Benefits:
- The camera produces RAW files (like the NEX).
- These RAW files are also generated when the NEX does not do this (for example automatic mode, remote control).
- For me much is usual in terms of features and menus, because I'm a Sony users. Even the RAW format.
- Remote control via mobile phone works quite well (as with the NEX).
- Very good quality in low light. The pictures are much better lit and less noise than the NEX, for example compared with ISO 3200. This can be seen both in JPG and in the Raw. When NEX I always try to avoid ISO3200. Is not necessary with this camera.
- The camera has an additional programs when shooting at night (Night Scene, Hand held Twilight), to make the quality in low light even better (the NEX as well, but the recordings remain noisy)
- As with the NEX camera can be charged via microUSB. This is a huge advantage for me, because I always external USB batteries and chargers here and most of my devices support this. I will sorely miss if I were to buy a Canon S120. I really can not be bothered to lug around, their own chargers for each device with me.
- The contrast can be set for JPGs (see also downside below).
- The screen resolution is very good.
- The water level is good (as with the NEX).
- After Lightroom and Photoshop editing the images often look just like the NEX.
- Thanks to the high-aperture objective, the camera in low light shorter and / or with lower sensitivity illuminate (with Wide, Zoom: see cons below).
Disadvantages:
- I can think of at wide angle to clear chromatic aberrations, eg leaves of a tree with backlight. While this can be corrected with Lightroom, annoying anyway.
- Apps can not be installed as the NEX, for example, Time Lapse, ISO series, etc. (is not bad, no point loss)
- Thick disadvantage: the focal length begins at 28mm (equivalent to KB). Thus, the camera is only suitable as a complement to other cameras / lenses, but not as the only camera for me. I'm not sure whether a point deduction is justified for it because I knew that yes before buying.
- The images are often too light (either in whole or in bright areas in an otherwise dark images). With Lightroom I can indeed correct, but I have to continue to do so every time. This makes the NEX significantly better.
- The contrast must be set (once at the beginning). The default like it (like the NEX) not good - too dark and bright areas. After adjustment, that's better, but not as good as that of the NEX.
- What's funny: Even at maximum zoom level the lens brighter (F4.9) than the kit lens of NEX (F5.6). Both cameras will illuminate with ISO3200 (underground). But the NEX exposed shorter (1/30 sec). The RX-100M2 longer (1/6 sec or so). This leads to blurry hand-held shooting. The image of the NEX is then even not really useful, but in any case not blurred). This seems to be only in P mode. Changing the contrast seems to have no influence.
- The foldability of the display brings only slightly when the camera is held over the head (such as NEX-6). With the NEX-5R this is better solved: The display can be folded up completely, so that it is visible in self shots.
- I do not get NFC in conjunction with the Galaxy Note 2. The manual is not really helpful here.
The camera has a clear Bokeh (as the NEX course). Although I recognize that this is an advantage for many users, but for me that's nice gimmick which sometimes even looks good. With me will always be sharp as possible all areas of the image. But I got used to it and look at the neutral.
Conclusion: The camera gets me 3-4 star and probably goes back. Too bad, because she is good and has real potential.
The key disadvantages are that I have to edit the images and most of the poor wide-angle.
