p.28 #1 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
gocolts wrote:
The comments about questioning the lens mirrors a recent thought I had...if you want $5k for this camera, a few things I think would go a long way to better justifying that price. Many have already been mentioned in this thread regarding IBIS, EVF, etc. But I think another selling point would have been a "v2" of the lens, which would have justified a price increase as we're not just talking about a camera body here. In 10 years are you telling me the lens is so good it couldn't be made better?
As far as form-factor compared to the A7c line, I had an RX1RII. Loved the small size and the images it made. Issue was I wanted some flexibility in focal length, and for me, how I carry the A7cR isn't different than how I carried the RX1RII. Even though when set next to each other sure the RX1RII was smaller and looked nicer. For those that have a use-case where only something the size of the RX1 line fits how you need it to, then this camera gets more compelling. ...Show more →
I'm sure it could be made "better" but to a certain extent, "better" is subjective. What if it were sharper at the expense of some aspect of the rendering? To me, that wouldn't be better. Better might have involved other tradeoffs, including size, and my guess is that given how well-loved this lens is, and the desire to keep the camera as small as possible, Sony decided to leave it.
I'd personally take this lens on every camera I own for the rest of eternity, I like it that much. No need for an update for me.
p.28 #2 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
gocolts wrote:
The comments about questioning the lens mirrors a recent thought I had...if you want $5k for this camera, a few things I think would go a long way to better justifying that price. Many have already been mentioned in this thread regarding IBIS, EVF, etc. But I think another selling point would have been a "v2" of the lens, which would have justified a price increase as we're not just talking about a camera body here. In 10 years are you telling me the lens is so good it couldn't be made better?
As far as form-factor compared to the A7c line, I had an RX1RII. Loved the small size and the images it made. Issue was I wanted some flexibility in focal length, and for me, how I carry the A7cR isn't different than how I carried the RX1RII. Even though when set next to each other sure the RX1RII was smaller and looked nicer. For those that have a use-case where only something the size of the RX1 line fits how you need it to, then this camera gets more compelling. ...Show more →
yeah, i would lose all interest in the camera if they “upgraded” the lens. i just don’t like most of sony’s new fast lenses, it is extremely unlikely i would prefer any new improved lens design.
p.28 #3 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
weezintrumpete wrote:
I'm sure it could be made "better" but to a certain extent, "better" is subjective. What if it were sharper at the expense of some aspect of the rendering? To me, that wouldn't be better. Better might have involved other tradeoffs, including size, and my guess is that given how well-loved this lens is, and the desire to keep the camera as small as possible, Sony decided to leave it.
I'd personally take this lens on every camera I own for the rest of eternity, I like it that much. No need for an update for me.
Yes, the decision not to change the lens is, I think, one of the least controversial aspects of the new RIII. Sony has a number of very, very sharp modern, high contrast lenses. Apart from the 24GM, I can't think of another Sony that is as muted, contrast wise, as the Sonnar. And the bokeh on the Sonnar is superb, very tough to unsettle. If memory serves, there was some green fringing in extreme cases, but otherwise it is a beautifully behaved lens for people/environmental portraiture.
The AF in the OG version I had was what drove me nuts - a near perfect candid camera, but without the AF to deliver on the promise. The RIII will clearly be up to modern spec with AF.
p.28 #4 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
The lens rendering is special for sure and I'm glad the optics haven't changed. However I wish they upgraded the AF motors. I'm curious if the lens can keep up with the improved AF algorithm so will have to wait for reviews to see. I'm also disappointed that the mk3 isn't fully weather sealed. With the mk2 I thought it was because of the popup EVF that it was not possible but now that it's no longer a popup, I wonder if the lens is the culprit.
p.28 #5 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
If you shoot M or S RAW, then the resulting MP count with the crop mode will be significantly smaller.
That was true of the earlier cameras. I'm currently running the A1 at Medium 21 MP size and the APS-C in-camera crops are also 21 MP. I'm interested to see if this carries across to the new RX1.
p.28 #6 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
kenthomson wrote:
That was true of the earlier cameras. I'm currently running the A1 at Medium 21 MP size and the APS-C in-camera crops are also 21 MP. I'm interested to see if this carries across to the new RX1.
The a1 ignores your RAW setting if you shoot in crop mode and switches back to full-size RAW.
p.28 #7 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
weezintrumpete wrote:
I'm sure it could be made "better" but to a certain extent, "better" is subjective. What if it were sharper at the expense of some aspect of the rendering? To me, that wouldn't be better. Better might have involved other tradeoffs, including size, and my guess is that given how well-loved this lens is, and the desire to keep the camera as small as possible, Sony decided to leave it.
I'd personally take this lens on every camera I own for the rest of eternity, I like it that much. No need for an update for me.
I agree that it wouldn't be better if rendering was sacrificed. I just know Sony has updated some other lenses that many were happy with, yet came out with a one that was improved & more compact. And yes, maybe tradeoffs would have existed so they left it alone, don't know.
p.28 #8 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Lukacs wrote:
Sure I can find tons of photos made with RX1RII, but I'm interested in comparison. In DPR Studio test scene even X100VI has more detail than RX1RII, and RX1R. Let alone Leica Q3, Q43, and GFX100RF. I downloaded full size images and I'm not convinced about this lens up to date standards performance. It was good lens 10 years ago sure.
i was interested in the 40/2.5 as small AF lens (i shoot all manual focus except for the rx1), but a quick browse of shots with it was plenty to convince me I would not be happy with it's rendering.
p.28 #9 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
jmcy wrote:
However I wish they upgraded the AF motors. I'm curious if the lens can keep up with the improved AF algorithm so will have to wait for reviews to see.
I think that's the biggest open question re: the AF at the moment. AF can only be as fast as the motors can move the lens elements. That's one of the reasons why I sold my X100VI after a week, so I'm very curious to hear whether the RX1R III lens suffers from the same problem (slow motors).
If anyone has any information about the motors, please do share.
p.28 #10 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
photonoclast wrote:
The reason for getting the sonnar is the "rounded" quality it gives for mid-range subjects, especially environmental portraits.
I came to conclude that THE use case for the rx1 is travel environmental portraiture in decent light.
I think it would be very hard to do better than an rx1 for that purpose. (If that was my primary use I wouldn't hesitate; since I generally take a wider variety of images while traveling, other lens/camera combos win out for me.)
This a million times. I think what people get wrong (so to speak) when they rave about the RX1 is that IMO it's not "the ultimate travel camera." It is, however, the ultimate travel portraiture camera.
As has been pointed out repeatedly, it's not really "pocketable" in a way that gives it a massive advantage over e.g. an A7RC and nice small prime. If I was looking for the ultimate travel camera to document the places I was seeing with a high priority on IQ, and even if space was at a premium, I'd go with the ILC option every time. But if I was more concerned with capturing people while traveling, then the RX1 would be my preference, hands-down.
A few years back I went with family to Busch Gardens in Tampa during their Christmas lights celebration. This was the ideal use case for the RX1RII, especially as the photographer uncle for five kids. Firstly, it was a situation where every millimeter and gram actually mattered. I managed to stuff the camera and the F20M flash into a tiny LowePro bag that could fit on a belt. That meant I could keep it secure and on my body when on a roller coaster, so I didn't have to leave it in the public storage bins. Anything even slightly larger would have been too big. But most importantly, it rendered the most absolutely sublime portraits under the diffused glow of the millions of Christmas lights.
The kids are all older these days and I take less photos of them, or if I do it's usually in a more flexible environment where I'd want multiple lenses. And I've rarely found myself in any position where camera weight and size were of the utmost importance. As a result, I have barely used the RX1 in the last few years. But it's the one piece of equipment I just can't bring myself to sell.
p.28 #11 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Tony Northrup first impressions:
Says the AF is really great. Also says that the rear screen goes black when turned vertical with polarized sunglasses on. That's a MAJOR bummer for me. The RX1RII doesn't do that.
p.28 #12 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
The RX1R III kind of reminds of the new 4Runner. Deeply passionate fanbase that waited forever for a technology upgrade only to be disappointed by other compromises and significant price increase.
I'd agree that it's great for travel portraiture. The original could handle that. For street and travel I'd prefer IBIS and a tilting screen.
p.28 #13 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
VetraLens wrote:
This a million times. I think what people get wrong (so to speak) when they rave about the RX1 is that IMO it's not "the ultimate travel camera." It is, however, the ultimate travel portraiture camera.
As has been pointed out repeatedly, it's not really "pocketable" in a way that gives it a massive advantage over e.g. an A7RC and nice small prime. If I was looking for the ultimate travel camera to document the places I was seeing with a high priority on IQ, and even if space was at a premium, I'd go with the ILC option every time. But if I was more concerned with capturing people while traveling, then the RX1 would be my preference, hands-down. ...Show more →
if i was constrained to a single lens on an ILC i would still choose the rx1 for landscape/documentary over the a7cr with any 35mm lens (and 35mm would be length i'd choose if i could only have one), but yeah having a ~21mm and ~85mm along would be better. i have done this a few times traveling with my g21, g90, and zm 35/1.4 (or other 35) and the result is that i take fewer 35mm shots and am less happy with the results. i've been happier with just taking the rx1 as my 35mm and bringing the a7cii with two other lenses if there is room. i think the zm 35 is better for a certain type of high impact landscape shot, but the rx1 is better for a wide range of documentary types and often preferable even for landscapes.
p.28 #14 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
It’s mostly the price for me. I’m an RX1 diehard for the past 11 years, and if this one was even $4k, I would have preordered it. At $5k (plus $500 tax), I think I’ll wait until they hit the used market and at least save on the tax. Too bad, I’d really like one, although I continue to use my RX1 and M2 almost everyday.
stuuke wrote:
The RX1R III kind of reminds of the new 4Runner. Deeply passionate fanbase that waited forever for a technology upgrade only to be disappointed by other compromises and significant price increase.
I'd agree that it's great for travel portraiture. The original could handle that. For street and travel I'd prefer IBIS and a tilting screen.
p.28 #15 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
weezintrumpete wrote:
It’s mostly the price for me. I’m an RX1 diehard for the past 11 years, and if this one was even $4k, I would have preordered it. At $5k (plus $500 tax), I think I’ll wait until they hit the used market and at least save on the tax. Too bad, I’d really like one, although I continue to use my RX1 and M2 almost everyday.
I can definitely see buying one down the road at used prices. I got some great images out of the original but wouldn't call it a completely pleasurable experience.
p.28 #17 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Yikes, looks like prices outside of the US for the RX1R III appear to match the MSRP in US.
If the price increase in the US are indeed due to tariffs, I would have expected prices elsewhere to be lower, not on par. I guess this is a prime example of how tariffs create a new anchor price from which prices in other countries are calculated from. Instead of keeping the consequences of tariffs limited to US consumers, companies are dialing back the pain by distributing the tariff burden to other buyers around the world.
In the end, everyone else is helping subsidize US tariffs, and companies are taking advantage of the tariff to increase their prices beyond what is necessary. Yay corporations ><
Great thread. Have not seen it before.
Interesting, I suppose I should not be surprised any lens was my pick consistently.
Sigma i35 and RX1 were clear winners for me though.
Also, I should buy a GM 24!
p.28 #19 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
macadphotos wrote:
Yikes, looks like prices outside of the US for the RX1R III appear to match the MSRP in US.
If the price increase in the US are indeed due to tariffs, I would have expected prices elsewhere to be lower, not on par. I guess this is a prime example of how tariffs create a new anchor price from which prices in other countries are calculated from. Instead of keeping the consequences of tariffs limited to US consumers, companies are dialing back the pain by distributing the tariff burden to other buyers around the world.
In the end, everyone else is helping subsidize US tariffs, and companies are taking advantage of the tariff to increase their prices beyond what is necessary. Yay corporations ><
Tax (10% GST) is included in Australian prices.
So US customers who cannot avoid Tax are paying more than Australians for RX1RIII.
US customers who can avoid Tax are paying a lot more for the 400-800.
If RX1RIII follows the usual Sony price trend in Australia, it will soon be AU$7499.
p.28 #20 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
freaklikeme wrote:
The a1 ignores your RAW setting if you shoot in crop mode and switches back to full-size RAW.
Yes, that's right if you shoot in an aspect ratio other than 3:2, the full RAW is available later in Lightroom. Useful for refining the framing or changing the aspect ratio later.
If you shoot Medium or Small Raw files, both full frame and APS-C crop files are the same pixel dimensions.
RAW Large, Lossless Comp 62.8MB 8640x5760 pixels, 49.76 megapixels
RAW Large, Lossless Comp with APS-C crop 30.9MB, 5616x3714 pixels, 20.85 megapixels
Raw Medium, Lossless Comp 38.4MB, 5616x3714 pixels, 20.85 megapixels
Raw Medium, Lossless Comp with APS-C crop 31MB, 5616x3714, 20.85 megapixels
Very handy free 1.5 zoom if you are happy to shoot at 21 Megapixels!
