[Closed] Anyone own a Sony RX100?

I've got one, not used the video much but excellent for riding pics once you get the hang of the settings, definitely worth spending time learning how to use all the manual controls, but also good on auto.

I only really have landscape shots from mine (Mk1). It is a true pocket-rocket IMO. Don't favour the interface/controls for the main part (although it is finally making more sense after much practice) and it requires an added grip for confident, steady shooting - but despite these shortcomings (again IMO) the IQ is superb. Dynamic range is also truly impressive, especially in RAW yet even the JPGs exhibit more shadow detail than any other compact I've tried.

[IMG] [/IMG]

It's a properly ace little camera - image quality from RAW is scarily close to my 6D.

I've got the mk1 which is excellent, but it seemed to just get better and better with each Mark. Basically pick a new or used one of any Mark based on how much you want to spend (I.e. Want cheaper get a mk1, OK to spend more get a mk4) and you'll have s brilliant little camera.

Great cameras. I had one for a couple of years, then lost it(!), bought a different camera and didn't get on with it, so bought another RX100 (Mk1) and of course promptly found the first one...

There are great differences between the Mk1 2 and 3. To be honest, I reckon the Mk1 is the one - unless you really need WiFi and GPS. The Mk1 can be had for £200 s/h and it's a steal. The shots are good enough for Singletrack magazine stuff, but it's small enough to put on a Camelbak pouch or in a jacket pocket. Battery life is good and, as others have said, if you learn its ways, it is a very rewarding camera. Both of mine recently broke (one broken lens motor (turned on in a pocket...) and one just went mad) so I cannibalised them and got one fixed camera out of both wreckages.

Also look at the Canon S100

Brilliant little camera, mk3 here, often take it rather than the SLR, especially on the bike. Not done a lot of video, but what I have done has been very nice. As above better with the add on grip and it takes a bit of getting to grips with all the menu options.

Biking and scenery...

[url= https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7791/17610404064_2ee4a50041.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7791/17610404064_2ee4a50041.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/sQaVAh ]Suilven by -crewlie-[/url]
[url= https://farm1.staticflickr.com/366/18248581649_7103743981.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm1.staticflickr.com/366/18248581649_7103743981.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/tNyKy6 ]Loch Morar by -crewlie-[/url]

[IMG] [/IMG]

I've got a Mk3, I've used my CSC far less since getting it. I've not got any examples to upload but as others have said the image quality is outstanding. I too got it to get better shots than my phone and it certainly does that and its compact size really makes it easy to carry.

Square crops at dawn. (JPEG with onboard DRO)

(Wonder if distant biker is an STWer...?)

[IMG] [/IMG]

Looks good guys, that first image looks like a CGI malver rider.

For my price range i'd be considering just the mark 1, i have spotted a second hand one with warranty until mid 2017 for 200 quid so considering that.

Managed to have a go on one in the shop and there did seem a lot of stuff hidden in menues but as for controls and settings i'm a little used to used them manually as I used to have an SLR but sold it as I never carried it since it was too big.

I was about to ask a similar question - I'm seriously tempted by the mk3, but am also considering the Canon GX7 - has anyone compared the two, which did you go for and why?

[IMG] [/IMG]

that first image looks like a CGI malver rider.

It does now you mention it. I opened the original up in Snapseed, pressed auto correct and then added a vignette to focus attention on the crop/path. Will try and dig out the unedited/unadulterated original

*Edit. Here it is:

[IMG] [/IMG]

400ISO
F11

This was back in May when the camera was new to me. I deliberately underexposed by knocking exposure comp down a few just to see how much shadow detail I could pull back after the event (from JPEG single frame ie no DRO)

This taken a few days ago. Nothing I think special about the pic except to show how it handled low natural light particularly well.

[IMG] [/IMG]

They're amazing IMO. I have a mk I too - got it for £215 from http://www.expeditelectronics.com - shadow recovery on a RAW file is definitely comparable to a 5D MK III, possible even better in some circumstances! Great little thing.

Had a mk1, sold it. Lovely quality but found it a bit slower use.

Now on a mk3. Love it. Same or better image quality, quicker to use.

Mk1 here. As previously said, if it broke I'd go straight out and buy another, only upgrade to Mk IV. I also have a Nikon D800 and sometimes I wonder why I bothered carrying the weight around and not just put the RX100 in my pocket.

Got a Mk1 and still love it, gets used more than even my Sony A7R.

Many thanks chaps, some good examples there which have certainly helped in my decision making

Couple more examples for ya:

[url= https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1617/23621923724_3870567960.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1617/23621923724_3870567960.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/BZowWY ]Portobello (5 of 5)[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/grum_wynne/ ]Graham Wynne[/url], on Flickr

[url= https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1571/24167594551_60b2c3bfbb_b.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1571/24167594551_60b2c3bfbb_b.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/CPBeSF ]Descending Table Mountain (1 of 1)[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/grum_wynne/ ]Graham Wynne[/url], on Flickr

I've got a MkI. They're great little cameras and so versatile once you've got the hang of things. A stick on finger grip is a really good idea as it's a bit slippery otherwise. You can program the Fn button as a shortcut to tab between 7 different parameters which saves a lot of faffing around in the menus. Unlike some cameras it will remember your settings if you switch it off and back on again which is really handy - unless you forget that you left it on selftimer and a week later can't work out why it won't take photos... 😆

[url= https://farm1.staticflickr.com/451/19071219413_425a711c87_c.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm1.staticflickr.com/451/19071219413_425a711c87_c.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/v4fZ6P ]Cham7[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/beanum/ ]Beanum[/url], on Flickr

[url= https://farm1.staticflickr.com/263/19091582831_67b8f1c9ea_c.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm1.staticflickr.com/263/19091582831_67b8f1c9ea_c.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/v64mre ]Lavaux 1[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/beanum/ ]Beanum[/url], on Flickr

Any compelling reasons to get a IV over a III - apart from the 4K?

For my price range i'd be considering just the mark 1, i have spotted a second hand one with warranty until mid 2017 for 200 quid so considering that.

That's not far off the price of a new MK1. (There was a cash-back offer until recently)

I have one. It's great. Image quality is outstanding - nothing I looked at of a similar size came close (sub £500). It's very versatile, once you get your head around the various options and ways of configuring the controls to access them (setting things via the menus is tiresome). It's much more pleasant to use with a stick on grip (a Franiec (sp?) grip is well made, feels nice and looks like it's always been there).

but...

Mine, (2+ years old), now has a hair that shows up at the edge of the frame at small apertures and certain zoom settings. I have tried the 'hoover trick' but that didn't shift it, so ended up taking the camera to pieces to clean the sensor / back of the lens (not for the faint hearted). Even though I usually keep the camera in a case, the sensor was absolutely covered in lint, so it is not well sealed, and even though I cleaned the sensor and blew out the back of the lens, the hair is still there, so it must be trapped inside the lens assembly. (I've switched to 4:3 format for the time being so it doesn't show).

It's a fantastic camera, and I'd still heartily recommend it, but I would really avoid putting it in my pocket without it being in a case of some sort - and check any 2nd hand ones carefully for dust/hairs at the smallest aperture through the full zoom range at 3:2 format.

P.S. It does really good video, too.

Am I correct in thinking the Mk1 has £60 cashback at the moment!
If so then it's available new for £197 net from Wilkinson Cameras or from John Lewis for £204 (which would probably be my preference)

https://www.sony.co.uk/cashback/digital-imaging

John Lewis have a 2 year warranty as standard and only £40 to extend it a year, and it includes accidental cover.

Most sites are saying £30 cashback at the moment, but the Sony page they link to says £60. I've read good and bad things about cashback claims, so I guess it's best not to bank on it.

I would guess JL would back you up if nothing came of the claim?

I think the Sony site must be wrong as the cashback seems to scale with the model and the RX100M4 has £50, so I wouldn't think that the base model would have a bigger cashback on it.

Any compelling reasons to get a IV over a III - apart from the 4K?

from what I've seen in reviews the noise on images actually seems to be worse in the mk IV.

Most sites are saying £30 cashback at the moment, but the Sony page they link to says £60. I've read good and bad things about cashback claims, so I guess it's best not to bank on it.

Yeah, they send you a credit card type thing that you have to register and enable and then you have the money on that card to spend. Which is a pain in itself.

well that's a description failure in itself - that's not cash...

I got a bank transfer when I claimed my cashback from sony about 3 or 4 months ago. Got mine from Harrisons in Sheffield the II with the official case thrown in and it was double cash back at the time(£80). Also traded in my old camera and lenses to fund it.

Have a Mk1. Can also highly recommend. The HD video and sound quality is very good.

Thanks for the cashback spot! definitely makes just buying one new from John Lewis the most sense with a two year warranty!

Anyone able to confirm the cashback question of what you are actually given back? is it a store credit type thing for sony or john lewis or actual cash/BT?

This is what it says in the T&Cs:

The Cashback will be provided in the form of a direct bank transfer to accounts which are operated by a financial institution located in the UK or Republic of Ireland. This is on assumption that correct electronic bank details are supplied. Alternative cashback fulfilment is not possible. Note that successful claimants will have their Cashback provided by direct bank transfer provided correct bank details have been included and receipt is valid and readable. Claimants
from the United Kingdom will have their Cashback paid in sterling whereas claimants from the Republic of Ireland will have their Cashback paid in Euros.

grum, you've had the LX7 too, haven't you?

How do you rate their relative strengths and weaknesses?

Alexsimon - many thanks!

The double cash back is over I think - there was a date limitation on it. I managed to get it for the HX90 that I bought.

Expedite are cheeky shites! Free delivery to the United Kingdom (4-7 days delivery), but to Scotland they want £15 and delivery due 6-10 days!

I haven't got one, but I'm very much enjoying the lovely pictures being posted.

Kit - noticed that and thought the same!

Anyone able to confirm the cashback question of what you are actually given back?

I got the money transferred into my bank a/c but it took 2 or 3 months to come through - this was the Sony cashback ~~2 years ago.

Not sure if I can do lovely pictures, but try these:

[URL= http://i255.photobucket.com/albums/hh143/werdnayarg/webstuf/Bike/sneudon/DSC02387_zps41aep0cd.jp g" target="_blank">http://i255.photobucket.com/albums/hh143/werdnayarg/webstuf/Bike/sneudon/DSC02387_zps41aep0cd.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]

(Taken in B+W mode and mildly tweaked):

[url= https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5727/21521518904_1a836a7b44_o.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5727/21521518904_1a836a7b44_o.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/yMMpLL ]Tilly[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/40141861@N00/ ]tillydog[/url], on Flickr

Just out of interest, how much image processing are people doing to produce the quality snaps that grace this thread (and what software are you using)? I ask because I'm just getting into digital photography and my unprocessed RAW pictures all have a 'flat' feel which does not reflect what was in front of the camera (Canon G15).

Like this?

[img] [/img]

This is probably one of the more extreme ones I've done recently. Others can be more subtle. Depends what you have in mind for the final photo. I use Lightroom. You can see [most of] the adjustments I've made in the panel. There's also a graduated filter on the sky to reduce the exposure a little.

The photo was taken at night, by the way 😀

here's a few, they're via instagram which might do something to the quality...

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

Most of my editing I use either Ps (or Snapseed. Always Snapseed for websize images. I've actually achieved a whole family wedding album with it. Very useful bit of kit. How much or little I do depends on a lot of factors and desired outcomes. For imstance sometimes I'll feel it requires a little desaturation of colour, sometimes a touch boosted. I will make actual notes in situ, as per my painting sketchbooks, as often the camera (well, me!) will fudge some subtlety of colour or light that was striking to the eye on location and needs to be manipulated a little in the lightroom. The one below was simply cropped and the levels/colours etc untouched. In-camera HDR did a good job off the bat and it was as I remembered.

[IMG] [/IMG]

This one was more work as I wanted to achieve a specific effect, sort of faded yet as sharp as I remembered it. I cropped, straightened it, sharpened and warmed it up in snapseed, then brought out the shadow detail via something akin to levels ('ambiance') then applied a filter.

[IMG] [/IMG]

*Edit - Not necessarily in that order. Usually rotate and crop first if required, adjust levels, then do all the fine tuning, dodging and burning if necessary, finishing up with a sharpen or lens blur etc.

If you want your images to 'pop' more just use the auto adjust in Snapseed and take it from there. If you are just using the auto mode on your camera then consider using aperture priority instead, or some other manual setting. Auto modes often produce flat looking results unless the subject is very nicely lit either by accident or design.

Just like my old Power Shot I find the RX100 results to be a touch blue out of the camera. Haven't gotten around to customising yet so tend to use the warm filter a touch (in Snapseed) to correct this.

grum, you've had the LX7 too, haven't you?

How do you rate their relative strengths and weaknesses?

No I've used one a bit though. I've used M4/3 cameras quite a bit and occasionally still use my GF1.

I can only compare with the RX100 Mk I. The LX7 is actually nicer to use IMO (and has a faster lens at both ends of the zoom) but the IQ and especially what you can do with the RAW files is better on the RX100. Twice as many MPs too if that's useful to you (big prints). Video stabilisation on the RX100 is really cool as well - looks like a steadicam!

... I'm just getting into digital photography and my unprocessed RAW pictures all have a 'flat' feel which does not reflect what was in front of the camera (Canon G15).

At the risk of stating the bleedin' obvious:

Raw images will appear flat because they don't have any dynamic range optimisation, sharpening or noise reduction, etc applied - they are the raw data for you to do these things.

I got Lightroom as I had great dreams of getting my photos organised - as yet unfulfilled. Picasa (free) would probably do 99% of what I use LR for.

Frankly, I find it all a bit too much of a faff to deal with RAW files and am happy for the camera to do this for me and save the result as a jpeg. I think the RX100 does a very good job of this. My spaniel photo was photoshopped to remove eye-snot, a few stray hairs and to tweak some detail out of the shadows. The Snowdon one was straight out of the camera IIRC, FWIW.

My photography is limited by my eye for composition, not the software! 🙂

It has been a revalation shooting in aperture priority - there are some excellent videos on youtube by B and H / Jeff Cable that struck a chord with me

@Beanum

A Flickr buddy of mine (Itch) lives in Lavaux. You should have a look at his Flickr stream as he is a wonderful photographer and has many incredible Landscape shots of the location:

[url= https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8788/17737178374_1f7e867f19_k.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8788/17737178374_1f7e867f19_k.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/t2nFbf ]Rainbow[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/the-itch/ ]- Itch -[/url], on Flickr

It has been a revalation shooting in aperture priority

I did a course with photoion in London

http://www.photoion.co.uk/?gclid=COTi3-GmnMoCFYWfGwodCJEDbQ

and that was his advice as full manual often takes too long to set, whereas AP gives you the control for the type of story you want to tell (I think the story bit is from Bryan Peterson).

Many thanks for the pointers. I was 'into' photography many years ago (long before digital) but then other interests took over. Although the basic principles remain unchanged the processing side of things is very different now (I used to spend hours in the hallowed sanctuary of the darkroom).

I find the video with the RX100 to be very good even when indoors and with p poor lighting. I have never been so happy with a camera, and it's only the Mk 1.

I have the mk1 and its a great all purpose camera but its not without is problems. So instead of me telling you about the good stuff heres some of the bad. Which arnt really that bad.

needs a grip as its a slippery sucker, the sony one works just fine and is cheap.
Its a bit slow to start up and shut down.
The colours are a bit off for my taste but can be corrected in raw.
It just doesnt feel as pleasant to use as it should, a bit clunky, no touch screen, reviewing pictures and zooming and having to use the zoom leaver, little things that detract from the overall experience.
More serious is the fact that it often chooses 1/30 shutter which may lead to blur hand held, easily overcome in S mode but still, in full auto this can be an issue.
Reliability, mine broke but fixed its self.. and the lens has no filter thread to protect the lens and the lens design may not be the most reliable for pocket use or dirt resistance.
My rx100 shots tend to need more post processing.

I'm comparing the rx100 to similar size quality camera like the panny gm1 and Ricoh GR which are both more pleasurable experience to use.
The Ricoh GR pretty much destroys the RX100 in every aspect of camera control but is of course just a 28mm equivalent lens.

Thought this might help a few people regarding getting dust/lint in the camera.
This case is a perfect fit for the RX100 MK 1 and is dust, crush and waterproof. Ideal for when cameras in my bag on bike trips,family outings.
http://www.pelican.com/us/en/product/watertight-protector-hard-cases/micro-case/standard/1010/
Picked one up from ebay for a tenner.
Loverly camera btw

Great thread. I really should own something like this. a year ago i bought a Olympus XZ-1 but it hasn't quite met my expectations, mainly on dynamic range

The canon version is tempting as well, but a bit pricier.....

If people have photos taken inside at night just using domestic (or pub etc.) lighting I'd be interested to see them

I shoot in JPEG as I simply can't be bothered to mess around on the Pc with pictures, I have instead done an action in lightroom to Blip the jpegs out a bit.
[img][url= https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5741/24152413105_5eca451ff6_k.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5741/24152413105_5eca451ff6_k.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/CNgqXB ]DSC01090[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/victoranthony/ ]Vic[/url], on Flickr[/img]

untouched version below, haqrdly any tweeking...

[img] [/img]

Thinking I might pop for a mkIV this week, the super slow motion might be fun with the cat...

If people have photos taken inside at night just using domestic (or pub etc.) lighting I'd be interested to see them

Not amazing photos but here you go. Last one has no noise reduction applied - 3200 ISO.

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

If people have photos taken inside at night just using domestic (or pub etc.) lighting I'd be interested to see them

the rx100 does really well in poorly lit indoor situations by virtue of the excellent flash. It is a lot more powerful than its size would suggest, it has a flash comp setting so you can adjust the strength and most importantly you can angle the flash upwards with your finger to bounce off the ceiling to avoid the artificial shiny forehead look you get with forward facing flashes.

No flash on any of mine. I just use High ISO and the wide end wide open. Will try the flash trick though.

[img] [/img]

your pics look really good without the flash Grum.

If I do use the flash usually set the flash comp down to -1 or less so it is subtle.

Colster808 - Question about that case! I was looking at it and though tit would be a good shout but wanted to know if it had any belt loops on it? I was thinking I might try get a case and attach it to my top tube for easy access to the camera instead of in my bag or in my pocket, especially if i can get a case that is supposedly crush proof and waterproof as that one claims.

^ be sure to think hard about any possible effects of vibration etc if using a camera case on the toptube! Compact cameras have a lot of precise moving parts and a fair bit of glass....

Fair point! Don't think i've thought that one through properly to be honest!

I've run a LowePro case for mine on my Camelbak strap and it's been great for access and protection.

Regarding vibration, my wife has had no fewer than 3 sony compacts fail through the vibration reduction mechanism (lens keeps shaking). One of them was just after the camera had sat on a boat engine for some time...that was a cheaper waterproof model (also good) but the latest to be afflicted is her beloved RX100. It's still usable (intermittent fault) but annoying.

Still love the cameras, will probably get another when this one gets worse.

Which lowepro model are you using chipps? I used to carry my gf1 in a case on the chest strap while biking - really good for quick access. I guess you wouldn't want to fall on it but probably less of an issue than with a GoPro.

mudmuncher - Member

If I do use the flash usually set the flash comp down to -1 or less so it is subtle.

This is what I do with my Nikon P200. Take the flash compensation down to -0.7/-1 and it still gives enough illumination to bring the subject out without making it too obvious.
I've also used a tissue draped over the flash before (split the tissue into it's thinnest layer & that's normally enough to use) to diffuse it a bit.

grum - Member

Which lowepro model are you using chipps?

I suspect it will be the Lowepro Apex. It's a really good case with a strong velcro fastening on the back and a waterproof cover tucked away in the bottom.
They do different sizes; I think mine in the 20AW which is a good fit for my P200 (which I suspect is a similar size to the Sony).
I use a cheap karabiner style clip to act as a back-up fastening when it's on my rucksack. I'm sure I've got some pics of it somewhere from when someone was asking about cases before......

Here you go...

[URL= http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m215/me96kka/IMAG0543.jp g" target="_blank">http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m215/me96kka/IMAG0543.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]

[URL= http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m215/me96kka/IMAG0545.jp g" target="_blank">http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m215/me96kka/IMAG0545.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]

[URL= http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m215/me96kka/IMAG0546.jp g" target="_blank">http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m215/me96kka/IMAG0546.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]

Another happy RX100(ii) user here. Glad I went for the Mk2 as its worth it for the wifi alone, means you can upload to your phone, use snapseed, need to turn your computer on, unless you want to shoot in raw anyway.

Definitely don't get an RX100 thinking you can stick it in a jersey pocket, its too bulky and heavy, and would break both you and the camera if you crashed.

I use a Lezyne pod caddy saddle bag (medium sized), with some foam I cut into shape as inserts, works very well indeed and is easy to access. Its a hard case saddle bag so should provide some reasonable protection.

Because I'm tight (and self employed) - I've just put in a price match request at JL for the Wilkinson's price (£249).

I used to use one of those Apex cases, fixed to the strap of my Camelbak. It was brilliant for accessibility as it was really easy to get the camera out and grab a few shots, but...not a great idea as I crushed a £300 Panasonic when I had a bit of a tactical shoulder dab on the Beast at Coed-y-Brenin. I certainly wouldn't risk an RX100 in one while I was cycling.

onewheelgood - Member

I used to use one of those Apex cases, fixed to the strap of my Camelbak. It was brilliant for accessibility as it was really easy to get the camera out and grab a few shots, but...not a great idea as I crushed a £300 Panasonic when I had a bit of a tactical shoulder dab on the Beast at Coed-y-Brenin. I certainly wouldn't risk an RX100 in one while I was cycling.

Thing is, if you're not going to take the camera out with you for fear of damaging it, I think you'd be better off with a £100 compact that you have with you & actually use.
Or you could use it in situations where you are fairly confident with your ability on the trails you are riding to minimise the risk.

I remember taking my SLR in a chest bag round CYB & couldn't believe the amount of comments about being crazy for taking it out on the bike. I'd rather that, than have it sat on a shelf gathering dust & not actually getting any shots from it.

I've had a couple of crashes with expensive mirrorless cameras strapped to me. No point having a camera on a shelf. It'll be worthless in 2 years anyway.

I need a new camera and might as well get something good. However, I have no knowledge of manual settings etc. I'd like to think I'll learn but knowing me I won't.

So, is the RX100 a good camera to used in auto mode only?

this guide on amazon gets reviewed well - there are different versions for the different models :

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Photographers-Guide-DSC-RX100-Alexander-White-ebook/dp/B009YMBS74/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&qid=1452518101&sr=8-9&keywords=Sony+RX100

once you have it you may find yourself at least wanting to use aperture priority mode according to the type of shot you want - i.e. if you have a central subject you will use a big aperture which will blur out the background somewhat, and for landscapes you will use a small aperture which will make everything in focus, and for times when there is nothing specific you will use a middling aperture.

Re the auto mode - it's pretty good and you'll get some great shots but as above sometimes it picks a fairly slow shutter speed in low light situations which can mean blurry shots.

Thing is, if you're not going to take the camera out with you for fear of damaging it, I think you'd be better off with a £100 compact that you have with you & actually use.

This ^^^^^

Buy from John Lewis and pay £40 for the 3 year cover with accidental...

I've got an RX100 mk2 coming tomorrow. I paid £279 from Clifton Cameras..... Rather bloody excited about it to be honest.

@geetee1972
Thanks for the link. There are some amazing photos on there...

I only ever use Picasa for my post processing. Normally auto-contrast and a couple of clicks of Saturation are enough to lift most photos I find...