justmeMN: For comparison, the Canon SL1 /100D DSLR is 8% narrower, 5% shorter, (20% thicker), and weighs 7% less than the Samsung NX30.
So much for the size advantage of mirrorless, at least in this case.
I'd recommend you take a look at the top-down comparison of these two bodies:
What mirrorless does is get rid of the large "dead space" of a DSLR. i.e. that large central volume of space required for the reflex mirror and mirror box. As a result, the flange focal distance is only 25.50mm on the mirrorless NX, while it's a whopping 44mm on the Canon SL1. That's why, once you mount a lens, a mirrorless body feels so much more compact. That's because the midsection of a mirrorless body is so much narrower than that of a DSLR. So your numbers are a bit misleading. A mirrorless body can give still give you a fairly beefy grip, but still offer a slimmer body because the slimness is at the midsection (i.e. at the lens mount). The SL1 downsizes by sacrificing grip size, but you still have the fat central portion of the body required for the mirror box. As a result, once you mount a lens, DSLR ends up being so much larger than comparable mirrorless.
zerlings: 2 refinements would make this camera the perfect camera (maybe Mk4) for me:
1) 24-100mm2) touchscreen
@GodSpeaks - People who are against touchscreens should go back to 1999. I mean seriously, someone is actually against a touchscreen on a smartphone? LOL. Yeah, touchscreens on smartphones are so poor, they'll never catch on! As for your need to be "impressed" by a touchscreen, what do you need to be impressed by? A touchscreen is merely a surface that allows you to activate an action using touch. Do you also expect to be "impressed" when you touch a physical button or turn a physical dial? LOL. "Wow, I touched that button, and I was REALLY IMPRESSED" LOL. Buttons and touchscreens are a means to an end. And touchscreens are a far more flexible and adaptive means to multiple ends.
So I guess you're predicting that touchscreen smartphones are a passing fad, huh? Because they are so "unmpressive", huh? Yeah, can't wait for the next generation of phones that are entirely comprised of physical buttons!
Eugene232: great but boriiiiiing camera
There are no boring cameras, only boring photographers.
Pat Cullinan Jr: EVF? Sold! Hope it doesn't fall off, though.
If the first iteration had offered an EVF, it would've been reasonably exciting. Can't help feeling that the III is mildly anticlimactic. Did someone say boring? With 9 digicams in the sock drawer, I'm jaded. I'm torn -- should I buy the III, or should I enter a monastery in the Egyptian desert?
Join the monastery.
Thomas Traub: It is typical for Sony that everything they can't do based on the knowledge of photography they do with an higher afford of technique.They built a great cam with great technical data.But in a slippery body.with a technical great viewfinder, but you have to pull it out and pull it back before you can use it - not comfortable and not fast for fast shoots.Also the flash: you have to put the cam from your eye and pull up the flash.
Sonys approach to photography is from the technical side, they have great technique and put as much as possible in the unit.
The approach of Nikon/Canon & Co is from the side of the photography, they first think on the photographer and than they develop a technique ....
That's the difference.
Beside my Nikon DSLR-Eyuipment I love to use my Fuji X10 because of the manuel zoom - that's also a realy fast lense that is fast to use and in the same way I use my DSLR - great from the point of view of a photographer (also it has not the same IQ than the Sony).
Of course, there are some people who will look for any excuse for why they can't take a good picture! Especially if every little thing on the camera doesn't happen automatically for them! "What, I have to pull up the flash?! That' makes it totally unusable! I can't take a photo if a camera requires that kind of work?!"
Kodachrome200: Its really cool but the problem with this and a lot of compact cameras is that here is no easy way to select a focus points. its either full auto or center point. It needs adirectional pad or a touchscreen or something that one could work with to focus it
Unless a compact camera has touch focus, I always just use the "center-point/focus-lock/compose" method. It's a tried and true, classic method that photographers have been using for decades. Plus, directional pads tend to be a bit tedious to use on small compact camera bodies, especially during shooting.
Robert Wise: Wonder why Sony have deleted the Mark 2 hot shoe on the Mark 3 version? I know the Mark 3 has a EVF but that is not the only reason for using the hot shoe.
It's not difficult to understand. Just look at the top-plate real estate!
The pop-up viewfinder takes up space. The pop-up flash takes up space. That doesn't leave any space for a hot shoe. There's just not enough room for the viewfinder, flash, and hotshoe on such a compact body. And of these three items, I think Sony realized that the hot shoe is the least used item amongst people who buy a compact camera. After all, the whole point of having a compact all-in-one camera is to have it all in a single compact camera. A hotshoe flash tends to be incongruent with this all-in-one-body ethos.
Leiduowen: Still no time-lapse recording? Sony, you're not listening!
Time-lapse recording? "There's an app for that." And that's how it should be: people should be able to download apps to their cameras to supplement or improve upon the OEM software/firmware.
chj: Does Sony not know how to make a touchscreen? Otherwise this looks to be an ideal street camera.
We live in modern times now, where many of us have come to realize just how nice it is to have a touchscreen. Touch focus and touch shutter are two very valuable features that I've come to appreciate. I find it particularly effective for street photography. It just looks like you're fooling around with the settings, but you're actually spot focusing and shooting.
RichRMA: With ISO capabilities what they are today, why would you need a tripod collar on a lens with a maximum 200mm focal length and stabilization? Night shots?
Comfort. For long spans of shooting, I like putting my Canon 70-200/4L on a monopod, using its tripod collar (which is an optional extra, just like on this Tokina). No need to hold the weight of the lens and camera. The monopod does it for you. And the tripod collar allows you to easily switch between vertical and horizontal orientations, which you wouldn't be able to do if you mounted the monopod to the camera's tripod socket. Plus, the tripod collar puts the monopod at a more balanced center-of-gravity location, which improves handling. I love having a tripod collar for my 70-200/4L. It was definitely worth the extra cost.
white shadow: Now, it may be a good time to get the Mk2 as price will drop to make way for the Mk3.
I think the pop-up EVF is a gimmick. The flash hot shoe is more useful.
Unfortunately, they didn't improve on the clickless front wheel and provide an external battery charger.
The faster lens is welcome but I think the old one is good enough for casual photography.
I have an EOS M which has a hotshoe, but I'd much rather that it had a built-in EVF and a built-in pop-up flash. That's because when you're going "compact", you generally want to stay "compact." And one really quick way to not stay compact is to mount a hotshoe flash. Hotshoe flashes on compact cameras are a bit of a clash. That's why hotshoes on compact cameras mainly stay unused and empty of a hotshoe flash. I've yet to use a hotshoe flash on my EOS M. So in reality, based on how often a hotshoe on a compact camera goes unused, one might argue that a hotshoe on a compact camera is more of a "gimmick." As for the pop-up EVF, I'm willing to bet that it'll see a lot more use than a hotshoe would.
Storky: Very disappointed that Sony *still* has a tiny sensor that doesn't give you any opportunity to create a good bokeh, and that the zoom range is still so limited. How do they expect to compete with similar-priced alternatives like the Canon G1X-II this way? Sigh. It's time that Sony finally cleans up their act.
The G1X II is a much larger camera. And it doesn't have a built-in EVF. And once you add the EVF to the Canon, not only is it quite a bit more expensive, it's also a larger package too. So there are trade-offs. That's just a reality. Time to face reality. It's not Sony that needs to "clean up their act." You just need to face reality and understand that there are pros and cons to every camera.
viking79: Pop up viewfinder is nice, but how does one hold onto that camera? It looks like it has no comfortable way to hold it.
If you need instructions on how to hold a compact camera, try looking at photos:
These are not heavy cameras, so you don't need much to hold them. If you think the camera needs more support, put your left hand under the camera.
larrytusaz: The existence of quality "always with you" options like this, the 3rd version of the RX 100 III, is why there's no excuse for EVER using your freaking PHONE for photography pursuits because "the best camera is the one that's with you." As small & potent as this is, using the smartphone's camera is so lame. (As for price--you can now get the 1st RX100 for a relative song.)
BTW, you act as if the RX100 III is the first comapct camera to ever come into existence, and that heretofore we've NEVER had a compact camera that could ever possibly compete with the size and convenience of a smartphone! Hahahaha. The RX100 III changes nothing. There have always been compact cameras. This camera does not make smartphone photography any less valid, attractive, or convenient. If anything, the RX100 III is a greater danger to much larger and more "ultimate quality" devices.
Ultimately, there are going to be conservative folks like yourself who are always going to attempt to define how things "should" be done based on their own extremely narrow ideologies. We see it throughout history, from conservative ideas on painting, to sculpture, to equal rights and marriage, to whatever, you name it, some narrow-minded dictatorial "standards" protector is going to try to keep things narrowly defined in his own vision. You're just following a long tradition of such people.
@larrytusaz- the failing of your anal, narrow vision of "photography" is that it is predicated on old standards, such as how an image will look when printed. Today, photography encompasses a much broader world, one which includes social sharing and immediacy. How an image looks as a print or in Photoshop at 100% magnification is completely beside the point. That's where your notion of "ultimate quality" is so far off the tracks. Today, there are billions of images that exist exclusively in the digital realm. And there's nothing wrong with that, especially if they reach millions more eyeballs than an "ultimate quality" print or file would. Plus, you're way off base if "defining excellence" in photography can't be defined as seeing an image on your phone or tablet that moves you. No, your "defining excellence" is based on tangential criteria far removed from simply being able to see and emotionally respond to an image. That's why you're so obsessed with the "device" used to take a photo.
larrytusaz, photography really doesn't need anal, judgmental, dictators like you dictating what is worthy of fitting into your narrow world view. But hearing your "Get off my lawn, you crazy kids" rants is quite humorous. LOL.
BubbaHotepUK: Oh no! No touchscreen!Why not Sony, why not? I've been using the Panasonic GM1 recently and touchscreens on small cameras is definitely the way to go.
Still, it looks to be a super camera nonetheless, addressing most of my complaints about the RX100 I & II. Now that summer is here in the UK, that EVF may just swing it my way :)
@leno - so I guess you use a cell phone with a rotary dial? LOL. Touchscreens are very valuable, across a huge range of devices these days. A well designed touch interface can add a huge degree of usability to a camera that can supplement the tiny buttons, knobs, and wheels on a camera. Plus, touch focus and touch shutter is hugely useful in certain situations. It works a lot faster than other methods of manually selecting the focus point, or the focus-lock-recompose method of shooting. Besides, there are countless features and interface designs that camera designers put into cameras that greatly add to the usability of a camera but do NOTHING to improve IQ. It doesn't mean these features and designs aren't still quite useful and valuable.
What's "lame" is that you seem so hung up on the DEVICE used to take a photo. I see a lot of great photos that just *happen* to be shot with a camera that is integrated into a phone. Does it matter to me that the camera was in a phone? No. Besides, as compact as the RX100 III is, it's still quite a chunk of camera. 290g is still a chunk of weight. So this camera certainly isn't going to make smartphone photography go away. Not by a long shot. Smartphone photography is here to stay, is only getting better with every passing year, and will be here long after you're gone. And shaking your cane at it like an angry old man who can't accept change is really "lame". People are now able to do photography on a much broader range of devices than what the old conservatives are able to accept, and it drives them crazy. Get over it. Nothing "lame" about using whatever you want to create images.
Ian SS: The cheaper 10-18mm EFS I see the point, but why 16-35mm IS? Wide angle lenses will not be affected as much due to hand shaking, I would rather have bigger f-stop.
Photographers tend to forget that their beloved DSLRs and DSLR lenses aren't just for taking photos anymore. These products have become the workhorses of the video industry now. And IS comes in very handy for video shooting. But obviously, it can be quite handy for stills shooting too. Just because wide angle lenses aren't effected "as much" due to handshake doesn't mean they aren't effected at all. Why do you think a tripod is standard equipment for landscape photographers, even though most landscapes are shot with wide angles? It's because stability matters, even with wide angles.
Olgierd: For $300 I'll buy 10-18 for my little EOS-M. Small and fairly light, cheaper than EFM 11-22 and available in US. Good option to take while I'm hiking.
@GKN - but you can't put the 11-22 EF-M on a Canon DSLR body. The 11-22 EF-M will, forever, be limited to Canon's mirrorless system. With the 10-18 EF-S, you can use it on both a Canon DSLR body (APS-C) and a Canon EOS M body. So it depends on what your priorities are: maximum compactness, or maximum versatility. For maximum compactness, go with the 11-22 EF-M. For maximum versatility so you can use it on both EOS and EOS M bodies, go with the 10-18 EF-S.