Canon G7X Mark ii vs. Sony RX100 V
These seem to be the top vlogging cameras used on YouTube these days, but I'm curious what everyone's thoughts are on them?
Here are the differences that I can see with the cameras:
Canon:
Price is more affordable ($600 - $700)
Internal image stabilization is great
I like the out-of-box color grading more than Sony
Auto-focus is good, but seems to be slower than then new Sony camera
No 4K...Come on, Canon! 1080p is so 2011!
Battery life is...okay-ish. I'd buy 1 - 2 extra batteries.
Longer exposure for night shots if you like taking pictures
Touch-screen for focusing on other objects in the shot is super handy
Sony:
Blows Canon's HD frame rates out of the water - Sony is a complete game changer and makes it look like Canon is falling behind lol. Canon can only go to 60 fps (fps = frames per second), but Sony can go up to 960 fps (for like..6 seconds...but it's still pretty cool!). That's amazing! Think of the slow-mo stuff you could do with that!
Claims to have lightening fast auto-focus, however, I've seen some sluggish clips bumbling around on YouTube lol. It does seem to be faster than Canon.
Stabilization isn't very good compared to the Canon camera, so you need a good editing program for that step
It can shoot in 4K
Battery life is really bad. It seems like you need to buy like 4+ Sony batteries at $30 - $40 a pop to have the camera be useful for shooting video, especially slow-motion stuff. Generic "compatible" batteries apparently won't cut it (according to some YouTubers...).
The price tag is almost double what Canon is ($1000! Ouch! D: )
I think it does a better job detecting lighting changes between indoors and outdoors
The lens is more zoomed in and cropped looking than the Canon
It has a flip-out viewfinder like Canon has, but no touch screen capabilities. D:
Faster at shooting Raw pictures and a bigger buffer
It seems more fragile than the Canon? Everyone seems to buy screen protectors and cases for this camera, but not for the Canon
You can turn it to a much higher ISO in low-light, but the image looks like mashed potatoes at those ISOs, so there's really not much of a gain with that, imo....
Both seem to be good in low-light settings, have a nice picture, good auto-focus, okay audio, and are light-weight. They are both good cameras. ^_^
I personally think that for the price, Canon wins - especially since I don't think my computer will be able to handle 4K editing. Sony missed the mark with the touch-screen stuff, but gets lots of brownie points for the slow-motion and 4K for those who have a computer that can handle the editing. As soon as Sony rolls out with a touchscreen and better image stabilization, I think they will win hands down (especially if they find a way to improve the battery life a bit).
But...that slow-motion is tempting.....I feel like for an extra $300-ish you get slow motion, 4K, and slightly more editing work with Sony -- but is it worth it? o_0
These seem to be the top vlogging cameras used on YouTube these days, but I'm curious what everyone's thoughts are on them?
Here are the differences that I can see with the cameras:
Canon:
Price is more affordable ($600 - $700)
Internal image stabilization is great
I like the out-of-box color grading more than Sony
Auto-focus is good, but seems to be slower than then new Sony camera
No 4K...Come on, Canon! 1080p is so 2011!
Battery life is...okay-ish. I'd buy 1 - 2 extra batteries.
Longer exposure for night shots if you like taking pictures
Touch-screen for focusing on other objects in the shot is super handy
Sony:
Blows Canon's HD frame rates out of the water - Sony is a complete game changer and makes it look like Canon is falling behind lol. Canon can only go to 60 fps (fps = frames per second), but Sony can go up to 960 fps (for like..6 seconds...but it's still pretty cool!). That's amazing! Think of the slow-mo stuff you could do with that!
Claims to have lightening fast auto-focus, however, I've seen some sluggish clips bumbling around on YouTube lol. It does seem to be faster than Canon.
Stabilization isn't very good compared to the Canon camera, so you need a good editing program for that step
It can shoot in 4K
Battery life is really bad. It seems like you need to buy like 4+ Sony batteries at $30 - $40 a pop to have the camera be useful for shooting video, especially slow-motion stuff. Generic "compatible" batteries apparently won't cut it (according to some YouTubers...).
The price tag is almost double what Canon is ($1000! Ouch! D: )
I think it does a better job detecting lighting changes between indoors and outdoors
The lens is more zoomed in and cropped looking than the Canon
It has a flip-out viewfinder like Canon has, but no touch screen capabilities. D:
Faster at shooting Raw pictures and a bigger buffer
It seems more fragile than the Canon? Everyone seems to buy screen protectors and cases for this camera, but not for the Canon
You can turn it to a much higher ISO in low-light, but the image looks like mashed potatoes at those ISOs, so there's really not much of a gain with that, imo....
Both seem to be good in low-light settings, have a nice picture, good auto-focus, okay audio, and are light-weight. They are both good cameras. ^_^
I personally think that for the price, Canon wins - especially since I don't think my computer will be able to handle 4K editing. Sony missed the mark with the touch-screen stuff, but gets lots of brownie points for the slow-motion and 4K for those who have a computer that can handle the editing. As soon as Sony rolls out with a touchscreen and better image stabilization, I think they will win hands down (especially if they find a way to improve the battery life a bit).
But...that slow-motion is tempting.....I feel like for an extra $300-ish you get slow motion, 4K, and slightly more editing work with Sony -- but is it worth it? o_0
Last edited:
