Tested In-Depth: Sony RX100 III Compact Camera 

Tony Santos I suspect the thumbs down is due to the length. This is 15 minutes of information combined with 18 minutes of stupid comments and small talk. These reviews would be great if half the length and delivered by one person sans the continual annoying banter.

Lol I have done the same

I am considering buying it as well, how were your experiences. Is it worth it when you have a good high end phone?

@@SuperDoetinchem Hands down better than any phone. I am sure because of the sensor size and top notch lens. Not to mention capabilities of full control of exposure, focus point, and shutter speed. Even in auto modes takes clean bright photos. Best pocket camera out there.

I Will buy today 😅

I dont mean to be so off topic but does anybody know a tool to get back into an Instagram account?? I stupidly forgot the password. I would appreciate any tips you can give me

@Zechariah Kenneth Instablaster ;)

i have the original and thinking about the getting the m3 due to my eyes(getting older) now having to wear reading glasses to see anything close...do you think the evf would help much better in my situation?

zcarenow To tell u the truth I really don't know if the EVF would help u more then just looking @ the back screen, sorry I couldn't help. Maybe if u Google EVF & glasses, that might help out.

zcarenow The EVF is great. It has its own focus (diopter) so it will work great with your glasses. But the reviewers missed the main point about this feature. They're talking about frame rates and sharpness in the EVF, but (for me at least) it's all about composition, being able to move and compose without holding the thing out away from your body. I love this camera and have not touched my Nikon D90 in weeks.

Ⅷ異八十八まィてした時いたしますす

Also, thanks as always, learned a lot!

I often used a handheld light meter with my ff and micro four thirds bodies. f2.8@1/60(iso 400) is f2.8@1/60(iso400) in either format! all this aperture "equivalence"( as far as exposure) is bullshit.

According to your logic there would be no incentive to buy a ff body for better bokehs. Most compact cameras start with apertures of f1.8+ . Why are then no photos with wonderful bokehs from these cameras available? Simple answer: because sensor matters... (says an owner of several ff, aps-c and a compact cameras...)

Martin I assume that was directed towards me..(because I'm ,not re-reading a thread from dec 2014) "better" bokehs" is completely subjective. As "bokeh" is the Japanese word meaning "the pleasing quality of the out of focus highlights". If you mean shallower"depth of field" ; there's no argument that objectively you can get a shallower depth of field using a full frame came; or a medium or even a large format camera for that matter.. I disagree that shallower is ALWAYS BETTER. If I want get both my brides and grooms eyes acceptably sharp. I have much better chance at f4 with a micro four thirds than with a full frame where I might need 5.6 or more. One stop smaller aperture, equates to using . one-stop of iso lower on the m4:3. So I can run around shooting at f1.4 and still have a margin for focus error and I can use a lower Iso doing so.Try shooting f1.4 on your full frame ; you have have the time to focus precisely. Good day.

Is there a big difference in video side of things between M1 and M3?

The lens is much better on the newer models and a bit more responsive. Aside from that, not much.

slickplaid Ok, because there is a killer deal M1 for $390, two times less than M3. I'm thinking of getting it...

***** If you half-hold the shutter while you close the viewfinder I think it stays on. Something I read while researching cameras...

0ooTheMAXXoo0 No it doesn't - just tried - it turns off anyway.

Yes it does, it's incredible so many professional reviewers and nobody knows that, not even sony...... Just hold the power button

If you hold down the viewfinder lever while pushing it in, it stays on. I know this for a fact. Obviously it should stay on by default, but this is the best solution we've got.

***** Thanks

How'd that go?🤣

1080p up to 60fps to 50mb/s with XAVS codec and 720p up to 120fps!!

StefanoRossso I think he meant the youtube video

If you go that route I could also say that a Fujifilm X-m1 or a1 are producing even better pictures for even less then the a6000. It all comes down to the purpose of the camera itself and therefore, while being absolutley right, your infos are kinda unecessary. Someon who looks for a compact will almost never settle for a similar priced APC-S or even Full Frame. If that was an option they would look at those in the first place. While beeing expensive the Sony RX series is without a doubt the best compact camera series out there and you definitely won't regret the buy if you want something that fits in your pocket and at the same time shoots good pictures. I would forward people with the need of a compact but not that much money to the mark 1 though since you might not need the features of the other two and while the picture quality (thanks to the lense) is definitely better on the mark III, thanks to the same sensor the difference isn't so huge that it gets to the point where you would pay the additional 500€ for the mark 3 just for the PQ.

The a6000 has a viewfinder and superior auto focus over the X-M1, those alone are worth the extra to me. Also the a6000 beat out the Fujifilm in comparison tests done by Imaging Resource, it's almost meaningless as they are very close anyway but to say the X-M1 is better is just silly because it really isn't. X-M1 is also a worse overall package due to the other edges the a6000 has over it, but most importantly the a6000 has a viewfinder, this is a big deal for anyone that wants to shoot photos outside without getting annoyed by glare on an LCD screen. (and in bright sunlight, LCD screens make photography not fun)

DriveCancelled Isn't that basically what I was talking about? ;) Btw. Imaging Resource basically compared the JPEG Engines not the RAW Images and their Quality and I barely shoot JPEG. Anyway your argument fits my point perfectly. I wasn't saying the x-m1 is the better shooter (It definitely is NOT) it lacks in alomst all aspects compared to the a6000. My point is that it might not matter for a person like me that only shoots RAW anyway and ends up with a lighter workflow in lightroom or photo ninja (etc.) to make them look like I want them too. The x-m1 has the slight edge above the a6000 for me there which makes me choose her instead of the a6000 as my ... well not daily driver that would be a different camera entirely but you might get what I'm talking about. If I would shoot mainly in JPEG I would have gone with the a6000, maybe even RAW if I had accustomed to a different workflow in lightroom beforehand but like I said: Your camera choice depends completely on your personal preferences in handling it as long as the sensor is similar in quality you will almost always end up with better pictures on the tech that you are more familiar and better in handling with. That was my point from the get go, the part with the x-m1 was simply poorly written I maybe should have added "for me" at the end of the first sentence or something like that. Btw. I'm with you on the viewfinder. I need one ... BADLY!

The A6000 is only better with a better lens and at high ISO. In decent light with the kit lens, the RX100 M3 actually has better IQ.

AdventuristoSupremo You wouldn't notice the difference in good light between a lot of high end cameras anyway.

Thank you so much

Ok firstly the Canon lens is much larger and has much heavier optics. Aperture is ratio, not size. Also the focal length on the RX100 has most likely been equated to full frame.

you are wrong. f value is also in ratio with sensor size and sensor specs...

StefanoRossso Sensor specs? Size matter what specs do you think matter? My calaculations have compensation for the crop factor (2,7), I would like to see yours.

Tomteluva Ok the actual aperture diameter must be 5.5mm (approx) to get an aperture of f1.8. That's perfectly realistic if you ask me.

Tomteluva Aperture equation. The focal length is really 10mm (or something like that) and then the aperture is f1.8. Divide the focal length by the aperture number to get the physical aperture size. I might not be 100% though.