Sony RX10 mkIII
 

Ok, I'm liking this big time. 24-600mm f2.4-4 lens, 1" 24mp sensor, 4k, mic input.

.
.
.
And only $1500
(official link to be updated)
Temp link:
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 III puts emphasis on lens reach and video capabilities: Digital Photography Review

Re: Sony RX10 mkIII
 

Seems like the MkII was just released yesterday.... New lens with 3 rings looks nice, not sure how often that long zoom will be usable, I'm not THAT steady! Overall, another nice addition to the RX line...

Re: Sony RX10 mkIII
 

No built-in ND's. Maybe, maybe not; not listed in the Specs at DPReview however the previous versions were so equipped. Whatever, at that price and that lens it might be worth a look.

Ah, yes to ND's according to B&H. As with the original RX10 I imagine one needs to be aware that in strong winds the telescoping lens is susceptible to slight image degrading movement.

Re: Sony RX10 mkIII
 

Re: Sony RX10 mkIII
 

It's got SLOG-2 and SLOG-3. I wonder how they mapped the minimum ISO for that sensor. On the A7S-II they dropped the minimum ISO from 3200 to 1600. Currently the RX10-II is set for 800 ISO.

That 1 inch-type sensor is fairly noisy on SLOG-2 but for SLOG-3, it's probably going to look like a snow storm.

I dunno, looks interesting.

CT

Re: Sony RX10 mkIII
 

The lens reach is 680mm in 4K video mode. There is 13.77-MP of the 17.7-MP in the 16/9 sector of the sensor, that is used to derive the 8.1-MP for 4K. It's not quite a full sensor readout. This leaves almost 4-MP of pixels unused around the margins. The smaller effective sensing size gives a greater magnification effect, than when shooting photos.It works out to about 71% of the 16:9 sector of the sensor being used for 4K. And that would be about 62.5% of the total 3:2-aspect sensor surface.

I don't see much problem in holding it steady at full zoom, as this is less than half as much reach as I'm accustomed to using in the Intelligent-Active video mode on my current camera. I always use a shoulder-mount or a monopod when shooting and many people would use a tripod. Even a short gripping-rod would make a big difference in steadiness.The Intelligent-Active image stabilization mode, that combines EIS progressively as the zoom goes out, with OIS, is not available for 4K. The hybrid EIS/OIS stabilization works only with 1080 or lesser frame sizes. When shooting 1080, you'd get 846mm of reach, due to the 1.41X magnification effect of the EIS, which makes the active sensor size less when zoomed-in.

So this camera when loaded, will weigh 2.33 lbs. There's some people in photo forums talking about how it's too heavy for them. Those who used (or still do) full-sized camcorders, at about 16 lbs., must be amused by this. When I had a Beta camcorder on a counter-weighted shoulder rig, it totaled 23 lbs. I remember shooting a trade union meeting with it, that lasted 2 hrs. & 15 min., with constant panning between the podium and audience. The next day, I got the needed parts and turned it into a standalone setup, with the 7 lbs. of the VTR in a wired bag on the floor or a chair.

Re: Sony RX10 mkIII
 

So it's basically a rx10II but with a lens that has a longer reach? I still have the mark 1 and it's one of my favorite camera's to shoot run and gun style with during weddings, I only don't like the limited DR and the fact that the footage false apart in darker venues, it might be able to shoot at 12800iso but it's not a camera to shoot at those high iso's. Not sure who this camera is aimed at, considering they just released the mark 2 that already has a very usable focal length at a constant f-stop.

Re: Sony RX10 mkIII
 

Woah!....just read on "Imaging-resource" that this RX10 does NOT have a video record time limit! ("in full HD mode")

What about 4k? If so, that's big bold game changer.

Waiting for confirmation of this.....

Re: Sony RX10 mkIII
 

This capability in a bigger camcorder body with a fan for better cooling so that the processor can do UHD60P and it would be great and capable competitor to the Panasonic DVX200. As Cliff says not going to happen because of the impact on the FS5, PXW Z150 and X70

Ron Evans

Re: Sony RX10 mkIII
 

I also wonder about the target market given that it is a relatively large heavy beast. At 1100 g for many, me included, it's hardly a handy walk-around cam. And the price is getting up there. I shan't be rushing to place an order as I did for the original RX10.

The other good news is that there is more and more competition in the smaller 4k capable consumer camera market. The recently announced Nikon 24-500 at nearly half the weight and price of the RX10 III looks much more interesting to me even though it has a little less reach. Performance, image quality, might be the deciding factor although thus far footage I have viewed from all the 4k cams looks just fine. I have yet to see anything better than I get out of my ancient, no fuss no bother, AX100. However the lighter Nikon with almost 50% more reach is appealing (on paper that is).

Great to see the competition increasing markedly for 4k capable cams and the performance convergence. Soon the customer will really be able to nitpick precisely what he/she wants based on ergonomics and suchlike knowing that 4k performance wise they are now becoming a very good pretty much of a muchness.

Re: Sony RX10 mkIII
 

@John - yeah, the price starts to look a bit high, but it comes back to the lens - that's a lot of lens for the money, IF you want a long reach camera (and if not, there's the Mk2, which might come down a bit now). I've already picked 3-4 cameras that mostly sit around that would potentially be replaced by one of these, so it will be on my "hit list" to pick up when I find a deal.

Yep, it's "bigger" and "heavier", but it's livable - I've found I'm "wobbly" regardless of how much a cam weighs, though my preference is for lighter cameras! I'm sure I'll be able to stabilize this one just fine. Sony SHOULD have taken the opportunity to step up to the FM500 battery of the Alphas though, IMO. I actually think the taller "grip" will be easier to hold than the earlier models (my pinky passes right under the current grip).

Looked at the Nikon, and clearly the M3 is a shot across the bow on that model.... the only video I found of that model is a VERY sad low resolution promo, no actual output... would need to see actual output. I normally am not a photo snob, but the bokeh in the 6 "sample photos" was actually quite awful, and detracted from the pix, again, IMO, but seeing as typically I don't even care that much about "bokeh", it immediately stood out in a bad way. Competition is still a good thing!


@Cliff - we probably will need to wait for the manual to be online (if it's not already, I didn't find it in a quick search). If they take the record limit off, I'd probably move from the AX100, however reluctantly, but it would make the camera even more attractive!


@Ron - getting consistent reliable 60p 4K is likely another year or two - been fiddling with trying to get 4K 60p going for gaming, it's hit and miss at best. When it works, it's glorious, but not too many "whens" - if it's not the hardware, it's the software, most aggrivating! Once I started using lower shutter speeds with 30p, I've been happy with the results, even if I'd love to see the needed horsepower and bandwidth for 60p.... I'm sure we will see it, but the tech is not there yet - will also probably mean newer faster bigger memory too!


@Noa - I had the same reaction, but I also sometimes want a long reach zoom... this fits that "want". And provides a good reason to finally give up my "Mark1", which has been and remains a "favorite" camera... the Mark2 will remain as a lighter smaller "backup", or maybe it'll still get more use when I don't need "super" zoom! I do think this later generation sensor as introduced in the RX10II and RX100IV is a bit better than the first generation.... You'd probably find the Mark2 to be very comfortable and usable, and now the price should drop a bit <wink>.

Re: Sony RX10 mkIII
 

I believe that the target market includes pros and advanced amateurs that shoot both stills and video, particularly for travel, and specifically where it is useful to avoid changing lenses in mirrorless cameras in outdoor environments.

Versions 1 and 2 of this camera had stills capabilities that camcorders did not have.

Versions 2 and now 3 have exceptional slow motion and ultra slow motion capabilities.

Bob Krist is arguably one of the finest travel photographers ever. Ever. For decades he specialized in stills for travel photography for some of the best travel magazines around. He used Nikon gear. He evolved into a hybrid photographer / videographer, again specializing in travel. He ended up switching to Sony mirrorless gear. Bob is evangelical about the RX10 in versions 1 and 2. You can see his beautiful video work on Vimeo.

I shoot more stills than video. A bit over a year ago, I traded / sold a very large pile of Canon gear for Sony gear. I currently have an A7S, a brand new A7R II, and I am in the process of selling my a6000 for an a6300. I now have all Sony native FE lenses, including the 16-35, the 70-200, the 24-70, the 16-70, and the exquisite Zeiss 55.

I seriously considered an RX10 II, but did not follow through because of the lens wobble during zooming issue. I have little need for the long reach of the RX10 III but would consider it if the lens wobble during zooming issue was solved in version 3.

Much angst has been expressed about poor battery life of Sony cameras. What is missed in this "tempest in a teapot" is the fact that the W batteries are small and cheap, and they work in all of these cameras:

RX10 (all versions)
A7 (all versions)
A7S (all versions)
A7R (all versions)
A6000 and A6300

Re: Sony RX10 mkIII
 

Interesting point, Richard, about Bob Krist and his 'conversion' to Sony. I do have a somewhat different point of view, and I shall share it here. In my skeptical old age I avoid evangelists like the plague, especially if I suspect their back pocket is benefiting one way or another from their proselytizing. And I'm not saying Bob Krist is being rewarded, one way or another; I have no idea. Based on a quick look at his web site he is clearly not a bad photographer, presumably successful business-wise, though his thing is not my thing, and it doesn't matter does it; as always beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I do believe many of us here, and at other similar gathering places of gear-heads and suchlike, derive a measure of delight in selecting new gear. The process of buying a new camera - searching out specifications, what is said and what is not said, evaluating the hype both deserved and outrageous, justifying, fantasying, testing, comparing, and of course just good old talking about it as we do here, is rewarding in and of itself. If the process became like a visit to the medic who tells us 'you have such and such, here's a prescription, take one in the morning and one at night - next', and likewise if a Bob Krist type of expert told me after assessing my 'symptoms' you need such and such camera and such and such lens - I would feel just a little dismayed. I enjoy all the hoopla of selecting gear, weighing up the pros and cons, always knowing that the Noa's, Dave's, and all the other good fellows here (not too many females eh) needs will be different from mine, and vice versa. But the product information they share, and perhaps one might include Bob Krist in the mix, is generally very helpful but seldom sufficient partly because we all have different and evolving needs, and thankfully going back and forward, around and around, on and off about a piece of gear is par for the course, and we love it that way.

Even Peter Jackson enjoys fooling about with various bits of kit, so I'm told.

While my gear list is decidedly Sony heavy I am delighted to note the increasing competition, or should I say my new-found awareness of the competition. I absolutely don't need a new camera but I want one, again. And as well as Sony and their RX10 III this time Nikon and Panasonic are truly in the mix. I may well end up with the RX10 III (right now I think not) but not before thoroughly, deliberately and with great delight sizing up the non-Sony offering out there.

And I shall jolly well take my time about it too, no doubt repeatedly change my mind, and savor every moment.

All good fun for a retired layabout; keeps me off the streets.

Re: Sony RX10 mkIII
 

Perhaps "evangelical" was not the best term to use. Perhaps you can skip the gear advice and just enjoy Bob Krist's work on Vimeo.

There are certainly many good camera choices these days, and one brand is not always best for everyone. I tend to stay with one brand as it simplifies my life (lenses, batteries, accessories). My progression was from Nikon (film) to Canon (digital), then adding Canon camcorders, and now to Sony (for both stills and video).

Everyone's mileage may vary.

Re: Sony RX10 mkIII
 

I should add that the RX10 II and III have good audio features. Mic and headphone jacks and XLR capability with the shoe mounted Sony adaptor.