Alphoid: Seems like another home run. Sadly, not quite worth the upgrade for me. There's a half dozen possible ifs that would push it over, but most likely, I'll go for the IV. If Sony can keep up this momentum, it'll be hard to resist whatever that upgrade will bring.
If it was a few hundred less, I'd do it. If it had a mike input and audio levels, it'd replace carrying video equipment. I'd do it. (I'm especially excited by this with the full frame readout)
You should say that Sony keeps this one high in price to protect the sales of previous models. The fact that you can still buy the first RX100 new in shops, is a prove how good it sold. The Mk2 will be available for at least 2 years more, if not longer, new, the price makes them stuck in stores. And this one will be the same, when all wanna get, and need this absolutely fan boys are served, they sit on them, like the previous models. Sell them cheaper, at a correct pricing and they sell like candy. The store where I buy sold 1 of the 3 RX100 he had in stock, and he never took the Mk2, only on order, it doesn't sells since those people that those small tourist cameras target, find it too expensive. Now that the first model dropped 150$ in pricing he still doesn't sells them, since now it is the old model what is the reason. The camera is huge, it has all one experienced photographer needs to make a companion camera for the bigger guns, but, not at that price, sorry Sony.
Calvin Chann: To all those posters who post saying no EVF no sale. Well here you are!
But I'm sure you'll find something else to stop you buying it.
yes, the price is too high, even if now it has what we look for.
utomo99: The biggest problem is: the Price is too expensive. Many people did not willing to pay for expensive compact camera. Max 600 maybe still ok
I bet it will only sell like hotcakes in the first days when all the wanna have and must have boys are served, after that it will wait for customers. Some pay just any price for just anything, that is what those gadgets are lade for. Those with knowhow and experience see what the real value is and they will think twice before paying the same price that can make you happy with an A6000 that cost just a 50$ more and has ILS. At 550, maybe 600$ it's fairly priced.
kona_moon: f/1.8-2.8 sounds impressive, but when you look at the plot of equivalent f-stop for the entire zoom range, it is almost a constant f/2.8 from 30mm up. Still, tempting.
what new sensor?
Ridethelight: Strange comments on this camera, complaints about the short zoom 70mm vs 100mm , this is nothing a half decent photographer would not easily adapt to.Lack of hot shoe ? really , how stupid would a flash gun twice the size of the camera look.It has a EVF , built in ND filter and faster lens, what's not to love here ? maybe the price.
only the price, unfortunately
1500$ for a Tokina, you're kiddin' I suppose.
AbrasiveReducer: When the test reports appear, I'll go straight to the 24mm setting. If the corners are sharp, I'll buy one.
that is a mk2 shot, despite the guy said it was mk3 on SAR site. But the Mk3 will probably be as noisy, and for the corner sharpness, we will wait the first shots to appear
wlad: anyone seen Canikon ? are they still around ?
right, nikon released a J4 and S2 lately....
don't forget Nikon with the D4S .... sic
and for Christmas we will get it for 1900$, so let's wait that few month, we will not die until there, at least i do not expect to.
tuerta photography: Very nice, but at that price I'd have to liquidate my lens collection just to afford that body. I was hoping it was going to be priced under the a7R
There is no secret and no magick, reduce pixel amounts and make the pixels bigger and you get more light into them, but, every single recorded pixel look more rough and with less resolved detail. This camera will do double sized D70/D40 pictures with the dynamic advantage of the FF sensor, nothing more, nothing less. Look at DF shots in full size and you just cry when it comes to detail, and that one has 16 mpix. 7 years ago, you had been delighted, but today where we know what a 24 and 36 mpix sensor in FF can resolve and give us, it is just an insult to come with a 12 mpix one, except for video and that is what this camera targets.
All is just a question of point of view. For someone that is in video, it is a bad compromise to a full pro video camera, it is a good compromise if one considers the price compared to a full pro video camera and the low light ability in this matter.
For stills it is just a flop, the good old reworked D700 sensor with his D70 resolution and FF dynamics, that can serve for nice downsized shots at low light. For that price, it is too expensive, starts noising at 6500 iso just like any sensor, loses details at 3200 iso, like any sensor, and depends on good software cheats to make a good impression at 12500 iso.
Just a Photographer: Pretty expensive considering the fact that you need an external 4k recorder to be able to use this camera to its full.
all good, but somewhat expensive for a simple software update and a plug to plugin an external recorder. To me it had to be lower in price than A7R, maybe somewhat more expensive than A7. The speculated price equivalent to GH4 pricing had made it a hit, despite it can't record 4k internal, GH4 can. So, all Sony announcements for this week end are a kick in the butt in my point of view.
pew pew: I suspect this camera will blow the dxo sensor stats.
possible, but not evident, it is the same sensor in reworked form as the one we find in Nikon D700
discbrake: Good job, Sony. But OM-D E-M1 over RX100 III for a walk-around camera. E-M1 is "small" for me. I'm more excited for the Alpha 7s that will release in July.
If you add 2 cm in length and a 7 mm in high, and add a 20mm pancake you get a A6000, for around 950$ and you have the double amount of camera and IQ then with this tool. Even a Ricoh Gr with a fixed 28mm equivalent lens is cheaper. A GM1 is same pricing and has ILS and, it's smaller with a larger sensor. Now, do you need a 24/70 equivalent zoom, that's up to you, I switch between 24, 28, 35 mm lenses on APSC NEX, so 35, 40, and 50mm equivalent, and that is plenty of it for me. Most of all I do is with 28 mm, thus 40 mm equivalent, it fits all situations in life with brio.
Jun2: I would buy Sony a6000 with kit lens (16-50mm f/3.5- 5.6) at the same price. The two combo have similar light gathering ability. BTW, light gathering ability of 8.8-25.7mm f1.8-2.8 doesn't equal 24-70mm f1.8-2.8.
That is what i say since a few days to all that claim this camera to be worth it's price. A6000 with a lens is 50$ more, and look how much more camera you buy. For sure, it is a different design, but let's compare features, sensor, IQ, and so on, then you realize how much overpriced this camera is, it's at least 250$ too expensive.
Is it worth this price just to be pocketable, and let's be honest, you need big and solid pockets for that one too. Generally, a 20mm and 16mm pnacake do for pocket use, and then A6000 or any Nex will fit in our pockets too. A NEX3N is 300$ and with a 350$ 20mm pancake it's still cheaper than this luxury toy for the "absolutely need it" boys.
Cheng Bao: $800 is more reasonable than previous rumored price.however consider the built-in evf alone cost around $100 for several mirrorless camera, it is a better deal than rx100m2, if you need an EVF
never compare external evf to one in the camera. The on board is a mass production item sold with every camera, the external is a separate low quantity production unit that 1 user on 10 will buy. A6000 has the same on board, and the whole camera is 850$ so compare how much camera you can buy for just 50$ more. This camera is overpriced without any doubt. You pay 250$ for the unique design, it just misses LV or CC initials on the side.
Gonini: its getting bigger and heavier, not nice
yes, right, but there is no hot shoe anymore yet, one reason to rant at it once more. It fits me perfectly, except it is 200$ overpriced.
VaLeX: For some reasons, the specifications' page has no content as I'm typing these impressions.1. Does this camera have Image Stabilisation?2. You claim: "The lens is the big selling point of the RX100 III. With a maximum aperture of F1.8-2.8 and a focal range of 24-70mm equiv, you won't find anything as impressive on a compact camera." - Let's be serious - Take Fuji X20, Pentax Mx1, Oly ZX-2, they're quite similarly impressive. BTW, I'd love to see Fuji's X20 in the DOF / relative aperture chart.3. How much customization of controls is possible with this camera? For instance, can one allocate exposure compensation to the ring on the lens?4. Aside from sensor/resolution, I don't see a serious reason to buy this camera instead of my intended Fuji X20. I'm just waiting to see Fuji's X30, though ... (not to mention price considerations ...)
I see only one reason not to buy this camera, and that is it's pricing. For all the rest it fits my needs to 100%. Seriously, 50$ cheaper than a A6000 with zoom lens. Sony is able to sell a NEX3N with lens for 300$, a A7 with zoom kit lens for 1450$ and here we have top pay 800$ for that toy thing. Weird ......
ZoranHR: 1. take the glasses you are using to judge value of Leica.2. put them again and look over to Olympus.3. than look over to Fuji.4. than look K-3,D7100,7D.5. Does only Leica look overpriced?
I hate when someone's lying,but I don't hate Leica brand or any other. That would be too much of black and white thinking. Shallow. Buy something on your budget and preference... And just take photos!
Many cameras are overpriced, but Leica is amazingly overpriced.
ArturK: I just don't get it. If it has an EVF then why the translucent mirror? Can't the image from the sensor go directly into the EVF?
It does, the AF sensor needs the mirror deviation, the sensing module being on the top. You look through the sensor, but AF doesn't. In mirrorless ILS, sensor with pdaf AF sensing that AF module is not needed. Here you need one for phase detection. I do not know if future A mount cameras will have PDAF only like mirrorless, it would be a big step forward and the mirror would disappear.