RX1 vs. Canon 5D iii

Started Jun 13, 2013 | Discussions thread
Toccata47
Senior MemberPosts: 2,189
Like?
Re: RX1 vs. Canon 5D iii
In reply to halfmonkey, Jun 16, 2013

halfmonkey wrote:

I'm in the market to finally upgrade to full frame and I've narrowed down my choices to either the Sony RX1 or the Canon 5D iii. I know these two cameras are in completely different categories and that's what making the decision so difficult. I guess I wasn't really even considering the RX1 at first because of the fixed 35mm. It was the quality of the pictures and the size that drew me in. If I buy the 5D iii, I'd purchase the 24-70 ii lens with it to start off.

So I know that deciding which camera to pick will ultimately fall to my style of shooting but I'd like to ask for your guys' opinion or suggestions on things to consider when deciding between the two cameras.

I would probably say that my primary focus at this point is taking pictures of my little kids.

Stop here. The rx1 is not for you. Really.

If you need to catch a subject that moves faster than a walking pace the rx1's autofocus can't keep up. You can use pre-af techniques like presetting your focal distance with the lens set to a narrow aperture and presetting your exposure, adjusting on the fly...but is that what you really want to do?

My guess is no.

The mkiii is just about designed for shooting kids. It's an all purpose camera that leans a bit more to the sport shooting side than the landscape side, like a d800. It's af is faster and can reliably track even erratic motion with accuracy.

Yes, it's larger than an rx1 but there are work arounds to ameliorate that without bending the laws of physics. The first is don't buy the 24-70. It's freaking huge, heavy and really not all that much more interesting than the 40mm pancake lens imho. The pancake extends about 1" and looks almost like a lens cap. That said, it's a pretty useful focal length and a quality lens. I was surprised by it. If you could be happy with the rx1, you will be happy with the 40mm on the mkiii.

If you were only interested in image quality at 35mm, this would be a no brainer. The rx1 is pretty much unrivaled there. Add moving subjects, fast af, frame rates and buffer depths come in and mixes things up. While the rx1 may look slightly better when in focus your kids shots will be in focus far less often than with the mkiii, and really, who cares about dynamic range when your kids are blurry.

Lastly, get a camera bag. Your wife doesn't want to carry your camera. Have you seen what else they carry in those things? You don't want your camera anywhere near that crap.

Ps- I own an rx1, am a dad of 2 under 3 and finished a shoot on tuesday with a mkiii.

They're 5.5, 4, and 6 months. I guess one of the main things holding me back on the RX1 is the fixed 35mm lens. I know it's generally considered a walkaround lens, maybe a little on the wide side but non-the-less, a usable walk around lens.

I've compiled my list of pros and cons for each. Please feel free to give feedback to suggest things to consider for each.

RX1...

pros:

1. small - I guess the first rule of taking a great picture is to have the camera with you in the first place.

2. cheaper than the 5D iii

cons:

1. fixed 35mm lens; non-changable - not necessarily the best for shots of kids

2. accessories are extremely expensive

5Diii...

pros:

1. interchangable lens - allwos for flexibility

cons:

1. heavy and large - there not as portable as I'd like. Can't just throw in a bag or wife's purse or pocket

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow