New RX1 III

Yes.

Same-generation APS-C vs 135 format sensors show little practical performance difference; measurable yes, but not practical.

As far as DOF is concerned, I've never shot a very shallow DOF photo with APS-C where I was disappointed that it wasn't instead shot with a 135-format sensor. The difference is trivial and only visible in side-by-side comparisons.
 
splitimageview said:
...
As far as DOF is concerned, I've never shot a very shallow DOF photo with APS-C where I was disappointed that it wasn't instead shot with a 135-format sensor. The difference is trivial and only visible in side-by-side comparisons.
Click to expand...

Yes. Actually, to get the focus zone control I wanted for ultra-wide photography like I had with my Hasselblad SWC, FF was insufficient. It's much of what motivated me to buy the Hasselblad 907x: the additional size of the sensor format allows more focus zone control with short focal length lenses like the 21mm. For wide-normal and longer lenses, the APS-C cameras are quite sufficient in focus zone control with f/2 or f/2.8 maximum apertures.

G
 
ColSebastianMoran said:
What really is the driver for FF?
Click to expand...

The “best” image quality at the price point.

Travel and vlogging/video are the two main uses for compacts right now. I expect the Fujifilm X-E4, Panasonic GX10, and Canon M6 Mk3 will have the same form factor: RF-style EVF + fully-articulated screen.
 
I've had a GR since film days and still think it is the best pocket camera I've ever used. I'm comfortable with 28mm as a result. I've had a couple of failed bodies due to knocks on the lens assembly (I think) or drenching in orange juice (don't ask).

So along with the film GR1s I use the first version RX1 because :
-that lens!
-the price
-that lens!

Improvements would be welcome as identified above, but I don't want the MP. A small form factor is becoming more important to me such that I'm considering M43 instead of honking DSLRs / mirorrless, or more aptly, the FF lenses they require at the long end.
 
It is interesting how on this and other forums, older cameras that we may have overlooked or simply rejected for this or that reason back when gain praise in retrospect (and I include myself in this observation) . So seen over decades it is for example easy to praise the Contax T2 to a greater extent than it received at issue- it of course had serious competition with the Konica Hexar. And that camera so beautifully designed lacked a shutter speed of even 1/500th of a second.

While the Sony Rx1R II is not perfect by any stretch, it deserves and my bet is it will receive similar, and well deserved praise as time goes on.

That said, and while I am sure Sony have moved on, the changes that come to mind for me and off-the-cuff are:

-Chimping with magnification is a cumbersome process
-Deleting images is also cumbersome as "delete" has to bee reset after each deletion and it requires two presses.
-I'd be okay with slightly larger body to avoid pop-up EVF gain space for bigger battery

I get that form factor alone on this camera is not for everybody, but image quality certainly speaks for itself and holds-up! The RX1R II is capable of providing beautiful images that (IMHO) need be not quantified in numbers for competitive purposes.

David
 
I’m sure it will be capable, but not for me - the EVF seems to be much lower spec than a Q2/3 and it has the expected back “steering wheel” control that I hate so much. I have to wonder how the lens holds up to the increased resolution, too.

So close, so close…
 
Good on Sony for saying "look, we can actually do this" here's our best shot in 2025".

I like that it also carries on the RX1 badge, and adds to the niche of small form factor, prime lens cameras at the leading edge of their sensor size.

It is clear they're after the Q $, and I can see why given it is a high spec, bespoke use case camera which probably won't be their best seller. I can't see RX1 II camera prices falling in response.

For some, the 61MP will be "essential", and the crop MP for 50mm and 70mm provides flexibility.

Ricoh GRs 28mm equivalent gave them the great option of adding the 40mm in the GRx, and Leica have also given us the Q43 and Monochrom. I hope Sony does well with this and that encourages a Monochrom RX or something unexpected.

For now I say congratulations to Sony for the investment in the marque in such a highly constrained market, and I look forward to seeing what creative and skilled photographers do with the RX1R III. I'm sure I'll use my original RX1 more as a result, because it is still fantastic for my needs.
 
Well I still use my RX1 Rii and don't see this as a step forward.

Lower magnification evf, same resolution.
Fixed rear screen
I prefer the 42mp Sony sensor to the 61mp

The bigger battery would be good and I would like the manual focus to better, it is hopeless on mine.
I actually like the pop up evf and when I had a A7rii the RX finder was better. The image quality is so good I don’t think a higher mp sensor was what was needed.
One of the few cameras I own I feel I'll keep till it drops. And I love the lens, in fact I keep mine in my Billingham with my M240 and 21, 28 and 50mm lenses and always use the little Sony for 35mm.
As usual YMMV.
 
I can't see myself even wanting this seriously, let alone buying it. No tilting screen, no IBIS, crazy price tag. It will probably be a superb camera, but I'm not in the market for a brand new fixed lens camera of that price. In Australia it will be something close to $8000, that's a couple of secondhand Leica SL2S bodies, three-four secondhand Sony RX1r II cameras, two-three secondhand Zeiss Otus lenses, five rolls of film (hahaha).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom