Ricoh GX100 or Sony W300

Ricoh GX100

5 (50%)

Sony W300

5 (50%)

Total Members Voted: 8

[ricksander]

So I need a new digicam for carrying around.  Im edging towards the older, larger GX100, but am also considering the smaller (1 inch shorter front profile!).  The GX100 seems more prosumer, the Sony smaller, newer, more fun features maybe.  Which would you get?

[thom]

Which would you get?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Maybe the newly announced Ricoh GX-200?
[a href=\"http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_ricoh_gx200_3.php]http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_ricoh_gx200_3.php[/url]

[BruceHouston]

The GX100 got a pretty nasty review on DPR, particularly as regards low-light IQ.

[kudzu1509]

I bought a Sony W300 last week and I'm truly blown away by the image quality.  I worked as a photojournalist for 40 years before retiring and I have never seen a camera like this one.
Whats next Sony?

[Prognathous]

The GX100 got a pretty nasty review on DPR, particularly as regards low-light IQ.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The GX100 high-ISO is nothing special in JPEG, but in RAW you can get [a href=\"http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1012&message=26096771]results[/url] that rival and in some aspects even surpass those from the undisputed high-ISO P&S champ - Fuji F31.

Now that the GX200 offers a RAW buffer, the JPEG complaints are no longer an issue. Just process the files yourself, using the best methods and software. This would result in better images than any in-camera JPEG from other cameras that share the same Sony 12MP sensor (e.g. Canon G9 and Nikon P5100).

Prog.