- Viewed objectively, the M III makes no better photos and videos as the M II.
- For less money (. Rd 100 Euro), there is even the Sony Alpha 6000 with the 18-55mm, the larger APS-C sensor, 24.3 MP, and the same viewfinder.
- What are the current, sophisticated cameras of upper / class come as an alternative to RX100 M III in question?
in detail:
-------------------------------------------
1. The M III in relation to the M II
The M III brings compared to the Mk II a significant improvement of the equipment:
- As a main novelty the latest RX100 has finally an electronic viewfinder. It is the same as in the Alpha 6000. He is good, bright and fast, but the resolution of 1.44 million pixels is cut by almost half compared to the NEX 6 and the viewfinder of my Fuji X-T1 or Olympus OMD are with 2.3 million pixels for assessing the sharpness eindeutlich better ud one does not project the image but the middle of it. The viewfinder of the M III Acuity misperceptions are possible without a magnifying glass, especially at full aperture. Nevertheless, in relation to the M II a huge step forward, especially in sunlight.
- Has the permanently installed Zeiss lens now converted 24-70mm f / 1.8-2.8 28-100mm instead f / 1.8-4.9.
The loss of 30 mm in the upper part does not hurt me, because of the stability there - especially for video - was overwhelmed. Converted 70mm are naturally very scarce, but in any case no telephoto 100mm were. For the wide-angle is slightly wider, which is more valuable in practice. But the most interesting new feature is the enormous improvement in brightness at common focal lengths, so that you can use faster shutter speeds and on the flash can almost always without. These blends the higher ISO sensitivity in conjunction with the Bionz image processor X.
-The M III now, as the latest Alpha has, over the Bionz X-Professor (nonsense, processor!), Which is not to be underestimated, because this results in a faster reading and processing the electrical signals from the sensor. The Bionz X I can enjoy my Alpha 6000 for a few weeks, especially in difficult lighting situations or incredible 11 frames / sec and 20 MP. Instead ISO 160 the MIII goes down to 80. The JPEG output continues to set standards, but visible differences in daily life and normal relationships between M II and M III are, I think, largely theoretical.
The M III turns to 0.6 s faster, also focused a little faster and creates in JPEG and shutter-priority max. 10 frames / second at full resolution, otherwise min. about 3.3 (RAW + JPEG Fine).
Not so with videos where M III on XAVC S-record format and slow motion 120 frames / sec at 720 pixels (ie not full HD) features. This is advantageous for already advanced, but only for.
- The display can be rotated in the M III to top 180 degrees, down 45 degrees, so that self-portraits, but also difficult shots above the head or close to the ground are possible.
One must renounce now on the hot shoe. This is not tragic because of the brightness gain of the lens and the noise-free performance up to high ISO areas allows shooting in conditions similar to the field of vision of the human eye.
Distant objects such as birds or wildlife still not left within reach of the RX100, whether or M II M III.
Some find the RX100 not especially secure and evaluate them so with 1 star. Ridiculous!
Frankly, this issue has me a damn because I anyway always wear the Cam in the Leather Case Sony LCJ-RXC.
Who pays so much money on an RX, the pair euro should have left for the safety of his camera.
In summary, I would say that the M III does not improve the image quality, but some significant improvements in low light and video area and the viewfinder ease in bright sunshine. She shoots therefore in these areas at the top class and remains the best compact camera with fixed lens.
Certainly the viewfinder, the new lens, the faster processor and the screen schwenbaren justify together a higher price of about 250-300 euros.
On the other hand, when I think that a brand new Canon EOS M gets for the additional cost, for example with 18-55mm kit lens and flash unit, the extra expense is hard to swallow.
I would therefore say that for owners of M II, the rise to the M III only for enthusiasts or perfectionists's really worth.
-------------------------------------------
2. RX100 M III or Alpha 6000
The RX100 MIII currently costs around 850 euros. For RD. I bought a brand new Alpha 6000, with the larger APS-C sensor, hot shoe, a ähnlichhen viewfinder and a 18-55mm, which is not particularly bright, but certainly quite well with f / 4.5-5.6 680 Euro. For this purpose you can for relatively little money but good inexpensive zoom lenses or lenses with fixed focal lengths such as the Sigma 60mm f / 2.8 E-mount for 168,90 Euro. Not only the processor but also the menus are almost identical. In the A6000 I can save 3 own configurations and 1 own menus in the MIII obviously not.
In the end, in my opinion offers the A6000 more camera for the money and is expandable as a system camera. Now I have purchased for significantly less than 300 euros to SEL55210B, it is not particularly bright, but achieved the triple focal length of MIII.
If compactness is paramount, the RX100 MIII is but virtually unrivaled, but only almost.
-------------------------------------------
3. Alternatives
I have some very compact cameras that also make very good pictures and videos, but have much more powerful zoom.
If it does not depend on the last pixel and greatest aperture, then the Nikon P340 or the Olympus SH-1 not even half the price and I am absolutely satisfied with the results and excited about the flexibility of these cameras.
With similar performance and compactness I have a few years ago the Lumix LX7 with built 24-90mm f / 1.4-2.3. Although it has half as many megapixels as the RX100, but the difference is not as great as it would suggest the numbers and it costs a little more than 1/3 of the RX Mark III for normal pictures.
,
At Fujifilm, the matter is more complicated: The X10 and X20 are pocket cameras with 12 MP very inexpensive, the much larger system cameras, however, are equipped with a large APS-C sensor and 16 MP come, really expensive and considerably larger than the RX100. Compact they are, but here you have to replace his pockets against camera bags.
But they are upgradeable with lenses of the highest class, which is why I have decided to use the X-Pro1 and X-T1.
That would be my recommendation for very ambitionnierte photographers who are willing langristig clearly spend more than 2,000 euros and want to let the limitations of the RX100 behind.
With Micro Four Thirds lenses, it makes for the numerous top class (eg the Zuiko 12-40 f / 2.8 or Leica 25mm f / 1.4) and superior image quality to fish sense to system cameras. But even here there is nothing so compact like the RX100. There, I've decided for the Olympus OMD and Lumix GX7 with stability and the viewfinder that can easily hang on the neck, but of course can not disappear after getanner work in your pocket.
These cameras come mainly because of much more expensive lenses as an RX100, but not subject to 70mm restriction of M III.
These are no real alternatives because either not so good, too big, too expensive, or both.
But there is finally 2 very attractive solutions:
Land RX100 or RX100 M II used for 200 or 400 euros!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUPPLEMENT I:
There are more or less meaningful issues about this camera.
But that much here is talking about the camera turns off when you close the viewfinder, I find it unnecessary.
All camcorders from Sony or Panasonic, the devices are switched on or off by raus or shove the viewfinder. That is common sense and practical. Basta!
Then also discussed that the RX100 is too small for large hands.
Hello ... Compactness is the basic philosophy of this design: as technically possible to pack much in the smallest housing utmost!
And that's absolutely Sony succeeded none can currently better, so praise and not criticism!
Those looking for or need a large housing must not spill here negative about the RX100 yet. This is just as helpful as complaints about the spaciousness of a Smart or motorcycle. Who space and massive needs should be from me in his two cents to any station wagon or van, but nich to Smart!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADDENDUM II (07/08/2014)
- I am - up on the battery life - now really pleased, I really like the viewfinder, though not as big and sharp as my Olympus OMD be EM10 or Fuji X-T1.
- The menus are my Alpha 6000 is very similar, but I have found no way a private quickmenu with instant access to key functions to customize.
This in itself is not tragic, because you can assign several keys for any function, but I find the latest Alpha 6000 practical and flexible, and it would have been nice if all my Sony cameras have had a standardized operation.
- The Zeiss lens is great and I do not regret switching from the RX100 MII. On the one hand you can make in dark places quite useful images, on the other hand the distortions are quite low and the images are on the edge of the wide-angle considerably sharper than in my other premium pocket cameras.
- The colors are gorgeous and just brilliant, even in low light. The JPEG images have so much momentum that I currently do not save in RAW. However, I use HDR as possible as a standard, even without a tripod (fast lens and stabilization make it possible), and the RX100 III is in putting together calculation of the individual shots rd. 3 x faster than my Pentax K-30, which has less megapixels.
This way you can cope with the loss of the hot shoe well and built-in flash had been the predecessor already a joke.
However, I can distract from the MIII the built-in flash with the left index finger upward and thereby avoid (from about 45 °), overexposure of foreground objects. This on-board flash has become useful, at least to 2.5-3 meters.
- The zoom is quite nearly the equivalent of 70mm. This camera is not (or restricted), the part for wilderness or remote Obbjekten, for details in a landscape I miss at least another 30-50mm focal length. Luckily I can on a 6000 Alpha recourse with several lenses, but the MIII as a single camera is not sufficient in my opinion.
The perspective I think playing much better than the kit lens on my Canon EOS M, for example, in individuals at a table are shown the distant subjects still quite good and big, so do not shrink more than proportionally with the distance from the lens.
- How quickly as propaganda the RX100 III, however, is not: The AF needs with decreasing light intensity increasingly more time, usually already at the 0.4-0.5 s to switch itself and also the Zomm the video works comfortably, but apart from extreme situations with fast objects such as motorcross events, running children, playing dogs, etc. is absolutely OK.
As an accessory, can I use the Belkin LCJ-RXC my old at the MII MIII easily.
The batteries are the weak point of the MIII. The battery pack NP-BX1 1240 mAh enough for about 200 pictures supposedly if one is economical with the camera. This is very little, and a spare battery has strongly recommended.
Last weekend I made at night about 2-3 dozen pictures at a party, 1/4 of them with lightning. The next day I took the camera for a day trip and the battery was empty after 2 Pictures! Such problems I had never been to the MII! The battery was enough for 1 whole afternoon with 250 video clips.
Now I'll be careful with the M III in the future and take away all my 3 batteries!
The original cost RD. 33 euros, even if any rascals are trying the part for 100 euros or more, for example, here to sell on Amazon.
The batteries for 5-9 euros and I do not trust many reports of low capacity and sudden loss of power. I have chosen:
- Ex-Pro High Power Plus + (ASIN: B008YSMOAY) for 14.41. The delivered part did not match the picture and I guess because of the weight that he rd. Has 15% less capacity than the original. Otherwise the garment fits exactly supports the display of state of charge and cuts a fine figure, even in Patona charger (ASIN: B00GWKM2X0), which I received for 10.85 including postage with Prime overnight.. The charger is quite OK, the pins do not bend and for the pair of coins is the subject of "store in the camera" off the table.
- Ansmann A-Son NP BX 1 with 1000 mAh for 21.32. All brands battery as Ansmann, Energizer EZ-NPBX1 (ASIN: B00GMGBJX8) or Hahnel HL-X1 (ASIN: B009CN6K0U) cost around 20-22 Euro and with honest 1000-1100 mAh. All other cheap China batteries have mE phony capacity figures, fewer charge cycles and may involve risks, I do not want to meet at a 850-Euro-camera. I think about. 22 Euro for honest 1000 Ah +/- 10% for correct and appropriate. Moreover, I have already had good experiences with Ansmann batteries for my Panasonic premium camcorder.
The Hahnel HL-X1 with 1170 mAh for 22.15 at Amazon will I order, it costs 34 euros in MediaMarkt (!!!) and is therefore in the shop just as expensive as the Sony NP-BX1 1240 mAh. But these are guaranteed capacity, unlike China batteries, the use at 900 mAh or significantly below it and probably no premium cell.
The operator's manual I have not read.
Instead, I use the book in pocket format of Data Becker "Practical Manual: Sony RX100 II & RX100", which I had bought last year for 24 euros for my MII and to 85% for which MIII valid, but not for all menus and settings. The book I can recommend, it is extensive, well-structured, richly illustrated, understandable and contains a lot of useful hints. But who is looking for a suitable literature for the M III, has to wait until September 2014.
The book is so small that you can take it on the beach or on a trip, but no less full-bodied than the kilogram chunk of Franzis for Nikon / Canon or POS for Lumix that bend my shelves. It fits to the compactness of the camera.
-----------------
ADDENDUM III: ALTERNATIVE and latest CAMERAS competitors
Now I have even bought the RX10. It is at least twice as large as the RX100. Although it also is a bridge camera with the same Senser and the software is very similar, which is a completely different device, properly massif that well complements the RX100, mainly because of the longer focal length to 200mm.
A few weeks later, I have exchanged my HX100V against the latest HX400V with the giant Zoom 1200mm. Is more 1 toy but useful and entertaining, ME currently the best Bridge with Super Zoom. It is useful especially for the range 400-1000mm.
At Photokina, the Lumix LX100 and the Canon PowerShot G7x have been presented, both of which are direct competitors of the RX100 and the same size, so pocket-compatible.
Available they are expected to be available in mid-November 2014th
The name LX100 aims course on RX100 MIII and the decor is also in accordance with:
- Greater MFT sensor as the 1-inch of the RX100 but with 10.5 to 12.0 MP, depending on the format (probably very good low-light properties, ISO 25600 up)
- Comparable lens, Aperture f / 1.7-2.8 and same focal length as the RX100, but Leica
- Super-sharp and -Quick viewfinder with approx. 2.5 MP
- 4K video at 25 frames / sec and various HD options INL. Slow motion.
- Equipment and operation of Spizenklasse, insanely fast part, sports shooting-ready.
A few hundred euros cheaper also comes in mid-November the G7x Canon
- 1-inch sensor with 20.2 MP
- Comparable lens, Aperture f / 1.8-2.8 and same focal length as the RX100 with 4.2 x
- No viewfinder
- Full HD video at 60 frames / sec
a total well below the Lumix LX100 and slightly below the Canon Gix, but more compact.
Both are very interesting and therefore ordered, but I'm leaving the Lumix GH2, Lumix LX5 and perhaps Canon EOS-M.
The Lumix LX100 is clearly directed to the RX100 MIII, but likely some additional opportunities (low-light and video).
When Canon G7x the target is more the issue of ursprungliche RX100 and for the introductory price is too high, but it will not stay long experience shows this:
The EOS-M would be introduced at 850 euros and I paid a few Wochern for a new copy 299 on Amazon.
As I said, it is still around. Last 2 months until both are available. Until then, the RX100 can rule undisturbed and I'll pass the time in addition to the new Lumix FZ1000.
The compact RX100 is the camera that can be taken anywhere, even if you should sift UFO 1, the chunky RX10 (or LZ1000 / HX400V etc.) is the camera that you consciously wraps if you want to film something special. None of these cameras meets all purposes, they complement each other. But if you search a universal unit, then the RX100 - despite the scarce focal length - probably the best solution.
--------------------------
SUPPLEMENT III (02/11/2015)
Meanwhile, I have LX5 and Canon EOS-M separated me from Lumix GH2, for the Lumix LX100, GM5, GH4 and Canon G7x newly acquired.
The LX100 can not keep up remotely with the compactness of the RX100. Equally compact are the GM5 and G7x.
The GM5 is the only super-compact Micro Four Thirds with Wechslobjektive. Thus it offers more flexibility in longer focal lengths, if one is willing to change the look and lug around.
In addition, Panasonic promises 50 Euro cash back, but does not last word and it is then there no cashback and with broken packaging (to what you CROPPING and ship).
In the end, if you count all together (eg the slack and mega-expensive Canon batteries) is the RX100 III the better alternative, does not stress and makes me very satisfied!
