p.36 #1 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
The RX1 has never excelled at test charts as its not about shooting flat scenes. It truely is magic for normal 3D scenes and has rendering second to none. All the haters of the lens probably have never used one.
p.36 #2 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
hncc.photo wrote:
I’ve had this camera since Tuesday. It’s amazingly small and light, and the autofocus is exceptionally good compared to other cameras in this category (though I haven’t had a chance to try the Fuji RF yet). What I can confirm is the terrible battery life, you’ll need 2 spare batteries to comfortably make it through a full day of shooting. Personally, it’s definitely a keeper for me. What I’m debating now is whether to keep the Q3 43 or not, since their rendering is so different
I'm leica-curious about the q3 43, can you share the difference in renderings between both? I have the RX1R II and love it.
p.36 #3 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
RoamingScott wrote:
Wow, the Q3 is starkly better. Weird, all I've been told for the last 10 years is how legendary this Zeiss is
The 35mm Zeiss Sonnar is legendary, but not necessarily for outright lens sharpness. In my experience there is a falloff wide open at the edges. The lens achieved its legendary status among photographers for its distinctive visual characteristics, particularly "3D pop" and rendering quality. I love this camera for portraits. I thought about buying the R II for years before making the jump. At its core, the lens's appeal stems from a unique combination of high micro-contrast, controlled optical aberrations, and smooth focus transitions from what is in focus and what is out of focus... that creates a dreamy rendering.
There is a reason why the first two generations of the RX1R have some strong advocates for this camera that "doesn't make sense" for most people, and why there is a thread on FM with over 350+ pages of photos from the RX1 RXR and RX1R II. That isn't even the first thread of it... that one is only from 2023.
p.36 #4 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Yeah, looking at test charts for this camera is really not what the camera and lens is all about. I know people really rely on those to assess objective performance, and sometimes that helps, but certain lenses are not about extreme sharpness, and are more about overall rendering.
That said, as I've said before, I shoot my RX1 / RX1RII wide open 95% of the time for everything, and I've never been left wanting for sharpness where it matters (not at the edges of the frame).
p.36 #5 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
35mmshooter wrote:
I'm leica-curious about the q3 43, can you share the difference in renderings between both? I have the RX1R II and love it.
I don't have them side by side but I've used pretty much all the large sensor point and shoot cameras at this point and I would say if you love technically perfect image quality with good rendering, the Q3 43mm APO has it. Very sharp, APO clarity, high contrast, excellent colors (vibrant but not over the top), and bokeh while not amazing is very good. This is basically one of the Leica SL APO lenses in a smaller package.
I sold my Q3 43mm APO to fund the GFX100RF and regretted it so picked up another one - it's that good. The only reason I'd pick a Sony RX1RIII over the Q3 43mm is if you want the smaller size at the expense of image quality however I found the RX1RII hard to hold. The bokeh on the RX1RII is nice (and better than the Q3 43mm APO IMO) but I think the optics overall on the Q3 43mm is superior and worth the price differential.
p.36 #6 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
The rendering on this lens, as seen in the thread below, is just gorgeous. It's enough to make me think about forgiving the lack of IBIS.
The absence of excessive sharpness is part of what makes the lens render so beautifully. One's eye does not get caught on all the jagged edges of an unnaturally sharp image, which is so unlike what our eyes naturally perceive when we look at a scene. The smoother, more transitional rendering of edges with this lens is what Zeiss has called the quality of "rounded sharpness".
p.36 #7 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Regarding battery life - is the poor battery life assuming that the camera is in AF-C and using subject detection? What if you used AF-S and center point AF? Would the bettery life be much better as it's not using the AI engine? I have no idea how that works, just curious. I'm generally an AF-S / center point shooting, but must admit that I'm using AF-C and face detect a lot more on my RX1RM2.
p.36 #9 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
35mmshooter wrote:
I'm leica-curious about the q3 43, can you share the difference in renderings between both? I have the RX1R II and love it.
What Tzhang wrote is spot on. The rendering of the APO lens is, for me, sometimes too harsh. The Sonnar, on the other hand, renders similarly to the 35 Steel Rim Reissue (albeit without the glow and sharper wide open, probably due to it being a f2 lens) which I really regret selling.
p.36 #10 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
weezintrumpete wrote:
Regarding battery life - is the poor battery life assuming that the camera is in AF-C and using subject detection? What if you used AF-S and center point AF? Would the bettery life be much better as it's not using the AI engine? I have no idea how that works, just curious. I'm generally an AF-S / center point shooting, but must admit that I'm using AF-C and face detect a lot more on my RX1RM2.
I’m not sure if switching it to AF-S and center-point only would significantly improve the battery life. Sony’s autofocus is one of the main reasons I got this little camera, so I’m going to make full use of its potential 😀
p.36 #12 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Canuck-Nick wrote:
I held it in my hand and played around for a few minutes at B&H last night. It’s a -delight- in hand. Super well balanced, everything falls where you’d want it, and it feels premium. Haptics, buttons, etc. and it’s a lot smaller than a Leica Q. That said, it’s simply too expensive for what it is. I like the Zeiss f2 a lot, but it doesn’t command the premium of, say, the auto focusing Leitz 28mm on the Q3 - which is a super desirable optic and entirely unavailable with autofocus by any other means. As much as I admire Sony’s work here - and I own an a7CR - the market perception amongst photographers is working against them at this price point. Lifestyle customers maybe don’t care, and hopefully it sells well enough to keep this line of super compact FF ideas alive. ...Show more →
It would be a shame if there won’t be an M4. I really hope Sony takes the criticism and designs a proper successor to the M2. Give us a GM-quality lens and weather sealing. Maybe a stacked sensor, and I’ll be interested even at $6-7k.
p.36 #13 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Well if Leica in the Q series can go from mechanical shutter to electronic automatically I would have thought Sony could implement this as well. Apart from being slightly smaller and cheaper the only possible advantage of this camera that I can see is the better AF. I have never tried the RX1ii but I would think that if eye detect AF works okay then maybe it is almost a better choice being cheaper and has a tilting screen, the same but pop up EVF etc. I think the Q3 (I have Q2 monochrom) is a far better option
p.36 #14 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
photomadnz wrote:
The RX1 has never excelled at test charts as its not about shooting flat scenes. It truely is magic for normal 3D scenes and has rendering second to none. All the haters of the lens probably have never used one.
This is nonsense, because there is no difference between test chart and "real world" in terms of sharpness and resolution. The bokeh, CA (where is also not shining this lens), LOCA, LACA, COMA, flare resistance you need other testing methods, scenes. Those preferences are also important aspects determinate the overall IQ. And of course the size and build quality.
For landscapes, cityscapes, cropping ability (digital zoom), all applications where resolution, detail are important this lens is not recommendable (you can get better performance for cheaper or lot better with GFX100RF). For family portraits, events, street photography the resolution is not so important, but background separation, rendering and AF is, where this lens has sufficient sharpness.
p.36 #15 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
I've been a professional photographer for 40 years.
I've been using cameras from Mamiya RZ67, Hasselblads 500's and 900's, Sinar paired with Schneider lenses, Contax RTSIII, Digital Canon's from 5D on till 5DmkIII, Nikon D800, Fujifilm X-T1, X-T2, X100V, and now Sony's A7IV and A7CR.
And I still have no clue what "character" and "3D pop" is, and how people can see and measure it.
Is it something absolute? you have it or you don't have it? Are there levels for it? maybe different types of characters (like my girlfriend's or my mother in law's?
So, in short, honestly, are you kidding me?
If you have to clue what photography is, please shut up, read and learn. But please do not try to teach someone cause you've just had a revealing conversation with a Leica man who told you that once you pay for an expensive item, you belong to a club where things can not be measured, but cryptically enjoyed.
p.36 #16 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Hahaha! Funny and true. I bought the Q3/43 and sold it because the shutter was just too damn quiet. The image quality was simply outstanding, but you can get this from others. I owned the rxii twice and sold it each time because of battery life. Well I missed it so much that I bought it again. That camera is simply so satisfying, a little work of art. The most fun camera Sony has ever made. The lens is more than adequate.
p.36 #17 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Not really.
I did some testing when I moved form A7III to A1 and the main change seems to be the camera simply consuming a lot more charge when just being on (framing through the evf, reviewing photos on the LCD, etc.). It's basically caused by the new cpu, which I think the new RX1R also got.
Now, AI AF increases the battery usage even more... weezintrumpete wrote:
Regarding battery life - is the poor battery life assuming that the camera is in AF-C and using subject detection? What if you used AF-S and center point AF? Would the bettery life be much better as it's not using the AI engine? I have no idea how that works, just curious. I'm generally an AF-S / center point shooting, but must admit that I'm using AF-C and face detect a lot more on my RX1RM2.
p.36 #20 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
I have the rx1rii and like it a lot. however eye AF is simply just to bad to work with in the way it is implemented in that model.
Viramati wrote:
Well if Leica in the Q series can go from mechanical shutter to electronic automatically I would have thought Sony could implement this as well. Apart from being slightly smaller and cheaper the only possible advantage of this camera that I can see is the better AF. I have never tried the RX1ii but I would think that if eye detect AF works okay then maybe it is almost a better choice being cheaper and has a tilting screen, the same but pop up EVF etc. I think the Q3 (I have Q2 monochrom) is a far better option
