1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  1. dibbly dobbler

    dibbly dobbler

    Messages:
    1,344
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I'm getting seriously tempted by one of these having read some pretty stellar reviews (see Google but http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2016/03/30/hands-on-sony-rx1r-iii-some-samples-thoughts/ is an example). Also I tried an Rx10 Mk2 at the weekend and really liked the feel of it. One review had an image at 600mm effective from the RX10 compared to a shot on a full frame Sony with the Tamron 150-600 at 600mm and they were very very similar, perhaps even a slight win for the RX10 - which amazed me.

    Anybody taken the plunge with one of these or considering it?

    Thoughts welcome :)
     
  2. odd jim

    odd jim Flimsiest Lambresta

    Messages:
    9,220
    Name:
    Jim
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I'd be careful trying to compare the RX10 to an image shot with the FF Sony and 150-600, web size they might look similar but anything more the Sony with the 150-600 will be much better (the RX10's 1" sensor is much, much smaller than an FF sensor and the 150-600 is the better lens). Not to mention focus speeds etc.
     
    Last edited: May 8, 2016
    dibbly dobbler likes this.
  3. dibbly dobbler

    dibbly dobbler

    Messages:
    1,344
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I don't disagree with any of that Jim - I'll try and find the review again and you can see what you think :)
     
  4. Snapsh0t

    Snapsh0t

    Messages:
    1,598
    Name:
    Jonathan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I, err, now have the complete set of RX10s. It's worth reading the various discussions on DPReview as there are quite a few of us that have paid the early adopter's tax to get one from the first batch. The next batch could well be delayed due to the earthquake that affected Sony's sensor-manufacturing plant in Japan.
    The Mk3 is noticeably larger and heaver than the Mk1 & 2 but the results do seem to be very good. There's a feeling that OOC JPEGs are better than before and there's now zero lens slop at any extension. AF is generally good, even at '600mm', but there's some hunting in low light and AF tracking is still poor compared with its main rival, the Panasonic FZ1000.

    I started with an early RX10 Mk1 in late 2013 and sold my D7100 and lenses after I hadn't used them for a year. The main downside I notice with the 1" sensor compared with APS-C is a lack of dynamic range but the shadows are held very well so one can exposed for the highlights and drag the shadows back in PP. The on-screen 'zebras' help with this.

    I haven't got any useful Mk3 samples yet but there are plenty from the earlier ones on my web site if you want some pointers to them.
     
    SsSsSsSsSnake and dibbly dobbler like this.
  5. dibbly dobbler

    dibbly dobbler

    Messages:
    1,344
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Thanks Jonathan - I am very close to pulling the trigger on the Mk3 now, just trying to pluck up courage! Interesting about the lack of DR - I thought the Sony sensors were really good?
     
  6. odd jim

    odd jim Flimsiest Lambresta

    Messages:
    9,220
    Name:
    Jim
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    They are but 1" sensors are significantly smaller than even APS-C so they DR won't be as good.
     
  7. Snapsh0t

    Snapsh0t

    Messages:
    1,598
    Name:
    Jonathan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    They are good but, as Jim says, they're relatively small and DR is the main casualty. That's not to say it's bad, just not as good as my D7100 was. If you use RAW then it's noticeably better than JPEG but I'm totally uninterested in that level of PP.
     
  8. dibbly dobbler

    dibbly dobbler

    Messages:
    1,344
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
  9. odd jim

    odd jim Flimsiest Lambresta

    Messages:
    9,220
    Name:
    Jim
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
  10. dibbly dobbler

    dibbly dobbler

    Messages:
    1,344
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Well I bought one last night - will report back in due course :)
     
  11. dibbly dobbler

    dibbly dobbler

    Messages:
    1,344
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
  12. paul.w

    paul.w

    Messages:
    287
    Name:
    paul
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I'm thinking of getting one of these as soon as the next batch arrives in the UK, (I'm told stock is delayed due to the earthquake)
    If your only interested in stills, and don't need the mega zoom, then there are much better options for the money,
    Having said that, the zoom range is awesome, and means you can replace a whole bag load of lenses with this one camera. Compared to other cameras, the DR is an irrelevant issue, if you don't have the lense length on your alternative camera to get the shot you want, then that kit is useless.
    Where the mkiii excels however, is in the 4k video capture, the specs are incredible at this price range, where else can you get true 4k at 100mbps with a 25x zoom and great optical image stabilization along with mic and headphone inputs and clean hdmi output in 4k and hd1080. All for £1250.
    I can't wait to get my grubby paws on one !!!
     
    dibbly dobbler likes this.
  13. Snapsh0t

    Snapsh0t

    Messages:
    1,598
    Name:
    Jonathan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Here are a few from our day out last Friday. Please bear in mind these are heavily compressed by JAlbum. A few were straightened in JAlbum and a few (but none of these) had shadows lifted in PSE. The full set is here.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    (Edited on 20/06/2016 to correct broken links and add the fourth pic. And on 10/01/2017 as I broke the links again.)
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2017
    dibbly dobbler likes this.
  14. dibbly dobbler

    dibbly dobbler

    Messages:
    1,344
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Results look good Jonathan - what are your first impressions?

    I'm hoping to pick mine up tonight :)
     
  15. Snapsh0t

    Snapsh0t

    Messages:
    1,598
    Name:
    Jonathan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    It's heavy.... But there are a good number of improvements over the Mk II, ignoring the lens. One of the big ones is that Flexible Spot is much more useable than it used to be, more in line with what we expect. One of the little 'uns is that the base is slightly thicker so a QR plate can be attached without fouling the lower edge of the screen. The rest I hope you're finding for yourself by now. :)
     
    dibbly dobbler likes this.
  16. dibbly dobbler

    dibbly dobbler

    Messages:
    1,344
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Thanks - yes got it :)

    It's not light is it! Nicely put together but of kit though. Not processed anything yet (need to update ACR) but the images look almost unbelievably sharp...
     
  17. Snapsh0t

    Snapsh0t

    Messages:
    1,598
    Name:
    Jonathan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Something that no-one on DPR seems to want to ask is how much of the lens performance comes from software. A 25x zoom simply shouldn't be this good,especially given how little distortion there is at the extremes.
     
  18. odd jim

    odd jim Flimsiest Lambresta

    Messages:
    9,220
    Name:
    Jim
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    There will be a lot of software correction. I've seen files from my RX100 in their native form and there's lots of barrel distortion at the wide end, which you don't get a whiff of even when shooting raw!
     
    Last edited: May 17, 2016
  19. paul.w

    paul.w

    Messages:
    287
    Name:
    paul
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    has any one had a look at the 4k output yet? even down sampled to 1080hd it should be impressive, if the stats are to be believed.
    im still waiting for the next batch to arrive in stores :-(
     
  20. Snapsh0t

    Snapsh0t

    Messages:
    1,598
    Name:
    Jonathan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Not me but there are at least a couple in the Sony Cyber-shot forum on DPR.
     
    dibbly dobbler likes this.
  21. dibbly dobbler

    dibbly dobbler

    Messages:
    1,344
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Jonathan - have you been able to open the RAW files? I have downloaded ACR 9.5.1 but Photoshop (Elements 14) won't pull it in - argh!:mad:

    Any suggestions please?
     
  22. Snapsh0t

    Snapsh0t

    Messages:
    1,598
    Name:
    Jonathan
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I've not tried as I don't normally take RAW.

    <A few minutes later>
    I've just taken a sample RAW+JPG shot then installed the 9.5.1 stand-alone DNG convertor and, once I'd found my round the UI, converted the shot. It then opened successfully with ACR 7.4 in PSE11.
    Because I don't normally use RAW, I haven't bothered upgrading PSE but the stand-alone convertor does seem to remove the need.
     
    dibbly dobbler likes this.
  23. dibbly dobbler

    dibbly dobbler

    Messages:
    1,344
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Thanks Jonathan - I'll have another go tonight :)
     
  24. dibbly dobbler

    dibbly dobbler

    Messages:
    1,344
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Eventually got PSE updated with ACR 9.5.1 - what a faff! Anyway - finally... here's a shot :)

    Handheld at 600mm and quite a big crop - looks decent...

    [​IMG]
    Sony RX10iii Test Shot 1
    by Mike Smith, on Flickr
     
  25. dibbly dobbler

    dibbly dobbler

    Messages:
    1,344
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
  26. lostsoulal2

    lostsoulal2

    Messages:
    1,601
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    The moon shot is quite impressive for a handheld shot:), but have I missed something on the second test shot? - it appears to be 5 separate images stitched together, and I can see distinct dark and light shading bands separated vertically. I noticed the little smiley, so guess it may be deliberate, but the relevance was lost on me? (did wonder if it was my PC which had been playing up earlier tonight)
     
  27. stevelmx5

    stevelmx5

    Messages:
    7,456
    Name:
    Steve
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Looks more like one image that's been recovered by different amounts showing the dynamic range, hence the smiley?
     
  28. dibbly dobbler

    dibbly dobbler

    Messages:
    1,344
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Ah sorry - should have explained.... I overlayed the recovered shot on top of the original and removed bands to try and allow the two to be compared :)

    In hindsight I should have added labels but it was late and the old brain was not functioning too well!
     
  29. dibbly dobbler

    dibbly dobbler

    Messages:
    1,344
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
  30. dibbly dobbler

    dibbly dobbler

    Messages:
    1,344
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
  31. badlywornroy

    badlywornroy I am not macho

    Messages:
    1,327
    Name:
    Roy
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I would be interested to know how the zoom range affects the available aperture, anyone help ?

    Thanks
     
  32. dibbly dobbler

    dibbly dobbler

    Messages:
    1,344
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    At 24mm effective you're at f2.4 then steadily up to f4 by the time you hit 100mm effective then f4 all the way to 600mm effective :)
     
  33. badlywornroy

    badlywornroy I am not macho

    Messages:
    1,327
    Name:
    Roy
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Thanks for that. I have a Panny FZ1000 25-400mm and I am very impressed with it.

    I thought has crossed my mind would I prefer the RX10 mk3 ?

    Bit disappointing the Sony gets to f4 at 100mm, the FZ1000 reaches f4 at 175mm ?
     
  34. dibbly dobbler

    dibbly dobbler

    Messages:
    1,344
    Name:
    Mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I don't think that makes much difference in practice Roy but if that's important to you then maybe you'd be better off sticking with the FZ1000 :)
     
  35. paul.w

    paul.w

    Messages:
    287
    Name:
    paul
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Yes the Sony gets to f4 at around 100 mm so I guess all the people who spend their lives taking pictures of black cats in coal houses at midnight from half a mile away would be better off with the fz1000.
     
  36. odd jim

    odd jim Flimsiest Lambresta

    Messages:
    9,220
    Name:
    Jim
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    ...or people who might shoot general photos in less than ideal light.

    Though the difference between f/2.4 and f/4 might be nullified anyway with the Sony's better sensor, ignoring DOF.
     
    Last edited: May 30, 2016
  37. paul.w

    paul.w

    Messages:
    287
    Name:
    paul
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Hi Jim, I get a bit fed up of people going on about differences in low light performance, The fact is there is virtually no difference whatsoever, So why don't we just get on with taking pictures?
    Professionals don't worry about ISO performance, they just sell their pictures, job done......... Period
    Only amutures worry about specs! It's all b.s.
    After 25 years in the wedding industry I get tired of the same old arguments day after day. I started off with a tlr camera and 400 ISO maximum film, so low light discussions is of no interest to me anymore, I leave that to people who don't take photography seriously.
    Modern cameras, and modern sensors are far more capable than the people who operate them, the sooner we all realise that the better.
    Here's a thought, ...... If the pictures you take aren't good enough, Is it your cameras fault, or yours ?
     
    justa1972 and gatecrasher3 like this.
  38. odd jim

    odd jim Flimsiest Lambresta

    Messages:
    9,220
    Name:
    Jim
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I agree to a degree, but for some people it would be important, and although it might not make a significant difference, it will make some difference. I shoot a fair bit in low light, and for me having that difference is important (OK, we are talking a significantly better low light performer though).

    A basic example is when I'm away, I always take my 35mm f/2 for the evening / night stuff :)

    I think some of the issue is we've been spoilt, and even cameras made nearly 10 years ago are still very capable (which is why I still own them!).
     
    Last edited: May 30, 2016
  39. mikew

    mikew

    Messages:
    2,085
    Name:
    mike
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Have you tried any action captures
     
  40. wellyboot

    wellyboot

    Messages:
    956
    Name:
    Marcia
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Love the Rhododendron image with the orange against the blue of the sky Mike! And the chick images are both as sharp as can be! Lovely accurate colours too on the birds. I must say I'm really impressed. Keep the images coming please!!
     
    dibbly dobbler likes this.

Share This Page