p.18 #1 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
rhawidantas wrote:
Size comparison:
The new RX1 really is very small, almost just a lens with short wings on it. The body is VERY thin, though the lens of course is not.
I am a big fan of small camera bodies. I dislike the current bodies of the A7RV, A1, A1 II, and the A9III because they are too large.
But what are the actual advantages of having a body that is this tiny, over one the size of an A7Cxx?
I would assume most of the advantage goes to carrying the camera rather than handling and using it? I like how the A7Cxx bodies fit in the hand and handle while shooing. Would the new RX1 body be too small to handle comfortably? What is the advantage of getting this small? What is the actual use case and what are the concrete advantages for the photographer?
p.18 #2 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
I suspect some people would buy it due to the lens alone, it has a pretty big cult following. I know in the past, there has been a quest for some to find a lens that renders like it, that can be mounted on a Sony ILC.
p.18 #4 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
tsdevine wrote:
I suspect some people would buy it due to the lens alone, it has a pretty big cult following. I know in the past, there has been a quest for some to find a lens that renders like it, that can be mounted on a Sony ILC.
I agree about the lens, and I think the lens gets some of it rendering advantages from being so close to the sensor and having a leaf shutter. But what significant advantages-in-use would be lost by putting it on a slightly larger body? It seems almost like a demonstration project.
p.18 #5 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
InFocus2014 wrote:
Engineering: How about $300 for the thumb grip and $200 for the lens hood?
Marketing: In six months, the Chinese will release exact replicas for $60 and $40. We might as well make some fat initial profits while we can. Besides, buyers will not realize how much they need these items until after they have made the initial camera purchase, which we think is a clever way to get $5600 for the camera.
p.18 #6 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
If this is the same sensor as the A7RIV or A7CR, then it's a pass from me.
I'm not much of a color shooter, but I never liked the color files from either of those cameras.
Getting the A7RV for color work was a (very positive) game-changer and reassured me that Sony could make good color sensors.
I could live with the other features, or lack thereof, but that A7CR sensor is not to my taste.
p.18 #7 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
chiron wrote:
The new RX1 really is very small, almost just a lens with short wings on it. The body is VERY thin, though the lens of course is not.
I am a big fan of small camera bodies. I dislike the current bodies of the A7RV, A1, A1 II, and the A9III because they are too large.
But what are the actual advantages of having a body that is this tiny, over one the size of an A7Cxx?
I would assume most of the advantage goes to carrying the camera rather than handling and using it? I like how the A7Cxx bodies fit in the hand and handle while shooing. Would the new RX1 body be too small to handle comfortably? What is the advantage of getting this small? What is the actual use case and what are the concrete advantages for the photographer?...Show more →
The biggest advantage beyond size (and irrespective of size) is the lens as there is simply no other full frame, interchangeable 35mm lens that can give the same look as the Sonnar on the RX1. This is due to the design and positioning of the lens so close to the sensor which is not possible to recreate with an interchangeable lens. This can give the output more of a larger format look imo.
p.18 #8 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Tariq Gibran wrote:
The biggest advantage beyond size (and irrespective of size) is the lens as there is simply no other full frame, interchangeable 35mm lens that can give the same look as the Sonnar on the RX1. This is due to the design and positioning of the lens so close to the sensor which is not possible to recreate with an interchangeable lens. This can give the output more of a larger format look imo.
Yes, I get it about the lens, but why not put it on a slightly larger body?
p.18 #9 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
chiron wrote:
Yes, I get it about the lens, but why not put it on a slightly larger body?
There is no physical reason of course but for Sony, the RX1 (when originally released in 2012!) was a show of their innovation prowess in a very small package - what Sony used to be traditionally known for.
p.18 #10 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
ATPphoto wrote:
If this is the same sensor as the A7RIV or A7CR, then it's a pass from me.
I'm not much of a color shooter, but I never liked the color files from either of those cameras.
Getting the A7RV for color work was a (very positive) game-changer and reassured me that Sony could make good color sensors.
I could live with the other features, or lack thereof, but that A7CR sensor is not to my taste.
Doesn’t the A7cr have the same sensor as the a7r5?
p.18 #11 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
What percentage more people would buy it if it had a slightly larger body? What is slightly larger? Is there a correct size for this camera? Would some consider a slightly larger camera too large vs the current size being too small for some people.
Whew...these are tough questions. You can't make 100% of the people happy 100% of the time.
p.18 #12 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
No IBIS was the reason I sold my RX1Rii, and while I was going they might sneak it in, I can understand why they left it out - the ethos of the camera obviously prioritizes a small size. It’ll be nice to use higher ISOs with an updated sensor though.
I do think a non tilting screen is pushing that ethos too far, but I don’t know how much size it would have added. Interesting angles for demanding photographers seems reasonable.
Video is getting more important these days and I would’ve preferred the 33mp sensor if that meant 4k60 and 1080p120, but megapickles are important for marketing.
Maybe I’m relieved that the f4 lens of the x100RF, no IBIS for the RX1Riii, and APO lens of the Q3 43 means I can keep hanging into my A7Cii and Sigma 45 for nice bokeh, slow shutter speeds, and flexibility. I’m in London right now for my first big trip with the Sigma, and the 45i is perfect for portraits, street photos, and panos for wide shots that I hope will turn out well. I even snuck in a 24 GM for a few shots in the morning on my own before everyone woke up.
p.18 #13 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
chiron wrote:
Yes, I get it about the lens, but why not put it on a slightly larger body?
There are so many larger cameras out there…I like Sony pushing the smaller camera end. The A7cr and now the rx1r3 are great releases for those that want more compact cameras. The Nikon D8 and Z9 are the opposite end with a lot of cameras in between.
p.18 #14 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
When I read the headline that a new Sony RX was released I shortly thought to myself: Oh, oh, I just bought the Leica Q43. Now I know: (very) good decision. Stunning image quality.
Which doesn't mean that people will not have fun with the new Sony.
p.18 #16 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
chez wrote:
There are so many larger cameras out there…I like Sony pushing the smaller camera end. The A7cr and now the rx1r3 are great releases for those that want more compact cameras. The Nikon D8 and Z9 are the opposite end with a lot of cameras in between.
Yes, I prefer small bodies also, and I like the A7Cxx bodies a lot. However, the new RX1 seems to me to be a bit extreme in its smallness. The extra-smallness does not confer much of an advantage, only a slight advantage in carrying over the A7Cxx bodies. But the extra-small size did compromise some important functionality for no obvious gain. The extra-small size may even make the camera hard to handle, like some of Sony's slippery sub-APS-C bodies.
p.18 #17 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
chiron wrote:
Yes, I prefer small bodies also, and I like the A7Cxx bodies a lot. However, the new RX1 seems to me to be a bit extreme in its smallness. The extra-smallness does not confer much of an advantage, only a slight advantage in carrying over the A7Cxx bodies. But the extra-small size did compromise some important functionality for no obvious gain. The extra-small size may even make the camera hard to handle, like some of Sony's slippery sub-FF bodies.
When first announced, I thought of you and for sure this would be your next camera.
p.18 #18 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Here's what Dpreview's Richard Butler speculates regarding the missing IBIS:
"The RX1R III uses the same Zeiss-branded lens as the 2012 version and, in the name of size, illuminates the sensor and very little beyond it: it would need to project a larger image circle to allow sensor-shift IS (making both the lens and body bigger), or would need a complete redesign to have optical stabilization incorporated into the lens itself."
If correct, I can see why both alternative ways would have been a no-go for Sony: they would had to redesign the whole Sonnar 2/35 lens, and it wouldn't be the same, and we don't know what's the current situation with the Sony-Zeiss relationship. 12 years is a long time and a matter of 'readjusting the Sonnar' might be practically impossible, who knows..
p.18 #20 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
I’ve never used any cameras from the RX1 family but curious how the lens from the previous generation that is at least 10 years old performs with the higher 61 Mpixel sensor? Does it loose any sharpness? I know Fuji had some concerns about their older lenses, designed for the 26 Mpixel sensor performed with their newest 40 Mpixel APS-C sensor used in the XV100VI and X-T5.
Will that be something that someone can test and compare?
Stunning image quality.