I am a hack photographer with just barely more sense and dated skills than the average point-and-shoot person. I don't like the camera to do everything for me. There are situations when I like to select aperture and shutter speed. As I moved away from film I bought what was then classified as a "pro-sumer" Canon G11. It is very old now and a little bigger than I want in a new camera. I am sick of my iPotato.

Please recommend a pocket size camera that still gives me some control over my exposures. And I would really love something with an exceptional night mode. Thanks.

Leica

Versatile, compact, a low light feature, and with good glass.

Fuji

Another contender, albeit a bit larger, however having interchangeable lens of very good quality.

The Sony RX100 VII is a monster in the pocket camera range, but you're well into mirrorless/dslr price range at $1200.  As a whole, the RX series is pretty solid across the board though.

How big are your pockets?

My old t5i with the Canon 24mm f/2.8 will fit in generous pockets.  The new, mirrorless cameras are probably even smaller, and the lenses (presumably) a bit shorter.  I just looked, the EF-M is at least a full inch smaller in every dimension than the T5i.  Throw the EF-M 22mm f/2 on it, it should fit in a pocket, and give you full control.  Now, IDK if the M format has long legs, or if that fits what you're looking for, just offering it up as an option.

+1

Versatile camera with good "mid-range" image quality and raw files, to boot.

Cameras on phones are surprisingly good nowadays depending on what your subject is,  they're fine for 95% of stuff.   If you have a newer phone I would look into a photo that enables manual controls for photos.

Thank you al for the input. Leica, Sony, and Fuji all look interesting. I am going to look at Canon too. All without interchangeable lenses.

Another vote for RX100, i have the -7, but Sony makes less expensive cameras in this line. The RX100-7 is super reliable and has never let me down if I do my part.

I have owned a Canon S100 and a Panasonic ZS50, both of which don't recommend, they have all broken down, and it costs half to 2/3ds the cost of a new camera to repair. The Canon S100 broke down with 3 months left on the warrant and Canon fixed after I told them that I need it for band camp that my son was going to attend. The S100 broke again, 1 month after the warranty expired and Canon refused to repair and quoted me half the price of a new camera to repair. The problem was the lens extension mechanism.

The Panasonic ZS50 was really bad. Panasonic doesn't have factory repair facilities in the US, but a contract company; they refused to repair my ZS50 even though I had 3 months left on the "free" extended warranty, claiming that I abused the camera. I didn't abuse the thing, but I used it a LOT. I will never fall for that line again, wasted $700. The problem was the lens extension mechanism.

And my Sony RX100, rock solid, had  since 2016, and used it similar circumstances to the above cameras and still going strong, with zero complaints.

BTW I also owned the Sony RX10-3, the mother board died and they wanted $500 to fix. I got the RX10-4 which is super reliable and way better than the -3 version, stay away from the -3. I got the -3 for a close out price, but it wasn't worth it, spend the bucks and get the -4 version.

I have been through many cameras in my life 4x5's, 2 1/4 Hasselblad, Nikons, Cannons, Olympus all very, very good. presently I use my phone I Phone 10 (maybe) and the Snapseed app. I find that remembering to always zoom in and back up to create the effect of a telephoto lens and just stay where you are for wide angle stuff. One of my phone pictures are shown the Porsche is printed out to 16x20ish. I find the phone very effective and easy to carry.

I am specifically trying to get away from my iPhone. The size is certainly convenient but I can't set controls as easily as I can on a dedicated camera, and the sensor size of the phone is small. I want to replace the old Canon G11 I have been using for about a decade, which I abandoned when phone cameras became good enough.

The Sony recommendations are good but maybe a tad expensive. I have been looking at the Canon G7 Mark 2 because as much as I want a good camera, my knowledge of photography is dated and I don't think I will take advantage of the more nuanced functions of a more expensive camera. I would be thrilled with high resolution and good low light capability for dusk and minimally lit scenes.

seabyrd6: The iPhones and the top-of-the-line phone cams are great if you don't need the such features long telephone or wide-wide angle,  nor  low light capabilities.

The phone cams use software to overcome some of the limitations of the tiny sensor. It takes multiple photos and process it with software, and puts all of the photos together in a blink of an eye. Many phone cam photos taken in adequate light is every bit as good as the photos from a DSLR or mirrorless cameras. And of course best of all, you don't have to lug around 10-20lbs of equipment. But personally for me, I find taking multiple simultaneous photos on a phone cam awkward. So I still have my trusty DSLRs and mirrorless cameras.

Lexington: i hear you the price of the Sonys, they are spendy, but they do the job. I would probably recommend a lower- to mid- range Canon or Nikon(I recommend these because I am familiar with them) DSLR or mirrorless interchangeable camera. If money is consideration(you should try stay within your budget), I think there are fixed lensed cameras that is quite capable and low cost.

Another vote for the RX100.  I have the Mk IV.  I would at least try for the Mk V, it does away with the Play Memories app control, which I think is actually better.  It's not a great low light camera, but it can take some great photos.  

I also have a Sony phone, which also has a great camera system too.  

My sister in law has a Canon G7 mk2 and she really likes it.  I had a really old Canon G7 (the original from 15 years ago) and I like the form factor.

This Sony phone has a real optical zoom lens system?

Yes, the RX 100 has an optical zoom (24-200) along with a digital zoom. As one would expect, the digital zoom quickly loses quality.

I have a Sony RX100-7 that I highly recommend to anyone who wants a pocket portable camera. Spend the bucks you only live once.

I also want to remind everyone who is considering buying a Sony RX100, but not the -7; while researching the -7, I came across some reviews where people have encountered sensor overheating during videoing. I use my -7 mostly as photo camera, with a few videos, but I have never experienced overheating of the sensor, where the camera actually turns itself off, and you are unable to turn it on again for like an hour or so.

Thanks to all who responded. I just bought a Sony RX-100 VII.

It was an open-box special (the display camera) at Best Buy for $779. No box, no nothin'. Full warranty. I got them to comp me a new NP-BX1 battery to go with it.

I would not have bought it at full price ($1299 @ B&H), but for $779 and a free battery, I stole it!

Yeah you got a good deal on that. I bought my RX100-7 NIB, but I paid full list, it was worth every penny. BTW you should get the optional Sony rubber grip

Nevermind.  I see the OP bought something.

Sorry, I didn't notice that you asked me a question.  Short answer is no, but it does have 3 cameras that allow you to select the optical zoom.  It has 3 12 megapixel cameras, 16mm, 24mm and 70mm (which can optically change to a 105mm.  The f-stops are all better than f-2.8.  is it better than my rx100? No, but I will say the video seems pretty good and it's optically stabilized.

The Fuji a few posts above it one of the more capable smaller cameras with interchangeable lenses.  I don't know of any that are really "pocket" other than the Sony above, but it still leaves a lot to be desired IMHO (I tried it and hated it).  The Leicas are epic (I have now shot the $$$ with the 35mm lens and it feels awesome but I shoot a lot of sports so useless for most of my stuff) but still not "pocket" sized.

For "pocket" cameras, the camera in your phone is the best in my opinion.  If you have a newer iPhone Pro or Android (Galaxy or Pixel), learn the more "manual" functions and shoot in RAW.  There is a lot of functionality/capability built in that most people never use.

Samsung is reportedly putting an internal variable zoom lens in their next gen Galaxy and iPhone is looking at it too, and that will the last nail in the pocket camera market coffin.

When I do snapshots, I use my phone.  When I want to take pictures, I have my good cameras and lenses, but they are backpack camera bag sized between them and the lenses.

I think in outdoors daylight, the phone cams are more than adequate. The problem is low-light and telephoto.

BTW I know that Apple makes use of AI to overcome limitations of smallish sensors. From my understanding, Iphones take multiple photos, us AI to fix the image, and put all of the images back together for the finished photo.