p.41 #1 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
architekt wrote:
From what I hear many people think the best 35mm modern design is Leica APO-Summicron-SL 35 f/2 ASPH (although it weight 750g, 1.5x weight of the whole RX1RIII)
APO-Summicron-M 35 f/2 ASPH is also rather astonishing.
don't know about the SL version (i've just ignored it because it is giant and so are the only cameras it works with). i was excited by the m 35 AA, but but i am not at all fond of it's rendering (same for the cv 35 apo and q43 lens), it's a fantastic lens but very representative of the tradeoffs i dislike about modern lenses. i'll note that those lenses cost more than the rx1riii without a camera.
surprisingly, i really like what i've seen from the cv 28/2 apo. i'll be tempted to try that out with my a7cii while i wait for rx1riiis to drop in price.
p.41 #2 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
sebboh wrote:
don't know about the SL version (i've just ignored it because it is giant and so are the only cameras it works with). i was excited by the m 35 AA, but but i am not at all fond of it's rendering (same for the cv 35 apo and q43 lens), it's a fantastic lens but very representative of the tradeoffs i dislike about modern lenses. i'll note that those lenses cost more than the rx1riii without a camera.
surprisingly, i really like what i've seen from the cv 28/2 apo. i'll be tempted to try that out with my a7cii while i wait for rx1riiis to drop in price....Show more →
I am curious though, why not the cv 35/2 APO which is close to the focal length of the RX1 series, and is available in the native E mount?
p.41 #3 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
james2441139 wrote:
I am curious though, why not the cv 35/2 APO which is close to the focal length of the RX1 series, and is available in the native E mount?
i really don't like it's oof rendering. also, native e-mount is a negative for me – i mostly shoot lenses that do better with a thin filter.
p.41 #4 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
chez wrote:
Or maybe the lens is legendary as is and Sony wanted to keep the legend alive. Over the years all everyone heard was huge praise for the character in the images from this lens. If it ain’t broken, don’t try and fix it.
---------------------------------------------
h00ligan wrote:
I’ve been waiting for this camera for at least ten years, as an owner of the rx1 OG.
unfortunately their choice to remove the tilt screen probably kills it for me. Certainly coupled with Sony’s history of post sales support for this line and the cost creates a huge pause and alternate brand consideration.
I’m not worried about the lens keepingup. I do think the evf quality is not good enough.
I’m tall, getting older, multiple neck surgeries. Tilting screen in 2025 doesn’t seem options, and afaik I couldn’t even slap on the add on evf from the OG to try and fill the gap.
Instead it looks like I’ll have to pinch more pennies and consider the q3 43
Oh, the lack of weather sealing and my current residence in London, another let down.
They just seem to have kind of phoned this in
FWIW I’ve been trying the x100vi for months now and still don’t get anything I love out of it. And I look at the vast majority of my favourite shots and they’re from either the rx1 or tamron 28-200/a7iv...Show more →
---------------------------------------------
h00ligan wrote:
I hasn’t realised there’s a mechanical shutter in the new rx1riii. Am I reading that correctly? If so, another bummer.
So the mechanical shutter is the deal breaker? 😂 🤦🏽♂️
p.41 #5 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Pretty sure it's still a mechanical central shutter, not a focal plane shutter.
For those wanting a more modern lens, the ZX1 is still available new at Ace for only $900 more. That distagon is a higher overall performer compared to the sonnar.
p.41 #6 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Now that most of the major YouTubers have shared their reviews, what are your thoughts on the camera? Has it changed your opinion, positively or negatively?
For me, the two biggest surprises were the autofocus performance being held back by the lens (though still far ahead of the competition) and the disappointing battery life. Neither is a deal breaker, but they do add to the list of compromises.
Coming from Sony’s AF system, it’s hard to consider other fixed-lens options. If not for that, I’d probably lean toward the Leica Q3 or the Ricoh (more practical).
p.41 #7 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
In real-life situations, I don’t think you’ll ever encounter the AF limitation at all — whether it’s kids running around or birds in flight.
As for the battery life, it is indeed disappointing. Compared to my Q3 43, it’s probably only half the capacity, since I rarely needed to use my spare battery with the Leica.
On a positive note, I ordered another four SmallRig batteries for the Sony, and it’s still 70% cheaper than one Leica battery.
p.41 #8 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Get a battery charger, too. The camera doesn't come with one. I bought a charger and one extra battery just so I could be up and running with it right out of the box and not have to wait for the battery to charge in-camera. Will get a couple more batteries when I'm certain I will keep the camera. I'm hoping to receive it Saturday.
hncc.photo wrote:
...
As for the battery life, it is indeed disappointing. Compared to my Q3 43, it’s probably only half the capacity, since I rarely needed to use my spare battery with the Leica.
On a positive note, I ordered another four SmallRig batteries for the Sony, and it’s still 70% cheaper than one Leica battery.
p.41 #12 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
hncc.photo wrote:
In real-life situations, I don’t think you’ll ever encounter the AF limitation at all — whether it’s kids running around or birds in flight.
As for the battery life, it is indeed disappointing. Compared to my Q3 43, it’s probably only half the capacity, since I rarely needed to use my spare battery with the Leica.
On a positive note, I ordered another four SmallRig batteries for the Sony, and it’s still 70% cheaper than one Leica battery.
I've seen three people now mention that the eye-AF in real life can be hit or miss – eyelash focus instead of the iris or just missing altogether, especially in backlighting. The lens is just too slow.
Can't remember the first mention of the eye-AF, but here are two of them below. I usually use a fixed lens camera like this in single point and don't rely on eye-AF, but it should be one of the reasons to choose Sony here over the other options, but it doesn't seem to be.
p.41 #14 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
That wasn't a review, it was a mugging. Yikes! I'm going to test the camera very carefully once I have it in hand. If I find it lacking, back to Sony it goes.
EDIT: cancelled my pre-order. It's just too risky. When the majority of hands-on reviews describe the AF as mediocre (they use more polite language) I have to pass for now. Will wait for reports from forum members.
p.41 #16 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
Sharif Abdou wrote:
That wasn't a review, it was a mugging. Yikes! I'm going to test the camera very carefully once I have it in hand. If I find it lacking, back to Sony it goes.
EDIT: cancelled my pre-order. It's just too risky. When the majority of hands-on reviews describe the AF as mediocre (they use more polite language) I have to pass for now. Will wait for reports from forum members.
yeah, the big improvement here is theoretically the AF, if that isn't there than why get this over the rx1r2? it doesn't sound like the viewfinder is much better and 61mp vs 42mp is not terribly exciting.
this guy says the camera still wouldn't be a great deal if it cost the same thing as the a7cr though, which is pretty ridiculous. apparently he thinks a great 35/2 lens and miniaturization should be free.
p.41 #17 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
As a former RX1RII owner I was hoping my pessimism about this camera would go away after some hands-on reviews, unfortunately that hasn't been the case so far. People questioned me on why I'd consider updating what many consider to be an incredible lens...but the video above proves my point. It's still 10 years old, and sure keep the optical formula as-is if you want, I know I loved the results the RX1RII gave me, but focusing motors have improved a lot the last decade.
p.41 #18 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
highdesertmesa wrote:
I've seen three people now mention that the eye-AF in real life can be hit or miss – eyelash focus instead of the iris or just missing altogether, especially in backlighting. The lens is just too slow.
Can't remember the first mention of the eye-AF, but here are two of them below. I usually use a fixed lens camera like this in single point and don't rely on eye-AF, but it should be one of the reasons to choose Sony here over the other options, but it doesn't seem to be.
lol at Julia's "dream" point and shoot...just literally change everything!
you can hear how every reviewer is choosing words VERY carefully to preserve their Sony relationship.
p.41 #20 · Official: Sony RX1R III Digital Camera announced!
As expected, AF speed appears to be a point of concern, though it's worth noting that no reviewer has called it anywhere near as sluggish as the Leica Q3. The real question is how much the RX1R III’s Eye-AF lags behind that of the A7R V or A7CR, likely only noticeable in more demanding situations.
Fuji X100VI or Ricoh GR III seem like a good contender for the purpose, both have quicker AF than the Q3 while being more pocketable as well.... I can't imagine the RX1RIII AF is just as good as these two compacts.
I’ll admit I’m coming at this with less background, having no prior experience with the Sonnar 35/2. Reviewers who are more familiar with fixed-lens compacts or the Q3 seem to genuinely enjoy the Sony without nitpicking too much. In contrast, some of the bigger YTs or mirrorless-focused creators seem caught between trying to appear transparent, staying aligned with popular sentiment, while also preserving their relationship with Sony. From the sample images on DPReview, the lens looks solid to me, and Eye-AF performance seems quite respectable.
Still, nothing beats real-world use. I’ll need some proper hands-on time to judge whether the AF holds up, especially since my kids have an uncanny ability to expose the limits of any AF system 😄. For about the same price, I can get the A9III to satisfy both strobe use and AF speed. It is just a different camera, just like settling with the A7CR or A7RV.
