Updated (August 2012): Compare the Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100 vs Sony NEX 5R

Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100 vs Sony NEX 5R

Winner
Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100

89

Sony NEX 5R

53

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100

Wide aperture
Aperture
f/1.8
High resolution screen
Screen resolution
1,229k dots
Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Lens
Light-weight
Weight
213 g
 

Reasons to buy the Sony NEX 5R

Touch screen
Touch screen
Fewer buttons
Movie continuous focus
Movie continuous focus
Makes it easy to get in-focus movies
Interchangeable lenses
Interchangeable lenses
Many lenses to choose from
External flash
External flash
Better lighting

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Sony NEX 5R.

competitors

Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100 Competitors

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III

Pro digicam

$510 - $748

Wide angle Much better wide angle
High-speed framerate Records high-speed movies
Weight Heavier
Canon PowerShot G9 X Mark II

Canon PowerShot G9 X Mark II

Pro digicam

$369 - $429

Touch screen Has a touch screen
Light sensitivity Better maximum light sensitivity
Aperture Slightly narrower aperture
Canon PowerShot G7 X

Canon PowerShot G7 X

Pro digicam

$534

Wide angle Much better wide angle
Touch screen Has a touch screen
Battery life Shorter battery life

Sony NEX 5R Competitors

Sony NEX 5T

Sony NEX 5T

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

Lowest price Slightly more expensive
Canon EOS 80D

Canon EOS 80D

Entry-level DSLR

$872 - $999 body only

$870 - $1,149 with 18-55mm lens

Lens availability Much more lenses available
Battery life Much longer battery life
Size Significantly larger
Sony Alpha NEX-6

Sony Alpha NEX-6

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$606 body only

Viewfinder Has a viewfinder
Built-in flash Built-in flash
Touch screen No touch screen

discussion

Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100
Cybershot DSC-RX100
Sony

Report a correction
Sony NEX 5R
NEX 5R
Sony

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments