t2i comparison thoughts to the new sony rx100

[thewanderer]

iposted this at another forum as well, but thought a different range of viewers.plus a review of the sony here may provide some insight to the situation

due to a theft of all my equip, my truck and my life basically in dallas, i am having to retool a bit and with all the new stuff,  i was thinking of maybe forgoing the t2i  which was stolen and applying it against my deductible and just getting the new sony for the little camera to have around for just things, and portability,  i will be also replacing the 1dsmIII which was stolen, so i will be getting the equivalent there, and have the longer lenses for that camera, plus if i want video with the 600IS or what ever lens i need, i can use one camera, the 1d4 or the 1dx  whichever i opt for or the 5dIII, so the need for  the t2i series has somewhat diminished as the above have the feature video feature, which i rarely use anyway,,, so to the question,

i am awareof the size and sensor differential of the t2i/3i series vs the sony, but it seems to be getting a lot of good review,  could anyone comment on that type of comparison, the sonny would be for general carry around, hiking, here and there where the t series even seems big. 

any thoughts at all on that comparison  t2i and sony rx100

[BernardLanguillier]

due to a theft of all my equip, my truck and my life basically in dallas, i am having to retool a bit and with all the new stuff,  i was thinking of maybe forgoing the t2i  which was stolen and applying it against my deductible and just getting the new sony for the little camera to have around for just things, and portability,  i will be also replacing the 1dsmIII which was stolen,

The RX100 is excellent for a compact camera but its image quality is not yet at DSLR level though.

Cheers,
Bernard

[thewanderer]

what would be a max  reasonable size print of a properly exposed photograph that could hold its detail, i am not a high iso shooter, i like light, so noise wouldn't really be a problem

[BernardLanguillier]

what would be a max  reasonable size print of a properly exposed photograph that could hold its detail, i am not a high iso shooter, i like light, so noise wouldn't really be a problem

Very hard to give a generic answer. Depends on subject, processing skills, type of paper used,...

I guess that for your typical landscape shot, most people would find an A3+ print from a well captured RX100 raw file to be excellent, while A2/A2+ might be pushing it a bit for some?

Note that I tend to be on the demanding side. 

Cheers,
Bernard

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I had mine for just five days and only can tell about JPEGs as LR doesn't support RX100 raw yet. I'm quite impressed with JPEG image quality, but I presume that it may be some in camera processing involved. Let's put it this way the JPEGs are sharp. I presume that there is some hefty noise reduction going on.

I'll post some comparisons once I have any.

Here is a JPEG image (in camera processing): http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/images/samples/20120820-_DSC0153.jpg

Best regards
Erik

[stever]

before ordering mine, i read Michael's and a few other reviews.  at least one other review was quite positive that 13x19 is practical at lower ISO's.  of the reviewers, only Michael had a beta RAW converter - i think all of the other reviewers were unwilling to invest time in the Sony converter

my expectation is that 13x19 will be reasonable for most subjects with Adobe RAW