Sony RX10 Mark III announced, 24-600mm f:2.4-4

[Ranger Rick]

I see the new camera announced, and the specs look great (including the video capabilities).  A 1-inch sensor, updated model of what i have in my RX10 Mark 1, and does an excellent job.  Sony certainly keeps shuffling the deck of cards.

[armand]

The video seems to be the best asset. For the rest we'll have to wait for all of them to be in the wild. While less bright and slightly shorter the Nikon 24-500 should have a significant advantage in focus speed (on paper at least). The Pana FZ1000 is much cheaper while the RX10 II is more compact.

[kirktuck]

I bought one a couple of days ago and have shot about 100 still frames around Austin, Texas and about ten minutes of controlled video in the studio. Here are a couple of blog entries I've written about the camera along with examples of both stills and 4K video (edited at 1080p).

http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2016/05/a-quick-test-of-sony-rx10iii-video.html

http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2016/05/sony-rx10iii-its-better-than-i-expected.html

I have owned the previous two generations of the RX10 and am finding this camera to be a very good addition. The 4K is sharp and well behaved except for a bit more noise in the shadows at ISO800 than I would like. I found the lens to be pretty great out and around town. See my several examples of shooting 24mm equivalent and then, from the same spot, shooting 600mm stills. The long end of the lens is very sharp and contrasty. More so that I would have expected. The finder of the camera, while supposedly the same as the one in the RX10ii, seems brighter and better defined. The body is bigger and heavier (duh) but it's not something I dislike. In fact, I like the bigger grip very much.

Was it worth $1500? My test show me that I'll be able to use this camera and the previous generation to shoot a week long video for a client the third week of this month. If it does the job well it will cover the cost of purchase several times over with money left over to stick in my pocket. So far? A wonderful camera. I don't want to put it down.

[kirktuck]

I added a post to my blog today about a job we did yesterday with three different Sony cameras: http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2016/05/images-from-my-coverage-of-keller.html

We worked with the A7R2, the a6300 and the RX10iii. All were pretty darn good. Lots of samples, labelled.

[Robert Roaldi]

The imminent DL 1" Nikon cameras are rumoured (promised) to have the same high performance auto-focus as the Nikon 1 series bodies. This would make them pretty good sports cameras (for amateurs at least). I have never read about the Sony RX10 series' capabilities in that area. Anyone have a feel for that?

[kirktuck]

I have all three of the RX10 models and none of them is especially speedy at AF. Even less so at following moving action well. The Panasonic fz 1000 is faster than the Sonys. While I think the newest two models are almost unequalled as 4K video cameras (under $2,000) and the still images taken on the one inch sensor are fantastic there are two things that most sports photographers will miss versus full frame DSLR cameras. One is the fast, continuous AF and the other is the ability (other than when using the RX10iii at 400-600mm focal lengths) to easily drop backgrounds convincingly out of focus. The only sport I shoot is swimming. It's pretty linear so it's pretty easy to follow. I'd be incredibly frustrated trying to use one of these cameras for something like football.

Bottom line? Great for single AF shooters. Great for studio shots. Incredibly great for shooting video. Not the right tool for fast, action sports.

What am I using the new RX10iii for? Right now I'm booked for the next two weeks shooting two video projects for a utility company. All in 4K. We tested the heck out of this camera before deciding. The codec looks great, the AF is good with video and the face detection actually works. There have been no overheat situations, we're getting an hour or more per battery and the files look great after transcoding into FCP X. Two caveats: We're using the A7R2 in 4K super 35 mode for low light/available light interviews. We're running second sound into a Tascam 60DRii for cleaner audio. That being said, a Sennheiser MK600 mic directly into the camera is pretty darn good. Just a little "hissy"....

[Zorki5]

My first digital camera was Sony F717, and my main gripe with it was its AF. Still, I became kinda fan of that form-factor, and every now and then, when similar in size/shape camera appears, I have a look at it.

But from what I see and hear, RX10 is not that much better... Yes, more CPU power (vs. F717) means better AF, but CDAF is CDAF, so for me personally there's no coming back. RX100II is my only camera with CDAF, and I only tolerate it because I marvel its size.

So I just snap 18-200 (or even 16-70/4) to my a6000 for situations when I'd grab an RX10.