Because probably the question is, in many minds, I will give a little help decision times. And there's a look at the photos made so far very helpful. This is now, however, requires that you already digitally photographed for a while and even cameras with more zoom is or was at the telephoto end.
At this point, help software, with which one can be to scour the Exif data of the photos made so far and then you get a statistic which focal length was used as often.
Unfortunately I have not found something for my Mac. Thankfully, Windows 7 runs here on Parallels Desktop. And I was then directly download the free software Exposure plot. Just looking after googling, find what it is already.
Exposure plot takes a while for analysis and then displays a clear graph of can be seen, among other things, with which focal lengths are so photographed.
And there was clearly in my case, that I am staying mostly in the range of 28 to 70 mm. With very, very large margin. If I actually times more telephoto needed, then that was always in stage events at school, when I had no place at the front. They were then to one-third and two-thirds of 85 mm 105 mm. (More brought my previously used Canon S 90 do not.)
In this respect, it was clear for me that I am absolutely right in the RX 100 M3.
Because here you can also be retrofitted on the computer still "zoom" by simply takes excerpts from the center. Since the lens in the center reflects very sharp and the camera with its 20 megapixels provides tidy crop potential, you can certainly choose excerpts that correspond to a focal length of 100 or maybe even 120 mm.
That, however, with the difference that many compact cameras offer only aperture of 4.9 or worse at 100 or 120 mm. When Sony RX 100 M3 I have at 70 mm f 2.8, however, what makes a big difference especially for stage events where you want to use no flash, so as not to destroy the atmosphere of the picture. (However, this is certainly not a camera for stage events, there would be something better with larger sensor with a high-intensity fixed focal length)
The image quality of the camera is of course absolutely great for the size. Pixelpeeper be criticized in 100% mode, the corners are out of focus, especially in wide angle. That's right, when the maximum aperture is used. After two stops unfocused but are almost gone. In addition, we are talking about blurring that you hardly see in the images normally or hardly notice because you rarely placed important image elements in the extreme corners. And: A 100% view is not a normal screen view for me.
In this respect, one has to live with corner blurring or just set a larger camera best with fixed focal lengths. And even as the corners are usually less sharp than the image center.
Also convincing I find reliability and speed of autofocus. Yes, the Sony A6000 it can more quickly, but also with due here I can live well.
Great is also the video quality. The reason is that this camera in video mode reads the entire sensor and not leave out lines. As this is quite small there alone, you can see clearly on the video. Too bad that you can not connect an external microphone. If you still want better sound quality, can sometimes view the Tascam DR-07MKII, the fixed one, for example, the bottom of the tripod socket. (Since the micro then upside down, you have to think about it later, to swap the left and right.) If a temporary solution, with which one can live well.
Also great is the fold-out display. This makes it possible to make much better photos of people, as you will not immediately be detected as a disturbing photographer, if you hold the camera approximately at stomach height and looks from above onto the display. Even small children can be so better pictures, without having to constantly bend over.
What bothers a little, is the extremely poor documentation. The manual is saudick but contains virtually no utility value of the content that it is equal in umpteen languages. Also online are available at Sony no reasonable information. Since helps just googled either through forums or buy one of the various books on this camera. Because without the aid will not see through so many of the countless settings easily.
In any case, you should not buy this camera in front of short holidays and then make good use of want. (Ok, in P or automatic works, too.) If you want to understand everything, should ever learn many hours schedule.
Bottom line for me an absolutely recommendable camera.
Another addendum: Had never been to one of my digital cameras a screen protector, here I made an exception. The reason: I've now seen in the exhibition of a large trader that much fingered Sony RX 100 III (also I and II) tend to lose the coating of the screen, starting from the edge. So I have not seen in any other camera. So rather protect in good time before it is later long faces ... (Did the "3 x atFoliX Sony DSC-RX100 III Screen Protector - FX-Clear crystal clear". That there is here at Amazon and fits well)
And Another addendum: The objectives of the RX 100 III there appear to be some dispersion. While it is expected that towards the corners sharpness decreases relatively even, which is more pronounced for single copies of a particular corner or side. This can then lead to there corner or edge areas with so much uncertainty that these effects of certain images even at a reduced view - can be seen, for example, on a Full HD monitor. This occurred to me now when trying to to buy a second copy of this camera. One sees these differences on some test pictures on the internet keyword decentralization. A bit more quality control here would certainly not a bad idea ...
