Three way compact update LX100M2 vs RX100M4 vs G1X3 14 November 2018

In December last year  I posted a comparison between the Lumix LX100 (original), Canon G1XM3 and Sony RX100M4. You can read this here.

This post is an update of that comparison with the LX100M2 replacing the LX100(original).

The LX100M2 uses the same body, EVF, lens and controls (with minor changes) as the original. 

Improvements come in the form of a new sensor with more pixels and better high ISO performance, a new processor, improved autofocus and a new monitor with touchscreen capability.

These improvements are modest and have disappointed some LX100 users but they do provide the Mk2 with an improved user experience and slightly better image quality.

In the meantime I have been using the G1XM3 and discovering that some of its little quirks can be more annoying than I first realised.

Image quality from these three cameras is so similar that only pixel peeping at high magnification can distinguish one from the other.

The choice between them is based on features, capabilities, performance and the user experience.

The Sony RX100  series, in this case the Mk4 which I own and tested, delivers essentially the same  imaging capability as the other two cameras but in a smaller package. 

The RX100 cameras are very easy to carry.

They are also the best performers in fully automatic mode with the best auto ISO algorithms in P Mode.

If you want a compact, utilitarian device which can make very nice photos with little need for user control, the RX100 Mk 3, 4 or 5 or even 6 can do a very competent job.

However it seems to me that if a utilitarian device is required maybe a smartphone might be even better.

The other issue many enthusiast photographers have reported is that the RX100 models are not particularly nice to hold or operate. In addition the pop-up EVF can become a nuisance after a while.

The Canon G1XMk3  Our family bought a G1X(original) several years ago and were mightily underwhelmed by its capabilities, performance and user experience.

We passed on the Mk2 (no viewfinder) but did get and have been using a Mk3.

This has many improvements over both the previous versions and in many respects is now a competent device.

But to me it appears to be an answer looking for a question.

It is not super compact like the RX100 series.  It has a small aperture (f2.8-5.6) lens and a sensor which is no better at high ISO settings than the LX100M2 so it is not well suited to low light work.

In operation it has some quirks which diminish the user experience.

Each of these is minor but together they are significant. The mode dial has a lock button which has to be pressed before it will turn. In P mode the camera behaves erratically sometimes selecting ISO 800 outdoors and sometimes 100.  This forces the user to set A mode which is more reliable. But the auto ISO algorithm is very basic so I often have to switch to S mode indoors.  The front dial is covered by the middle finger when the camera is held normally so I must shift my hand down to work the dial.  Raw files are quite prone to green/purple fringing at high contrast edges.

The list goes on but you get the idea.

Canon got some things right with the G1X3. The DPAF is very reliable. It ticks several boxes for specifications like the  built in EVF with a decent eyecup.

It is the best of the three models here for vloggers with a fully articulated monitor and mic socket.

But after spending a year with it I find the G1X3 to be somewhat less than the sum of its parts. Which is a pity because if Canon had been bolder with the design it might have been much more appealing.

Which brings us to the

Lumix LX100M2  I rate this as the least unsatisfactory of a compromised trio of models and the one most likely to appeal to enthusiast users.

My apologies to fervent LX100 lovers, of whom there are a few out there, but “least unsatisfactory” is the best I can say about a camera with plenty of  issues which could have been fixed by the manufacturer but have not.

The touch screen does improve usability considerably. The AF area can be moved quickly and easily. 

The cursor buttons can retain their labelled functions.

The modest improvement in image quality is appreciated. On my tests with Raw files at ISO 6400 (which by the way I hardly ever need to use on theLX100M2 because of the wide aperture lens) I rated the LX100M2 as having the least amount of luminance noise, the G1X3 had about ¼ stop more noise and the RX100M4 about 1/3 stop more noise than the G1X3.

Autofocus on the Mk2 is more reliable than the original.

All these things are welcome and just get the LX100M2 over the line as my recommendation for best currently available enthusiast/advanced zoom compact for general photography, street, family and documentary work.

It has the trademark Lumix multi-aspect-ratio sensor, a fast processor, is responsive, interesting to use with lots of external controls, gives a reliable firing solution (aperture x shutter speed x ISO) in P mode (actually A-A-A mode as there is no mode dial) and it makes nice looking pictures.