Sony RX10 mkIII

[Steve Burkett]

Originally Posted by Ken Ross

It's interesting though, I was wondering if I'd use the RX10iii if I were still shooting Corporate videos. I've always been sold on the concept of delivering an HD product (if that's what the client wanted) whose origin was 4K. Downscaling 4K to HD beats almost any HD-only camera I've ever seen for IQ. Sure it takes up more space, but storage is so cheap today it hardly matters.

I think I might, since lighting was rarely an issue. In the kind of Corporate videos I did, a long reach was sometimes an advantage.

Storage maybe cheaper but its not free and when you factor in larger SD cards and backups too, plus any upgrades to your PC, shooting 4K does affect your overall running costs. That said, it's rare I shoot anything other than 4K for both Weddings and Corporate work. Some of my Corporate clients and a few of my Wedding clients too have asked for 4K videos. Others benefit from the downscaling as you suggest.

[Simon Denny]

In my limited search for a cheapie camera and long lens setup I feel the RX10M3 is the only option at this price point, in Australia here it's selling for around $2300 which is a lot, however cheaper than any other option out there.

The 1 inch sensor on most things looks great, I'll even say it beat my 60k camera, PMW500 3CCD under low light, I sold this camera now and only use a RX10M1 and A7s. I feel that the RX10M1 seems a bit dated in image for me compared to the newer cameras, it seems muddy or something, just can't explain it correctly.... and looking at the RX10M3 this seems to have a cleaner image from videos on the net Ive been viewing, I could be so wrong here?

[Noa Put]

The rx10 mark 1 can produce some very nice images with vibrant color that are easily matched with my other even 4k camera's, but only in good outdoor light, especially indoors when the light is not so good I also find the images become "muddy".

[Dave Blackhurst]

You have to keep in mind that the"Mk1" was a first generation sensor, the RX10Mk2 and RX100M4 use a second generation sensor, it's sort of hard to tell if Sony tweaked that sensor further for the RX10M3, but it's likely. Overall the second generation sensor does seem to perform "better" as one would expect. I did only brief eyeball testing between the two, I might hook them up again and see if I can find more "technical" differences...

The RX series has ALWAYS "seemed" rather expensive, no doubt about that, but what it comes down to is performance and features. When you start to compare and consider alternatives (like a 600mm f4 lens on a DSLR), and consider what image quality you DO get from the RX's, they start to make more sense than the price tag suggests at first (painful) glance. Used prices work wonders to reduce that pain...

There are other cameras out there with" similar" designs, I've tested a few, but come back to the RX's. The RX10M3 will replace a couple of other cameras for my needs, I won't "need" that 600mm lens (the M2 with 200 and Clear Image Zoom isn't "bad" when I need zoom), but I won't mind it either.... I plan to keep the M2 most likely, they should work well together. The M2 has me covered until I find a deal on an M3,so I won't go crazy and buy retail, as tempting as it is!



I use a small dimmable LED light if I need more than ambient light, they work quite well... I don't see that well in low light anymore, I find that my cameras are at least as good most of the time, and bringing my own "fill' light does the trick when needed. Obviously this won't work when at zoom, but realistically, if ambient lighting is so bad a modern sensor camera can't produce a passable image, it's probably terrible for the live "audience"....

[J. Stephen McDonald]

Dave, I always appreciate your balanced comments about all sorts of cameras, even less-expensive ones that most people here ignore. Although you say that 600mm would be more than you need, for me, it wouldn't even be close to enough, despite having an actual 680mm for 4K video.

So as I have done for all cameras and camcorders I've owned, if they didn't have built-in mounting threads for telextender adaptor tubes, I would try to find one made for another model that would fit. I doubt if anyone would make one specifically for this camera. If none was available, I'd make my own from scratch, using fiberglass. With my 2.2X Raynox DCR-2021PRO telex, I'd get about 1,500mm and with a Sony DH1774 telex, I'd get about 1,200mm. The longer telex vignettes anywhere below 88% full zoom, but the 1.7X doesn't vignette until down to about 40% zoom. These lenses are sharp enough for 4K and photos and I prefer using extra glass instead of invoking any kind of digital zoom.

Some people here may have seen or used the KiwiFotos telextender tubes, which ride on the outer lens control ring of a camera like this one. They really work and the ring seems able to support them and still keep turning for adjustments. I've had two and used one without trouble for over two years. If someone with an RX10 III would be so good as to post the exact outer-diameter measurement of the most forward on-lens control ring, in millimeters, I will begin my search for one that fits.

Here's an example of a shot with the 1.7X telextender, also using the 7.5-MP reduced-size frame, for an equivalent of 3,460mm.

https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3925/1...9b6cecba_o.jpg

[Galen Rath]

J. Stephen McDonald: any photos to post of your fiberglass creations?

[J. Stephen McDonald]

Galen, if you go through the pages of my Flickr Photostream, from the link on my Signature lines, you can find these items. Some of them are several years back.

[Peter Roy]

Received my MKIII last week and so far I'm really impressed although I haven't tried doing any videos yet. I do have a question for you other owners, when taking stills using the view finder I find the image stays on the screen to long. I tried looking for ways to adjust this but I couldn't find any answers, so I was hoping someone here could help me out. It makes it impossible to follow a moving subject if you can't see it in the view finder.

Thanks

[Dave Blackhurst]

Don't have the 3 yet, but if the 2 is any indication... go to the "gear" tab (after pressing menu), second (2) page, "auto review", that should allow you to turn off the auto preview of the shot you just took, I believe.

[Peter Roy]

That did the trick... thanks Dave