Some help here (I hope it is not the wrong place to ask):
As far as I understand, the main difference between the G7X and the RX100 "Mx" in terms of IQ are:
- zooming or in 100% (pixel peeping), the corners of the G7X in 24mm (or close to that) and in 100mm WITH aperture completely open are less sharp, more upscaled. Or differences are more apparent than this (doesn't look like for the photos here)? (24mm G7X vs M3; 100mm G7X vs M1 or M2)
- if you shoot 24mm or 100mm (or around it) stopping down a little bit, sharpness is pretty much the same.
- other parts of the focal range, say between 27-90 are pretty much the same IQ.
I believe I understand the other differences (AF in the RX is faster, EVF...), don't want to start a debate, just to clarify this. I already have an RX100 M2, like it a lot, but I am a sucker for tilting LCD, and wouldn't mind having a different camera maker to try it out as I already have 3 Sonys. But want to understand this point above.
Appreciate any help. Thanks!
PS: The Canon does not have Time Lapse, right?
I think you have it mostly right except for a couple of points.
First, the G7X is somewhat soft at 100mm at f2.8, but NOT JUST IN THE CORNERS. It's not terrible and can be worked with, but it's soft everywhere wide open. That said, it seems to be more of an issue for close subjects than more removed subject. This issue is mostly resolved at 3.2 and fully resolved by f3.5. I think that's kind of the same at the wide end, as Serhan's quote describes. It's not at it's best real close at 24mm, but I find this to be limited to wide open and at the corners. I've done fine with macros at 24mm by around f3.5 or f4.
Second, a couple of the reviews said that AF was actually faster on the G7X, not on the RX100. I can't say, but both are pretty good for AF speed. I remember thinking the RX100 (1st gen) was about as good as any compact I'd shot with and I feel the same with the G7X. It's really fast toward the wide end in good light, and slows progressively as the light drops and the focal length increases. But even in pretty low light at 100mm it's better than I'd expect...