The End of the Sony RX100 

How many photo comparisons did you get right??

awesome video! i think the RX100 easily outperforms the iphone though. the zoom range was left out of the test, which is one of the RX100's biggest features. having a 24-200 lens in a body that size is insane and it EASILY beats the iphone in telephoto mode. this completely changes what youre able to shoot. and i know it wasnt about pixel peeping/zooming in, but if you did, youd notice more how good the RX100 really is. especially at the long end of the zoom compared to the iphone. also being able to have full manual control without additional apps and stuff is very nice. i do think the iphone wins for video though.

It was very easy to tell the difference between the two if you ask me. The natural bokeh of the RX100 gave it away almost every single shot, and if that wasn't the case, it was easy to tell the iPhone pictures were oversharpened. At 2:00 as you say you can't give either one a victory, you clearly show two pictures with one being far superior to the other.. the sony.

Interesting test but : 1) You only compare the iPhone and the RX100 based on what you can already do with an iPhone. No telephoto, no HDR or low light test. 2) Shooting such a small product (the watch) in good lights can be done with any phone camera. Portrait might look better on the RX because of natural bokeh and longer focal. 3) For video, the iPhone might have an edge. The image pops more and video is stabilised out of camera. 4) For artistic purposes, the iPhone lacks manual controls. It becomes accessible only with a third party app. Whereas you can control almost every settings on a P&S camera. 5) You might need to change phone after 2 years. But you could buy an RX100 from 5 years ago and still be happy with it. For everyday use and for the average guy, iPhone is definetely the way to go. But for any hobbyist, the RX100 still has a lot of value. Also, it's not forbidden to work with both together !

This just proves the idea of enjoying the process. So often it’s easy to get stuck on the spec sheet comparison but if you have a camera that you enjoy using and makes you creative then that is the winner. Regardless if that’s your phone because you know you will have it or an older point and shoot. If I’m taking a picture with my phone it’s just to capture it quickly and I don’t have a camera but having a dedicated camera lets me enter the mindset and not get a text message or Instagram notification that distracts me like on a phone. Modern cameras are amazing there’s no doubt that cameras are very impressive and you can have some amazing quality pictures with most models. Sometimes it’s not about the quality it’s about the creativity.

Great video! The funny thing is, two years ago I wouldn't have said it would. Although now with the recent Gen z craze of using 'retro' point and shoot cameras. It's clear that people don't want over processed and 'clinical' imagery. It takes the fun out of the moment and the memory. Plus it makes everyone's images look the same with no uniqueness.

One big advantage to the point and shoot is the ability to get longer telephoto zoom. I also do love the ccd point and shoots

I bought the iPhone specifically for airdrop. I don’t have any of those problems airdropping to my Mac, the DNG raw files go straight to my downloads folder as plain files, no folders. But also, when I finish editing photos on my Mac from my Sony, I airdrop it to the iPhone to post to IG. I love the system, no cables or card reading dongles, it’s so easy.

Personally I prefer the ergonomics of a dedicated camera and it makes me shoot more / better when I have I dedicated camera in my hands. Also... I think the key difference with an Iphone and RX100 is the focal range and the AF speed / accuracy. I love having something that goes to 200mm effective, and I find that it can capture fast moving action at those longer focal lengths. I also know that in lower light the RX100 cameras create usable shots whereas phone cameras don't. I took one to my friends wedding and they chose a bunch of my shots over the professional photographer's - even when it was lower light. I do think that most people can get by with just a phone, and they did kill most point and shoot cameras... but... I still think there are still scenarios where they make sense... and I think thats partially why Sony changed from 24-70mm to 24-200mm effective...

I may be old fashioned. I have 32,000 photos on my iPhone, but I’ve never used that device to “make” a photograph, and it has never occurred to me to think of the files as photographs. The RX100m7 is a tool that activates an entirely different head space.

If you’re showing them to a photographer, they’ll probably tell the difference; if showing it to a client/social media it’s negligible and most won’t know unless you mention it

I get your point, but as a photographer you need to compare "cameras" as they are, the Rx100 has a view finder, flexibility with apperture, shutter speed, iso, a viewfinder, manual focus.... just for mention some, all these are important for creativity, if you only want to take snapshots of your watch its ok, you can use whatever, if you want to have real creative control then use the rx100.... also lets mention the lens, the zoom is superior in everyway and yes the difference between the images you took are very obvious, if you preffer the ones of the iphone thats ok, we dont judge you.

Good choice for only testing the wide lens on the iphone. I’ve noticed that when i used the 3x camera, most of the time it will look more like digital that’s because it was digitally zoomed. Iphone is using the wide camera instead of the telephoto camera when zoomed in. You can see it on the exif data. Hope apple can fix this and give us an option to override just like on the macro control.

There are other point and shoot cameras out there! Highly recommend checking out the Ricoh GRIII and GRIIIX. They are APSC sensor point and shoot cameras and the lenses are SHARP. They lack in video capabilities but I am a street photographer in NYC and the Ricoh GR is my favorite camera to use because of its convenience and image quality vs my iPhone 14 pro. I definitely need to make a comparison video like this one with it lol

Most people probably can't tell the difference. However, there's some areas where my iPhone 14 Pro really let's me down and it's usually when the lighting conditions are not ideal. For instance, when the lighting isn't that great, my iPhone can't get a sharp photo of my two year old. I find the iPhone really struggles with motion and also fine details when there's poor lighting. Even a decade old Micro 4/3 camera seems to do better in these tough scenarios. One area where the iPhone does destroy most cameras though, is home videos. It seems to nail videos every time and the quality is really good. I actually find myself preferring the iPhone for video even over my dedicated mirrorless cameras.

What? Am I too used to the quality of a dedicated Camera? I don't feel I have the best eye for it but, it was very clear all the sony photos where better in all aspects, and as far as the video goes, wider doesn't make it better in quality 🤔 kind of biased this comparison

I think it comes down to if you want the zoom, you want full manual control, and/or you like to process your own raw files.

Just bought a Sony RX100M7. A little learning curve and it can do almost all a pro camera can. Nice vid!

I’m a street photographer that shoots in NYC. I use a Ricoh GR iii as well as an I-Phone 14 Pro Max. Both cameras work extremely well in different situations on the street. Both combined are a great combination for what I do.👍

You have valid points unless you want to go down the vintage P&S realm. I have three vintage P&S cameras -- 2003 Kodak CX6330 (3MP), 2008 Nikon L18 (8MP), and 2012 Panasonic DMC-ZS20 (14MP). I especially love shooting them in B&W mode as they really give a level of film graininess. But to your point, if you are looking to use them in a more modern situation, I agree the iPhone (or Android) wins out the battle. Great video!

I like the extra features on P&S cameras. My G7XII has built in ND, 24-105 optical zoom, you can upload custom LUTs to the camera that you design on your computer with the Camera Window software from Canon. The flip up screen lets you see yourself when shooting with the primary lens. Plus, you get all the specific camera operation ergonomics with a camera, which let's you operate it faster and more precisely. Phones aren't really built for that purpose. In terms of image quality and dynamic range, I think phones can use their algorithms to keep up with the old 1" sensors, but as soon as you try to compare it to an aps-c pocket camera like the Ricoh GRIII, it's no contest at all.

While I think for most phones have replaced basic point and shoots. The point and shoot market should move to more niche p&s cameras like the x100 or gr series.

Maybe you could make a video discussing the enjoyment of process of shooting with a dedicated camera vs smartphone? One of the reasons that 2000’s digicams are having a resurgence (and film too).

Spoiler alert: no, it did not. Use the specific camera a specific project needs. Great vid, Evan.

iphone is without a doubt win,in terms of IQ,Computing,speed,stabilization etc..especially when compare to old PNS camera,but nothing beats ergonomics of handling a dedicated camera that want you to shoot more.

*Ricoh GRiii enters the chat* Excellent comparison Evan! You're correct in saying most consumers will benefit from the convenience of the phone, but us 10% still don't want it😂 Much love from East Tennessee!🙏🏼

My question is how was the zoom capability comparison? I find the iPhone doesn't give me the reach I want for long-range photos. Did you compare those?

I own the Sony rx100iv and I still use it for everyday memories. My best use case was at a party with friends and one had one of those poloraid cameras that prints photos and everyone had fun taking shots. It ended up malfunctioning and so I pulled out my rx and the joy came back everyone passed it around using the articulating screen for selfies, the flash when needed, and having a great time. This experience would not have been replicated on our cell phones because the novelty is not there. The Sony rx will still carry that value long after it’s image quality is no longer top notch and we will continue to look for that dated image like we do with older digital camcorders and such for the nostalgia.

How do they both cope with difficult light? EG Low light / night, or the sun in an awkward place for the shot you want?

Smartphones are more convenient, faster, easier to use, give you as much detail as a dedicated P&S camera but they cannot give you that natural 3D camera look with the pleasant blurring before and after the subject. And that makes a world of difference. They also have aggressive HDR that bleaches photos and that digital looking highlight fall off mentioned at 1:50 is a real problem. That's because smartphones take multiple shots with fast shutter speed and then stack them so the light does not spread smoothly and evenly like when taking a single shot with a slower shutter speed. Combine everything I've mentioned and in actual practice dedicated cameras leave smartphones behind

there's no comparison ..they are 2 distinctly different photo/video devices

The RX 100 VII optical zoom factor leaves mobile phones behind in photography.

Great video mate. I got rid of my x100v when the 14 pro came out. Just never used it. Have a couple of proper cameras for intentional shoots, but for everything else, I find (just me) that the iPhone killed the x100v in almost every category of my use.

Came here while researching to buy the rx100m5a, sticking to the decision

Nothing beats the experience of handling a dedicated point and shoot camera. I have the iPhone 13 Pro Max and the Olympus TG-6. I find myself using the Olympus TG-6. It’s just more enjoyable. I’m currently eying the Lumix LX10 and the ZS200 to add to my photography gear.

My thoughts on this sort of comparison.. For the RX100 - dedicated physical hands on controls for a lot of functions.. zoom lever, focus ring, settings.. easy replaceable / swappable storage medium - SD cards, easy swappable batteries for long photo walks etc.. usage won't use up your mobile phone's battery, robust construction, (on later RX100 versions.. the flip out screen and view finder), more powerful and movable flash unit, tripod mount screw built in. For the iPhone / other good mobile cameras.. You have them with you most of the time, quick sharing of images if you're web connected, possible functionality updates and built in editing functions from third party software.

What about printing the photos? I guess the quality will be different right?

The iPhone 14 is great with its 48mp camera. But thats only at 24mm. As soon as you go to the zoom camera its back down to 12mp. This is where they dont compete. The rx100 being able to do 24-200mm at 20mp is amazing. for 99% of the people that just take photos to post on social then the iphone is perfect. But for say, travel photography where you want to print your photos its a clear win for the sony.

I've been in situations where the P&S camera was not allowed, but they allowed the phones and it's camera. ETA: the RX100-7 really shines in low light, pun intended.

What defines which camera is better? Ultimately the "result" you are looking for. That depends on the lighting conditions, the object itself - and above all - the quality of the final picture the viewer is looking at. Therefore - there is and will never be a "best of all". If you really want to know whether a camera is good for you - there is no way around testing "the ergonomics" - how it fits into your hands, does it feels compatible with the way you handle a camera, and whether the viewfinder or screens feel comfortable to work with. And finally - what do you use the photos for? Posting online in Social Media or publishing for big size posters - that's where the ultimate decision will be made.

Point and shoot cameras especially the early ones with CCD sensors are making a comeback. Due to rising costs of film and they give that analog feel to images.

When the sales for point and shoot cameras are down 98% from 110 million in 2008 to about two million for the last two years, it's clear that for the people not in the two percent group, mobile phones have replaced the point and shoot cameras. And it's great, it means that most people have found more suitable tools for photographing they rather use. And the ones who prefer separate camera, have still some models to buy, and used cameras can be have dirt cheap for those who prefer them. Advanced stacking raw files like Expert RAW from Samsung add incredible details, dynamic range and low light capability for mobile images for those situations where it is suitable, i.e. the subject is not moving too fast.

Do the same test with your Leica. I guess you’ll have to sell it, cause the results will be very similar.

Everyone is wrong and him about rx100. iPhone is a great telephone and RX100 is a dedicated camera.

but what about with zoom? i imagine that the Sony would far outperform the iPhone at longer focal ranges, yeah?

I sometimes still use my old point & shoot Nikon to just hold it over my head and walk around shooting without ever looking at what I am getting in frame. It is awkward in hand to do that with a phone. One of those from Canada is one of the last pics left on my Twitter account.

I have a really good Sony phone camera but the fun definitely goes out of photos when you use your phone all the time. I am looking at point and shoot again and even some of the early models like the 1st gen RX100.

I feel that the RX has a more natural look to it, like playing vinyl vs a cd with a laptop while the RX is as sharp looking. I bet that in 2 years we will have phones that will at least be on par with the cameras quality in all scenarios, but then you still dont have an optical zoom lens that goes that far and really good stabilisation combined with it plus all of the features that the RX brings to the table you wont find in the normal camera app. Also I use the ring on the lens to shoot video and change focal length by hand while zooming to create cinematic shots. That is also not easy on a phone, and filmic just sucks since its subscription model if tou would for example want to do those two actions with a phone.

I bought a normal iPhone 15 in September and that thing is by far not even close to the RX100VII. It is conviniend, but the pictures are worthless to me. The funny thing is, I had a tourism video project in the summer and the agency I worked for, send me their editor over, to help me out. Super nice guy, 21years old and he got in contact with my little b-cam the RX100VII. I was talking to him some days ago and he told me, that he bought this thing, too. And there is the point, this thing is a real tool. It feels like a tool, it is operating like a tool and the output is absolutely consistent. This is something you can't say for an iPhone. Every Camera is doing it's thing and the quality of the files doesn't look natural. Yes this thing is not a super gimbal like video cam - but it never was. But what this thing does is, you can put it on a tripod and use it as 2nd camera for interviews, or as cam to capture concerts and all this stuff. 99,9% of the people out there are no photographers, so yes, at least 95% will not need such a cam. But surprisingly enough, there is a trend back to these cameras. And it's not about the old guys it is Gen-Z.

Test number 1 you can TOTALLY see the depth of field difference from that 1 inch sensor. Both shots look great but real subject separation, not artificial, is hard to beat. Plus, if you want a real camera experience, than go for a sony. I got a super old mk2 for just a couple hundred bucks. Don’t need to get the VII and spend a G.

specifically iphone? other brands which also develops new tech have nothing to do with it, all iphone?

This comparison may seem to have a little bias in favor of the Sony and against the iPhone. At 2:35 far exemple, with the iPhone, we can see the tall building on the left with all its details and great colors. The Sony picture looks unclean / compressed. How can this be called a tie? Several of the criticism against the iPhone is inaccurate and even misleading. For exemple, from 6:05, it is stated that transferring files to a mac is a hassle (AirDrop takes too much time). AirDrop is not at all necessary. The iPhone can just be connected to a Mac using a cable then all the files can be easily selected in an app, copied quickly to the computer, then deleted from the iPhone (I do that all the time). This also lets the iPhone recharges, as an extra bonus. This is way faster and easier than using AirDrop, or even the process described for the Sony device. Also, the critical area, and possibly the only one, which could warrant having the Sony is the zoom, as it has a powerful variable optical zoom, while the iPhone is much more limited. Using the zoom to take pictures of far away and tall buildings is a perfect use case of the Sony. Why have not this been tested?

I just bought the Sony ZV-1. In India, costs less than 500 USD sometimes on Amazon--terrific VFM!

I respect what you said and found out, but disagree on that the RX is only a point and shoot or that you can't use the cell for landscapes. Also I use to remove the SD card but found it easier just to plug in a cable from my computer (Microsoft) computer. The same for my Samsung S10. I can even get them to download automatically. I'll bet I cold print up an 18X24 scenic shot from my RX, Cell or Aps-c cameras and doubt most people could tell the difference. Very good conclusion. The RX has more control (and my apsc is even easier if doing intensive photo shoots).

In 2024, it’s still a relevant topic. As a dad who makes it a mission to document my kid through the years, the Iphone has just burned me too much with blurry photos and weak flashes. The premium point and shoots have a clear advantage with capturing fast moving subjects like kids. And yes, kids are fast moving subjects, much like shooting sports or cars

for me personally i prefer to take photos on an actual camera, so id want the pocket camera rather than my phone for daily photos. just havent got one yet as i dont often find the need for one often enough.

it's not about image quality itself, it's about zoom angle 50mm with no any kind of problems on sony is much more portrait friendly

What about ergonomics?

I liked Sony's wide angle more. Would love to see more tests with some settings adjusted with Sony, especially taking advantage of the lens size capabilities. If it's possible)

I think The single most important feature of the RX100/7 is the 200mm (eqv.) zoom lens. That optical zoom range is not available on any iPhone and is the single most important reason to use this Sony camera, especially in landscape , wildlife and travel photography. If you compare this camera with a Samsung 23 , maybe the advantage will not be as obvious. If you do not need the 10x telephoto capability, there is no reason to buy the expensive RX100/7. BTW, Images from the iPhone can be downloaded to any MAC or PC computer for image processing using a lighting to usb cable, just as easily as reading from an SD card.

I will be getting a Rx100iv tomorrow for 200€ used. I dont think thats possible with an Iphone, so the Iohone is way more expesnive. In the right hands, especially in Video you will defintly see a difference between a 4k video from a ohine and 4k video from a camera. Furthermore the Rx100 has features, which people who take ohotography seriously and dont just want to snap and be done with the picture: For example the view finder and most importantly the complete manual controls - oh and the older rx100 (iii, iv, v, va) also have a very handy nd filter. I think phones in general are getting pretty close to cameras, but I wouldnt consider an Iphone a camera replacement just because of the lack of manual controls. And I seriously dont get why apple isnt offering full manual controls... Even my Huawei P30 from 4 years ago has complete manual controls...

Hi Evan, timing of this video can’t be better! I was on the fence of having a small compact camera that can do both photo & video and use it for on the go stuff. It came down to either the RX100vii and the ZV-1, with in the end leaning more towards zv-1 (same processor, sensor, has ND filter, faster lens, etc etc). Thus I’m clear between the two what my choices will be. But then again I asked myself, what will I do with this camera since I already have an x100v for my photo stuff, and it is more practical (at least for me) to use an iphone, and that’s where I am right now in the end.

But why the iPhone? Shouldn't the Xperia Pro-I or the 1V be on the higher level in terms of image quality?

I need a camera that can take the picture within a couple of 1/100 of a second when pressing the shutter. No one talks about that, for my phone it's more like seconds.

do a strobe photography and see how far the iPhone were left behind cameras are still a specialist tool, no need to buy expensive camera if you don't use the specific features it has

I bought an RX100 and an iPhone 6 the same year. Both were $1000 at the time. My RX100 cost me $600 in repairs the first year. It's still broken and tucked away in a bin somewhere. My iPhone 6 is my current camera and phone. Never a problem.

iPhone 12 Pro or 13 Pro is or enouth for start photography ? Thanks for all 🔥

Seriously I could tell which is which, watched until 3:10. Especially the indoor shots. The depth of field. Always the difference.

Zoom, zoom, and zoom. Need I say more? The zoom is far better than any iPhone out right now. And some of us do not like Apple's over sharpening at all. Even their raw files are about 40-50 over sharpened. The one thing for me that Apple or any other smartphone has over a camera is convenience. It's much quicker to pull out a phone and take a shot than to wait for the zoom lens to open up. Im not a vlogger, nor do I shoot video on a point and shoot, so for my use, stills, the RX100 VII is best. I own the 15 Pro Max, RX100 VII, and the S24 Ultra, and I really love the Sony.

Wow...I just rented the RX100 vii. I have never been more dissapointed in a camera. The distortion issues, bulging fish eye look, and seeing the lens tube in zoomed images is absurd. The eye focus everyone talks about dose not even come close and It sucks in low light.

The iPhone just looks like it has no dynamic range (software not being able to overcome the difference in sensor size I'm guessing), colours look flat (although that could be offset obviously), it's oversharpening everything and depth of field is way deeper

Not sure where you pulled the 90% figure from, but I’m guessing it’s based on no evidence. All of these tests play to the strengths of the iPhone. You could just as easily run a different set of tests which play to the strengths of the Sony. - Do low light test for videos and photos. - See how long the iPhone battery lasts when you’re shooting 4K. The Sony’s battery can be replaced. - Do the same test for storage. How long before the iPhone’s storage is exhausted? Sony… pop in another SD card. - Shoot a picture at more than 77mm zoom (35mm equivalent.) - Try taking photos with gloves or wet hands. - Shoot a low or high angled shot while looking at the screen. I could go on… And I believe that those of us who are really interested in photography should do our part to educate others as to the shortcomings of using their phone as their sole camera. There are still many advantages to using a compact camera over a Smartphone and anybody willing to spend more than $1000 on a camera is probably ready and able to use those advantages. The RX100 is not the camera that mom and pop buy to use on vacation. I am an iPhone user myself. I use the camera all the time. It’s great when it’s being used for the things it’s designed for. But any time I’ve know I’m going to be taking a lot of pictures or videos, such as weddings, baptisms, vacations, day trips and birthday parties… I’m taking a camera, every time. I thank you for the video and I appreciate your comments at the very end. There is no doubt that Smartphones are killing off the low-end point and shoot market but I think your conclusions in regards to the prosumer compact camera market are deeply wrong. There is still very much a place for the RX series, the Canon G series, the Panasonic LX series and others.

I love using my iPhone.. the best way to transfer files faster I’ve found is plug it into your mac and use “image capture” that is built into mac computers and u can select the files u want and import them quicker to a file u create.. stop using airdrop when u have a lot of files to import!

idk, sony's dynamic range is better and iphone can't do this bokeh. and if we don't want to practice pixel peeping - well most people won't see a difference between iphone and hasselblad photos is some conditions.

idk man.. using iphone 15 pro here and I have rx100 iv. All of the photos I take on iPhone look really pixellated and noisy when you do some of the basic edits such as photo optimiser / frame adjustment etc. Do i have to shoot everything in raw and manually do something for it be worthwhile?

Point and shoot it could be head to head but what about zooming abilities?

Come on, show us the telephoto and low light comparisons

You need print the photos and You can see the diference

No way the rx100 is way better than the iPhone.

camera manufacturers were already stop producing consumer grade P&S camera as phone camera is getting better every year. Now, P&S camera is marketed towards serious amateurs, photography hobbyists, etc. who appreciate lens performance, controls, and ergonomics of a dedicated camera.

I'm planning to get the RX100 MK1 since in my place (Ph) it sells for a cheap price. Would it be a great buy?

If someone is looking for something to use for the fun of photography I think the camera would win, it’s just different using a real dedicated camera. If someone if trying to be efficient and get a job done easier, there isn’t really enough upside of the point and shoot to justify it🤷🏽‍♂️

Nice comparison video! Great content!

The iphone or really any phone released in the last 5 years is a formidable opponent to most consumer cameras, especially now that they have caught up in the megapixel department. In fact many if not most casual users might actually prefer the shots that come out of these phones because of how they use HDR and handle exposure- bright, contrasty photos. The reality is that anybody CAN get good shots from a phone- but 90% of the population won't, because the entire process doesn't exactly encourage creativity. Messing with exposure and white balance and shutter speed are all important (not necessary, but important) parts of learning how photography works and what to look for. I don't say this in a gatekeepy way, but rather to point out that photographers will almost always still buy dedicated cameras because they are drawn to the creative process that it encourages. I CAN create an entire album of guitars, piano, and drums by simply playing using my ipad's screen and a midi controller. But the fact that this is becoming perpetually easier will never have enough significance to render physical instruments obsolete. Those will always have their place as the primary tools to serve the creative process.

As a parent of 2, who already owns an iphone13 with the watch, camera for me instead of upgrading the phone. Fast autofocus on messy kids is godsend.

evan - check out the ricoh GR III or IIIx ;o)

There's something unnatural looking about phone photos, it's like it's lacking depth. I mostly use the Ricoh GRiii, but if I can't find it tomorrow, I would rather grab my old ass RX100m2 than take a picture with my phone for other than note and messaging purposes.

I can see the perspective and this more or less is true IF using out of camera/phone results. For a photographer, nyet. The power of the camera RAW simply allows for better latitude of creativity with Lightroom (or such). Add in Topaz tools and the creative opportunities are endless. The question for users are: do I want to pre-processed images and do I have a flagship (or close) model. Yes? Phone is likely a better bet. Otherwise, compacts still have a place. Now give us the RX 100 V8

For video, the iPhone has a much better stabilization. I need a vlogging point and shoot camera with stellar stabilization like the iPhone.

Tru but up to day my Everyday camera is a canon s90..cuz I tend to do more photos and also street photography is my hobby...

Sony says the RX100 and ZV1 are for vlogging. I don't vlog. I take pictures and video as paid staff for a non-profit. My use case is a more traditional photography and video of others. I'm behind the lens. The higher end point and shoot cameras are good cameras for this work. I also shoot iPhone 13 Mini with Sandmarc add-on lenses. I like the Sony RX100 VII (good at both photo and video) and the Sony ZV1 (good for video; not as much fun for stills) better than the phone when I'm adding on external mics (either via a recorder or mixer or shoe), lights, and other rigged out items. On the odd occasion that I break out my Crane M3 gimbal, the phone is a royal counterweight nuisance to deal with if I add a lens and a filter and a decent holder. The cameras were meant for this. So, to each their own - use what works for you. In my case, the RX100 VII and ZV1 were worth the cost and get things done for which I get paid.

iPhones always got best video quality but NEVER best photo quality, should be camera vs. pixel or something.

You forgot the most interesting difference: iPhone night mode vs digital camera night photography. That iPhone fotos at daytime are great nowadays is common knowledge, but you can't capture that much light in a tiny lens, so they have to have really good computing to make up for that...

Good luck doing portraits with an iPhone like with cameras such as R100, Canon G5X, G7X... So no it's not the end of these small compact cameras because if you want to do beautiful portraits of your kids, family or animals phones are simply no match for these cameras. Phones are good for landscape or night shots because of strong processors that they have inside so you can achieve good dynamic range and great night photos already out of the box. With camers you will have to do post processing but you can still achieve better results with post processing. Anyway compact cameras are not dead at all, they still have their place.

Sure, if you do not test for the strong points of the RX100 (bokeh, zoom, landscape (resolution!)), the iPhone stands a chance.

For me personally i like te have a camera with me and not using my iPhone for pictures.. as it is a pain in the … to het them from the iphone to pc… therefore there are better smartphones to doing so… also im more into photography… also the zoom range for phones are so so… is almost all digital.. also these prices today for a iPhone flagship are insane… and I don’t think that people just buy a iPhone to take pics of vids.. for that money u get a better dslr or compact camera or system cam …

Are they necessary...not anymore...but they are fun and involves the user more.

The iPhone has great image quality which pushed away many people from buying point and shoots. However, there are many real photographers who still buy and use point and shoots because of the experience and flexibility. That’s what makes it different. Yes, that’s bad for the camera industry but it definitely makes professional photographers stand out a bit more. I love my RX100V and if I ever wanna replace it, it’ll be with a Fuji X100V. It offers a great and unique shooting experience.

But they are cameras that you can do "something crazy with" - they are essentially a medium zoom bridge camera stuffed into a compact camera body. If all you are doing is "point and shoot" then you are missing the point. The point is that you have pretty much all of the granular controls you would get with a DSLR/mirrorless or a bridge camera. Yet people will keep making these "point and shoot camera" comparisons...

Ayooo the Mayer watch is beautiful!! Great videooo