Ta.



Or even a Fuji X20 perhaps, superb camera, if you can run to the cost the Fuji X-E1 will blow most of the competition away, however, they are not really for the beginner, as I am rapidly finding out.

hotukdeals.com/dea…717

Edited by: "dwain" 11th Sep 2013

Banned

Can you cut amazon out and buy direct? (_;)

You're crazy if you buy this instead of a micro 4/3 camera. This has a tiny sensor, less choice of accessories, worse controls, just bad right across the board. Get yourself an E-PM2 or E-PL5.

These little cameras with tiny sensors were great like five years ago. The only reason they still sell at all today is because of momentum. Truth is that cameras which can beat SLRs in many cases are now around and for a similar amounts of money.

So as I said, skip this: Get a m43 camera for under £400 with a sensor eight times larger, better functionality, better low light performance, the option to change lenses, and it still fits in your pockets.

UnoriginalGuy

You're crazy if you buy this instead of a micro 4/3 camera. This has a … You're crazy if you buy this instead of a micro 4/3 camera. This has a tiny sensor, less choice of accessories, worse controls, just bad right across the board. Get yourself an E-PM2 or E-PL5. These little cameras with tiny sensors were great like five years ago. The only reason they still sell at all today is because of momentum. Truth is that cameras which can beat SLRs in many cases are now around and for a similar amounts of money. So as I said, skip this: Get a m43 camera for under £400 with a sensor eight times larger, better functionality, better low light performance, the option to change lenses, and it still fits in your pockets.



Very very much depends on your needs. I recently purchased something similar as I needed it to weigh in under 250 grams. I own 3 DSLRs but I needed a camera for something completely different, no I will not expect the same quality as I would from my DSLR but for what I need to achieve something like this does the job.

By the same token, some might say you are mad to buy a micro four thirds camera when for a little extra you can get a decent DSLR with a much wider range of lenses and in a lot of cases, much better quality lenses.

Horses for courses and all that jazz

You can fit a micro 4/3 camera with lens attached in your pocket? You must have big pockets

samsun

You can fit a micro 4/3 camera with lens attached in your pocket? You … You can fit a micro 4/3 camera with lens attached in your pocket? You must have big pockets



With a pancake prime or zoom lens on? Yes. Two in fact. Size by side.

UnoriginalGuy

You're crazy if you buy this instead of a micro 4/3 camera. This has a … You're crazy if you buy this instead of a micro 4/3 camera. This has a tiny sensor, less choice of accessories, worse controls, just bad right across the board. Get yourself an E-PM2 or E-PL5. These little cameras with tiny sensors were great like five years ago. The only reason they still sell at all today is because of momentum. Truth is that cameras which can beat SLRs in many cases are now around and for a similar amounts of money. So as I said, skip this: Get a m43 camera for under £400 with a sensor eight times larger, better functionality, better low light performance, the option to change lenses, and it still fits in your pockets.



I have both micro 4/3 and the RX100 (as well as NEX, 4/3 and FX f-mount) - there is no comparison in size, even the smallest micro 4/3 camera with a powerzoom lens is nowhere near as small or light as the RX100. The micro 4/3 camera will just fit in a jacket pocket but it feels bulky, the RX100 will comfortably fit in a jacket pocket and can also be carried in a trouser pocket. The RX100's sensor is smaller than the 4/3 sensor but you've got the sensor size completely wrong - the RX100 uses a 1in sensor, this is around 1/3 the size of a full frame sensor whereas micro 4/3 is half the size so the difference in sensitivity/depth of field is very small in practice. The RX100 is very capable in low light as its aperture starts at F1.8 whereas the power zoom lenses on the micro 4/3 cameras are comparatively even allowing for the sensor difference much dimmer at F3.5 while opting for a pancake lens gives the brighter aperture but at the cost of any zoom. Carrying both PZ and pancake lenses adds further bulk.

I'm not in any way saying micro 4/3 is a bad choice but to rubbish the RX100 and suggest micro 4/3 instead shows a complete misunderstanding of the market (particularly sensor sizes). The RX100's main rivals are the likes of the Canon S100 and Panasonic LX7 which are a similar size and weight but use much smaller sensors.

John

Major_Lee

Heat....Hmmm worth upgrading from the Canon S95 I use when not wanting to … Heat....Hmmm worth upgrading from the Canon S95 I use when not wanting to lug the DSLR around....Anyone with real world experience of this against the Nex6/7 ? or for that matter against a Canon 1100d with pancake lens ?Ta.



It really depends on what size/weight you're prepared to cart around with you. I have the RX100, a range of micro 4/3 cameras, the NEX-5N (same sensor as the NEX-6) with a few of its lenses and a D700 full frame setup. The main advantage of the RX100 and the main reason to buy it is the small size and weight, it's similar to a Panasonic LX7 or Canon S100 which is remarkable given how much larger the sensor is as well as having a zoom lens starting at F1.8. It fits comfortably in a jacket pocket without really noticing it's there and will fit in a trouser pocket as well so as a camera to have with you all the time which is what I use mine for.

In terms of image quality, the RX100 is quite a bit behind the APS-C cameras you've mentioned which is understandable given the smaller sensor size. The main frustration I find with the RX100 compared to the bigger sensors is the lack of flexibility in the raw files, the Sony 16MP APS-C sensor allows you to push the dynamic range quite a bit but the RX100 files don't have nearly as much overhead to do that. However the NEX cameras even with a small lens (same with the other compact system cameras) are simply not as small or light so you'll normally have to carry them in a separate bag, there are some combinations that will just fit in a jacket pocket but they're noticeably bulky and you normally have to give up either zoom or aperture.

I have very mixed feelings about the compact system cameras for this reason as I find if I'm going to take the 5N I may as well take the D700 and 28-300mm as I've the inconvenience of the bag anyway. The main advantage of the CSC's for me is the video capability plus they're a lot more subtle for social occasions.

John
Edited by: "Johnmcl7" 11th Sep 2013

UnoriginalGuy

You're crazy if you buy this instead of a micro 4/3 camera. This has a … You're crazy if you buy this instead of a micro 4/3 camera. This has a tiny sensor, less choice of accessories, worse controls, just bad right across the board. Get yourself an E-PM2 or E-PL5. These little cameras with tiny sensors were great like five years ago. The only reason they still sell at all today is because of momentum. Truth is that cameras which can beat SLRs in many cases are now around and for a similar amounts of money. So as I said, skip this: Get a m43 camera for under £400 with a sensor eight times larger, better functionality, better low light performance, the option to change lenses, and it still fits in your pockets.



This will, and does, outperform most micro four thirds for image quality and noise, it is simply the best sub £1000 compact camera out there, I have one, and compared it to my old 600D, it was on par with image quality, the 600D only slightly edged it. For the money, you won't get better, just wish it had a longer zoom.

Can fully recommend the RX100, but...I purchased mine originally from Britain Deals via Amazon, and what I got in the post was a previously opened, previously used camera, even though it was sold as brand new. I'd suggest caution with this seller. I promptly sent mine back and got a refund, then bought elsewhere. Waste of time.

aircanman

This will, and does, outperform most micro four thirds for image quality … This will, and does, outperform most micro four thirds for image quality and noise



Nope. Not even close.

Here is a lab comparison of the RX100, RX100 II, and E-PL5:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/896%7C0/(brand)/Sony/(appareil2)/839%7C0/(brand2)/Olympus/(appareil3)/812%7C0/(brand3)/Sony

I think the results speak for themselves. I suggest people put the 70D SLR up against the tiny E-PL5, you might be pleasantly surprised. An m43 is mildly bigger with a pancake lens but can beat out even medium tier SLRs, an easy buy relative to this RX100 which is just a glorified point and shoot.



Edited by: "UnoriginalGuy" 11th Sep 2013

Johnmcl7

I find if I'm going to take the 5N I may as well take the D700 and … I find if I'm going to take the 5N I may as well take the D700 and 28-300mm as I've the inconvenience of the bag anyway. The main advantage of the CSC's for me is the video capability plus they're a lot more subtle for social occasions.John



I take my NEX-5N practically everywhere I go, with the 16mm pancake lens attached it's minuscule, I only use a small wrist strap and fits in my jacket pocket, or courier bag and I hardly notice its there - no way could I take D700 and 28-300mm to work and stuff on a daily basis. Before you say ahh but the 16mm lens is cr*p, if you understand it limitations it's a perfectly useful lens and works great for me in London. last thing I snapped walking back from work with the ridiculed 16mm.
OK a bit dull but it shows some level of detail.

UnoriginalGuy

just bad right across the board



When you make a statement like that about what is pretty well accepted as the best compact camera on the market (except the MK 2 version and csc's), then it'd hard to take anything else you say seriously.

toaster

When you make a statement like that about what is pretty well accepted as … When you make a statement like that about what is pretty well accepted as the best compact camera on the market (except the MK 2 version and csc's), then it'd hard to take anything else you say seriously.



That is only true if you define a "compact" very narrowly. Is this better than a Fuji X100/s? No. Is it better than a RX1/r? No. Is it better than most m43 cameras? No.

It might be the best point and shoot, but it doesn't compare to a real camera. If someone stuck a gun to my head and forced me to buy a P&S I'd get this, but if my requirements were based on size and weight, I'd get either a APS-C compact (e.g. X100S) or an micro 4/3 camera (which are particularly interesting as they cost the same amount as this).

Very expensive still. I'd rather buy an N1 with boh pancake and zoom lenses for similar IQ and pocketability. I'd prob still have change for an SD card too.

UnoriginalGuy

These little cameras with tiny sensors were great like five years ago. … These little cameras with tiny sensors were great like five years ago. The only reason they still sell at all today is because of momentum. Get a m43 camera for under £400 with a sensor eight times larger



You went on that massive rant and yet you're completely oblivious to the fact that the RX100 has the largest sensor of any compact it's size , it has a unique 1" sensor 2.7 times the size of a Powershot S100 in a body that's virtually the same size.

A micro four thirds sensor is about 2x the size not 8.

I can't take anything you say seriously you just come across as a fanboy trying to compare apples to oranges but don't even research what you're arguing about.

Wonder if i should get this or the QX100, hard choice!

Wouldn't trust a third party seller when spending this amount. I'd spend 20 quid extra from Amazon if I was in the market for one. Think Amazon has been at less than 400 on this as well.

UnoriginalGuy

Nope. Not even close. Here is a lab comparison of the RX100, RX100 II, … Nope. Not even close. Here is a lab comparison of the RX100, RX100 II, and E-PL5:http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/896%7C0/(brand)/Sony/(appareil2)/839%7C0/(brand2)/Olympus/(appareil3)/812%7C0/(brand3)/SonyI think the results speak for themselves. I suggest people put the 70D SLR up against the tiny E-PL5, you might be pleasantly surprised. An m43 is mildly bigger with a pancake lens but can beat out even medium tier SLRs, an easy buy relative to this RX100 which is just a glorified point and shoot.



Umm, if you say so.

cykb

Wonder if i should get this or the QX100, hard choice!



There's a big saving but I just can't imagine the user interface being as responsive and smooth flowing as on the RX100, I don't think it will record raw files either

fatdeeman

You went on that massive rant and yet you're completely oblivious to the … You went on that massive rant and yet you're completely oblivious to the fact that the RX100 has the largest sensor of any compact it's size , it has a unique 1" sensor 2.7 times the size of a Powershot S100 in a body that's virtually the same size.



And that size is marginally smaller than a m43 camera while offering a sensor much smaller. The fact is you're spending the same money, saving a small amount of both size and weight but getting a much less capable camera out of the whole thing.

Both this and a m43 camera with pancake will fit in a pocket.

Size comparison:
camerasize.com/com…ct/

fatdeeman

A micro four thirds sensor is about 2x the size not 8.



Depends how you scale it, but 3x (2.88x) via the way I assume you're doing it.

fatdeeman

I can't take anything you say seriously



Including the lab testing I linked? Do you not take that seriously? Or is it just easier to ignore stuff you don't want to hear. I can hook you up with a m43 camera at this price point right now, that independent lab tests show is a significantly better camera optically, with more control, more accessories, interchangeable lenses, and a whole heap of other advantages.

So while I have nothing but fact behind me, lab tests, actual physical kit, and I will happily link you to user reviews, you seem to have nothing except hand waving and vaguely trying to redefine what a "compact camera" is. You don't want to just admit that this is a basic point and shoot with optics to match.

You call me a fanboy? What are you backing up what you're saying with? Your posts just try to redefine what category this camera fits in, you aren't even making real arguments for it. You want to save a few millimetres but get a bad camera? Fine, order away, I won't stop you. You actually want good value for money and a camera worth a damn then do some research.

fatdeeman

you just come across as a fanboy trying to compare apples to oranges but … you just come across as a fanboy trying to compare apples to oranges but don't even research what you're arguing about.



Except they're both cameras, both pocket sized, both aimed at somewhat serious photographers (e.g. RAW, manual modes, etc), and priced almost the same. Wait how are these not comparable again? Because you're trying to call one compact and the other almost identically sized camera not?
Edited by: "UnoriginalGuy" 11th Sep 2013

aircanman

Umm, if you say so.



Nope, I don't. The lab does.

To UnoriginalGuy, yes the x100s is a superior choice but its no where near the same price. Its £800-850, hardly comparable.

However the x100 is still far superior and will only cost you £350-400. It is however slightly bulkier. So apples and oranges.

aircanman

This will, and does, outperform most micro four thirds for image quality … This will, and does, outperform most micro four thirds for image quality and noise, it is simply the best sub £1000 compact camera out there, I have one, and compared it to my old 600D, it was on par with image quality, the 600D only slightly edged it. For the money, you won't get better, just wish it had a longer zoom.



For pure image quality on especially landscapes the sigma merrill is reputedly very hard to beat and is even head of many DLSR's. But the Merill's high cost, fixed lens and slow autofocus means its not everyone's cup of tea. When you say something is the best you need to qualify the statement.

morgano

To UnoriginalGuy, yes the x100s is a superior choice but its no where … To UnoriginalGuy, yes the x100s is a superior choice but its no where near the same price. Its £800-850, hardly comparable.



Re-read the post again. I brought up the X100s and the Sony RX1 (£2000) to point out that this isn't the best camera in the "compact" category. It is the best camera in the P&S category. Then I went on to say that the m43 option was similarly priced.

No clue how anyone could read that post and get what you seemingly got out of it. You'd almost have to want to misread it.

morgano

However the x100 is still far superior and will only cost you £350-400. … However the x100 is still far superior and will only cost you £350-400. It is however slightly bulkier. So apples and oranges.



That's being kind, it's actually more like a house brick compared with the RX100's tiny size

toaster

That's being kind, it's actually more like a house brick compared with … That's being kind, it's actually more like a house brick compared with the RX100's tiny size



Yeah, the X100/s is quite a large camera. But you get the OVF/EVF and all those manual dials. Lovely camera, but not small or cheap.

camerasize.com/com…ct/

The X100/s also doesn't fit in your pocket unless that pocket is coat sized.
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text