InFocus2014
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.6 #1 · Any thoughts on Sony’s new RX1R III? | |
Steve Spencer wrote:
This thread has got me thinking about whether I want a camera to carry with me on a regular basis and if I do what sort of camera would I want. For me I would want a camera that could handle a lot of different shots that I would like to take so that got me thinking about what I would like in such a camera. Here are the major features I would like:
1) a large sensor -- Why? If I am going to have a camera with a fixed lens I want to be able to crop so that I get a range of field of views. You can obviously crop more with a big sensor than a small sensor. On one extreme you can imagine an m4/3rds sensor and for me I probably don't want to crop that any more than a 1.3X crop. That means if I had a 17mm lens I could crop it to 22mm for a FF equivalent of 34 to 44, so not much range. If I keep that same size as the smallest size I am willing to crop to with APS-C that takes a 23mm lens and let you crop it to 38mm for a full frame equivalent of 35 to 58mm. A FF sensor with that same size as the smallest to which I would crop I get a 35mm to 85mm field of view. And if I used a 44 X 33 sensor and a 45mm lens and cropped to that same smallest size I would get the perspective of a 150mm lens for a full frame equivalent of 35 to 120mm. So if you keep the smallest size of sensor you are willing to crop to the same, sensor size really matters. Big sensors let you crop and cover a much wider range of fields of view.
2) a wide aperture lens -- Why? If I am going to have a camera with a fixed lens I want to be able to shoot in lower light, so I want it to let in as much light as it practically can and that means I want the entrance pupil to be big (this is what determines how much light the lens let's in). A 35 f/2 lens has an entrance pupil of 17.5 mm squared. A 28 f/1.7 lens has an entrance pupil of 16.5mm squared. A 43mm lens with an f/2 aperture has an entrance pupil of 21.5mm squared. The size of the entrance pupil is simply the focal length divided by the f/number.
3) image stabilization and a tilt LCD -- Why? If I am going to have a camera with a fixed lens, I am not going to be taking a tripod and I want to be able to shoot some long exposure shots and especially so if I want to shoot in low light (i.e., at night). Personally I would want the image stabilization to be as close to a tripod replacement in such a camera as possible. I would also want a tilt LCD as that facilitates positioning the camera in different ways the same way that a tripod does.
4) small size -- Why? If I am going to carry a fixed lens camera most of the time I am going to want it to be small so it isn't burdensome to have it with me a lot. This feature is obviously in tension with the first three, however, as larger sensors typically need bigger diameter lenses to cover the bigger image circle, wider apertures also need bigger diameter lenses, and image stabilization and tilting LCD typically add at least some to the weight of a camera.
What does this thinking lead me to think about the RX1R III? I think it is a good camera. It has a larger sensor. It has a lens with a decently wide aperture. It is admirably small. And if you want don't want my #3, then I can see why many people love it. It is especially good for people shots like in the post above by InFocus2014, when IS doesn't help much as you need to keep the shutter speed up as people move a little bit when you are taking their photo (personally I try to keep at least 1/60 when people are the primary focus of a shot). It works well for these people shots in low light and the built in flash and leaf shutter no doubt help this even more. What it won't do, however, is let you take a night shot of let's say a cityscape at a 1 sec exposure. I want the capability of being able to take longer exposure shots in low and even really low light, but if that doesn't matter to you (and you can live with other things that bother me like the small EVF), the RX1R III is a great option.
This leaves me thinking I might pick up a Leica Q3 at some point that is closer to what I would like such a camera to be even if it is a bit bigger, and I know I would not be interested in a Fuji GFX100RF, even though it has a really large sensor and a great EVF, because it has such a narrow aperture lens and it doesn't have image stabilization. The Fuji X100 VI or Ricoh GX3R aren't at all interesting to me either because of their small sensors and narrow aperture lenses.
In the mean time I am going to try carrying my A7r V with just one lens that is attached as a bit of a daily carry (either my CV 28 f/1.5 or 40 f/1.2). It won't be as small as I like but it will satisfy everything else I would be looking for and it might help me decide if I want a Leica Q3 and maybe even whether the regular Q3 or the Q3 43 would suit me better.
I do wish that someone other than Leica would make a camera more like the Q3, as I think the price of the camera is unreasonably high, but Leica seems to thrive in the space where they make something nobody else does and charge a premium for that product....Show more →
I think you are on the right track.
I sold my Q3 28 several months ago. While I really loved shooting that camera due to its solid Leica build, good EVF, leaf shutter, great menu's and connectivity that puts Sony/Canon, Nikon to shame, the autofocus wasn't great, like my newer Sony cameras are. My Sony cameras almost never miss focus with people, while the Q3 missed a lot of shots - particularly in low-light and angled faces. Further, there is the Q3 "glitch" (requiring re-booting) that is fairly well documented and seemed to rear its head at the worst times. As a note, I had an early release model and this may have been solved, later in production.
Finally, when I compared the sharpness of my Q3 28 to my A7CR with the GM 24mm f1.4, both shot at f1.7, the Sony lens was noticeably sharper. I carefully repeated this test several times on MTF50 charts at varying distances with the same result. Of course, the excellent Summilux lens on the Q3 43 would certainly be a different story.
Having said all that, I do miss shooting that Q3. My GAS makes me want to try a Q3 43.  . If a future Q4 28 update includes a better lens with improved focusing, it would be difficult for me to resist, but that is likely two years away.
|
