justmeMN: They should apologize for the US$1,199.95 suggested retail price, for a camera with a 1" sensor.
That's what I should have gone for! :)
dynamic range is ZERO!
no criticism intended, but if everything of this camera comes out in focus (can't see any depth of field samples) would it be better just to carry a smartphone instead? Really, what's the reason of having a camera like this besides my Note 3 cellphone?
no commitment to adobe. give me a disk with a license and I'll pay the money. Fu$k CC . I was at Cancun (mexico) and photoshop CC kicked me out just because there was no internet connection. No deal anymore.
I like the way she took a test shot! :)
Hey, Fuji! Enough of F3.5 - F5.6 crap! Start making some good stuff! F2.8 all the way thru or , at least , F4 . Sick of it!
it's a great update. I would not buy this cam without this feature. I'm not a professional filmmaker , just a hobbyist who enjoys shooting short videos and clips. I also have Canon 5dIII and tried to use it with Magic Lantern which is great development but the post processing is time consuming plus it requires a lot of storage and fast computer that can "eat" raw files. It also takes "super" fast CF cards which get cheaper but still very expensive. Very happy with my C100. 5DIII will be used for stills only.
I don't give a $hit about adobe and their new "features". Can't wait to see them filing chapter 11 with their CC subscription.
beril2013: i want a camera that takes excellent photos and excellent video for family.. Taking photos of my daughter while she is swimming at the beach etc... My budget is $1000 . I don't want a DSLR. Is the rx100 iii suitable for me? or can i get something better for $1000? size doesn't matter by the way.
Nope! RX100III is good for those who already has the "main" camera and wants something smaller (point and shoot) for occasional shots. I would choose something better than RX100III if I were you. I know you don't want DSLR, but Canon Rebel is very small and will give you much better quality than Sony P&S camera.
one word: disappointing.
abolit: high ISO performance is just awful!
compared to 2014 camera standards.
high ISO performance is just awful!
who is this camera for? nothing comes to mind so far....
buda1065: Impressive camera and it should be for the price. But where is the digital equivalent of the Contax G with its Biogon, Sonnar and Planar lenses? That should have been the NEX series, hopefully it will be the RX series. At least they hit a home run with the RX100.
digital equivalent of the camera that utilizes Sonnar, Planar and Biogon is called Leia M8 / M9
I don't get it. 5 out of 10 for raw image quality and it qualifies for gold award?
I'm sorry, but who needs this?
maxnimo: I'm confused by all the "ugly" comments. Is this camera supposed to be framed and hung on a gallery wall next to Mona Lisa?
Beauty & ugliness, why not?
Ciriacus: Not another preview, we want at least some of the missing full reviews!!
no need for any reviews. D600 is not worth it. Read the one for D7000 , same thing but full frame. Same lifeless & washed colors.
ugly as hell!