p.1 #1 · The Sony RX1R MkIII: it’s a bit late for April Fools Day
As I look over the specs, I must ask, where is the value in this camera? I see a bunch of old, recycled parts, many of which are included in other Sony cameras at a lower cost. Is the fact that the camera is so small? It’s still not pocketable. Having suffered through the usability of the MK II. version of this camera, I am intrigued as to why anyone would want it.
p.1 #2 · The Sony RX1R MkIII: it’s a bit late for April Fools Day
Even though RX1rIII might not live up to the expectations it is anyway a very good camera. RX1rII was already very good and rIII should be much better in many ways, especially AF and battery life.
Difficult to say about the value. Used price for all the older RX1 versions are also very high.
p.1 #4 · The Sony RX1R MkIII: it’s a bit late for April Fools Day
Then what? We all measure these tools for what they will bring to our shooting experience and work. I mean, wouldn't you rather have a CR with an attached 35mm and the option to have any other lens you wish? It's practically all the same tech but cheaper. At least the CR has a decent grip. My experience with the Mk II was that the camera was just too small to hold comfortably. And my hands aren't huge.
p.1 #5 · The Sony RX1R MkIII: it’s a bit late for April Fools Day
So, for your second post ever on FM Forums you felt the need to start another thread dissing this camera. Is this because you didn’t think you’d get enough attention posting your unoriginal and repetitive comments in the other thread on this camera which is now up to 24 pages.
p.1 #6 · The Sony RX1R MkIII: it’s a bit late for April Fools Day
If it had an inbuilt flash to pair with that leaf shutter then it would be a very different proposition in my books.
Sadly nobody seems to want to make leaf shutter cameras and include inbuilt flash any longer (x100vi excepted). When shooting people, the combo of leaf shutter plus inbuilt flash is uniquely good for two key scenarios: daylight fill and low light motion capture. IBIS and/or high iso performance don't/can't replace this function IMO.
I also personally really like the look of humans photographed under flash light. Especially with a bit of peach coloured filter taped over the flash to warm it up.
p.1 #7 · The Sony RX1R MkIII: it’s a bit late for April Fools Day
Jeff Kott wrote:
So, for your second post ever on FM Forums you felt the need to start another thread dissing this camera. Is this because you didn’t think you’d get enough attention posting your unoriginal and repetitive comments in the other thread on this camera which is now up to 24 pages.
This is a public forum where people can make threads, voice opinions and share ideas. That's exactly what I did. Maybe some beginner will think twice before dropping their hard earned cash on a camera like this. If that happens, it'll be worth it to me even after having to suffer the useless comments of bitter people who like to attack others.
p.1 #8 · The Sony RX1R MkIII: it’s a bit late for April Fools Day
itsmrjack wrote:
If it had an inbuilt flash to pair with that leaf shutter then it would be a very different proposition in my books.
Sadly nobody seems to want to make leaf shutter cameras and include inbuilt flash any longer (x100vi excepted). When shooting people, the combo of leaf shutter plus inbuilt flash is uniquely good for two key scenarios: daylight fill and low light motion capture. IBIS and/or high iso performance don't/can't replace this function IMO.
I also personally really like the look of humans photographed under flash light. Especially with a bit of peach coloured filter taped over the flash to warm it up....Show more →
I think the only thing going for this Sony is full frame resolution when stacked up against the Fujfilm X100 cameras. While I don't love the way crop sensor cameras render, as a street shooter, the Fuji is a great little tool. A little pop of on-board flash can look fantastic!
p.1 #9 · The Sony RX1R MkIII: it’s a bit late for April Fools Day
Maverien wrote:
This is a public forum where people can make threads, voice opinions and share ideas. That's exactly what I did. Maybe some beginner will think twice before dropping their hard earned cash on a camera like this. If that happens, it'll be worth it to me even after having to suffer the useless comments of bitter people who like to attack others.
Did you read the posts in the other thread? If not, you should. If you did, what did you think you were contributing to the forum by starting a new thread with your negative comments that just repeat what has already been said? People have done a very good job bashing this camera and it gets tiresome. Of course, if you had anything original to say, it would be interesting.
p.1 #10 · The Sony RX1R MkIII: it’s a bit late for April Fools Day
I'm super not interested in this camera, is this a good thread to post in or should I start another?
I mean there is already a thread about this camera that is pinned to the top of the forum, but I'm not sure that it is the right one to post my non-interest, and I'm not sure piggy backing off this one makes sense either.
p.1 #11 · The Sony RX1R MkIII: it’s a bit late for April Fools Day
Maverien wrote:
As I look over the specs, I must ask, where is the value in this camera?
Who told you to look at specs to see value? Your question implies there's some kind of a mismatch. But a mismatch requires two sides. On one side we have a multi-billion dollar company with Product, Marketing, R&D and other teams involved in making the decision to bring this camera to market. Just the announcement alone was apparently so newsworthy that it generated 25 pages of comments on a half-dead Internet forum.
On the other side of this mismatch we have YOU.
Which side do you think is more likely to see where the value is?
p.1 #12 · The Sony RX1R MkIII: it’s a bit late for April Fools Day
Maverien wrote:
This is a public forum where people can make threads, voice opinions and share ideas. That's exactly what I did. Maybe some beginner will think twice before dropping their hard earned cash on a camera like this. If that happens, it'll be worth it to me even after having to suffer the useless comments of bitter people who like to attack others.
Why do you feel you need to tell others how they should spend their money. Stay in your own lane and just worry about how you spend your hard earned cash.
p.1 #13 · The Sony RX1R MkIII: it’s a bit late for April Fools Day
Maverien wrote:
I think the only thing going for this Sony is full frame resolution when stacked up against the Fujfilm X100 cameras. While I don't love the way crop sensor cameras render, as a street shooter, the Fuji is a great little tool. A little pop of on-board flash can look fantastic!
Well the AF in the rx1r3 is leading class…so is the lens.
p.1 #14 · The Sony RX1R MkIII: it’s a bit late for April Fools Day
Maverien wrote:
Then what? We all measure these tools for what they will bring to our shooting experience and work. I mean, wouldn't you rather have a CR with an attached 35mm and the option to have any other lens you wish? It's practically all the same tech but cheaper. At least the CR has a decent grip. My experience with the Mk II was that the camera was just too small to hold comfortably. And my hands aren't huge.
I think if you just want to bag the camera, you are doing it the right way.
Same if you just enjoy living in an echo chamber.
If you are actually interested, you could spend hours reading FM threads where people explain why they chose any of these 3 cameras and for 2 of them, what they liked about them, why they kept them or why they sold them. I doubt that is what you are looking for though.
p.1 #16 · The Sony RX1R MkIII: it’s a bit late for April Fools Day
I do agree about the x100. For me I think inbuilt flash really shines with 28mm equivalent though, as you can get closer in and therefore a small flash does more. I just prefer that angle of view for personal people pics anyway. Hence why I adore my x70.
I just don't understand why Sony, like Ricoh (and Fuji with the XE and XM series), have moved to omitting inbuilt flash from their compact/fixed lens bodies. Inbuilt flash was so much more abundant in film era 35mm compacts/fixed lens bodies, and it made sense for a number of reasons, ISO limitations being only one.
I find that close up pictures of people moving dynamically on a sunny day, or in difficult lighting, will almost always come out better with flash, regardless of the presence of IBIS/OIS or how great the ISO performance is. Ditto computational photography cannot create light where none exists to the same degree as a flash.
We talk a lot about how phones are replacing/have replaced 'real' cameras. The ability to have a dedicated flash unit on a small camera body to me seems to be a real advantage over the form factor of phones that is just getting ignored by camera manufacturers.
So yes, the x100's are great, and I agree about rendering vs full frame of course, so wouldn't it be nice to have inbuilt flash on a high res compact body?!
Just see how the kids nowadays love those 35mm era compacts and the flash photos they take!
Maverien wrote:
I think the only thing going for this Sony is full frame resolution when stacked up against the Fujfilm X100 cameras. While I don't love the way crop sensor cameras render, as a street shooter, the Fuji is a great little tool. A little pop of on-board flash can look fantastic!
p.1 #17 · The Sony RX1R MkIII: it’s a bit late for April Fools Day
tsdevine wrote:
I'm super not interested in this camera, is this a good thread to post in or should I start another?
I mean there is already a thread about this camera that is pinned to the top of the forum, but I'm not sure that it is the right one to post my non-interest, and I'm not sure piggy backing off this one makes sense either.
p.1 #18 · The Sony RX1R MkIII: it’s a bit late for April Fools Day
WOW, welcome to FM, posting sometimes can be a contact sport. I don't understand why some on this site go back and review post made by anyone that starts a thread. I don't read every single post and have no interest in doing so. I don't care if you reword a post, some post get buried 3 or 4 pages and most don't go back that far unless they are searching for something specific. I was excited to see they came out with a vIII until I saw the price. In my opinion and my opinion only is all the versions were way over priced especially after reading they can sometimes have a dust on the sensor problem that needs to be sent in for repair, and at $5000 it's mostly for people with high disposable income. At $3500 they would fly out the door and make me think about selling my present gear to buy one.
p.1 #19 · The Sony RX1R MkIII: it’s a bit late for April Fools Day
As my late mother would say, "if you have nothing nice to say then say nothing", but I do also have to sympathize with the OP because the pinned RX1R3 thread is turning into a bit of a nauseating fanboy-fest for a camera that is, by all objective measurements, stupidly overpriced.
If subjectively you think it's worth your $5K (plus tax) and have that money burning a hole in your proverbial pocket then by all means have at it and use whatever price justification you can come up with. Personally, even if I had $5K I needed to unload quickly I would not buy this camera because I object to being ripped off and would rather not encourage Sony to price things stupidly high. Not that my lone protest would make a jot of difference to a massive global corporation, but it's nice to think I have a few principles left
