Jump to content

Sony rx100 mk3 opinions


Recommended Posts

Good morning,

Though a Canon man through and through, I am giving thought to purchasing a Sony 100 mk3.

Do you use one, would you buy another if you lost it..etc

Does alamy accept it...does it shoot raw files

Any thoughts  OPINIONS..gratefully accepted.

 

Thanks

 

Sparks

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got all Canon gear as well as the RX100 Mk II. I can honestly say that the images are almost as good as the 5D Mk II.

 

As Philippe says, if I lost mine the first thing I would do is buy another.

 

It's a superb camera.

 

John.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am also looking at the RX100 Mk3. I have CS4 and CS5 - will I be able to process the raw files using either of these, or only Jpeg?

(or will this not work at all ie what other software would I need to obtain?)

 

Thanks

Nigel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I started with the mk1 and love it but would have liked ELV so recently bought the mk3 and it is excellent although it does have a shorter focal length lens than the mk1.

 

Both very usable cameras and when I go out one of them is always with me.

 

My RR kit is Nikon D750 with various Nikkor, Tamron lenses.

 

Allan

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got the Mk2 back in January and now I use it 85% of the time.  Only use the Canon for longer telephoto shots.  My one and only complaint on the Sony is because you use the screen as there is no viewfinder (although I think the Mk3 has a viewfinder) it sucks the battery quicker, especially when in bright sunlight as you have to turn up the brightness on the screen.  But I just keep extra batteries for that.

 

Jill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Nigel Kirby said:

I am also looking at the RX100 Mk3. I have CS4 and CS5 - will I be able to process the raw files using either of these, or only Jpeg?

(or will this not work at all ie what other software would I need to obtain?)

 

Thanks

Nigel

 

I suspect CS5 will be OK as I'm on CS6 and using the later RX1004 (does that make sense?) anyway, the following handle my version and should be fine for you with RAW:-

 

Iridient, RawTherapee, RawDeveloper

 

Hope this helps

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Nigel Kirby said:

I am also looking at the RX100 Mk3. I have CS4 and CS5 - will I be able to process the raw files using either of these, or only Jpeg?

(or will this not work at all ie what other software would I need to obtain?)

 

Thanks

Nigel

If CS4 or CS5 won't open the Sony RAWs directly, then you can convert the Sony RAWs to DNG first using the free Adobe Raw to DNG convertor which CS4 and CS5 will open.

Adobe DNG convertor can be downloaded form Adobe's website. There are both Mac and Windows versions available.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading threads on here, I bit the bullet and just splashed out on a Mk5. Very, very capable, but I won't be getting rid of the 5d 3 anytime soon. Took it to Munich last week as a backup. Some uploaded to Alamy. cracking little camera

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny about those who said if they lost their RX100 they'd run fast to get another. 

I have the RX100. Kept it in my handbag. Went to a restaurant, took shots of food. Next day, looked for it and couldn't find it. Thought I'd left it on the restaurant seat. Called...no camera. 

Considered it gone. Ordered the MK3. Like immediately. Felt naked without one.  A month or two later, I found the one I lost under my car seat. I have them both and will keep them both. I do like the viewfinder of the 3. 

Talk about a travel camera.....

Betty

 

Edited by Betty LaRue
On for in
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, M.Chapman said:

If CS4 or CS5 won't open the Sony RAWs directly, then you can convert the Sony RAWs to DNG first using the free Adobe Raw to DNG convertor which CS4 and CS5 will open.

Adobe DNG convertor can be downloaded form Adobe's website. There are both Mac and Windows versions available.

 

18 hours ago, ReeRay said:

 

I suspect CS5 will be OK as I'm on CS6 and using the later RX1004 (does that make sense?) anyway, the following handle my version and should be fine for you with RAW:-

 

Iridient, RawTherapee, RawDeveloper

 

Hope this helps

Thanks Mark and ReeRay

Nigel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also using Canon gear supplemented by RX100 2. Chose the 2 due to focal range and good price at the time. Faster and viewfinder would have been good but the range is more important to me.

It generally lives in a lowepro pouch on my belt and allows me to get shots that wouldn't be possible with the Canon kit.

Convert raws to dng in above raw converter.

Hope this helps 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Yes, I bought the RX100 M3 specifically so I can maintain a lowish profile when out and about. People I think are a lot less apprehensive when they see a little camera. I like to act up to the amateurish, bumbling havent-got-a-clue stereotype. People lurking with huge lenses and expensive looking kit look ridiculous in so many situations.

 

My RX100 got hurt lately and I have had to send it away. Its been two weeks and finally its on its way back home. I have missed it so much.   

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This little beauty sounds most tempting but before I splash out on a new piece of kit I thought I would check with the pros about my existing Sony DSC HX10V compact camera. I haven't submitted any photos using it, as yet, because I wasn't sure if the spec was sufficient and didn't want to get 'blocked'. My normal camera is a Nikon 7100 but it would be useful to have something smaller in my pocket for those special moments when light and subject combine. Do people think the spec on this camera is sufficient for Alamy QC?

https://www.dpreview.com/products/sony/compacts/sony_dschx10v

I know that sensor size is the all important thing but I am not sure if this passes muster?

Body type Compact
Max resolution 4896 x 3672
Effective pixels 18 megapixels
Sensor size 1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm)
Sensor type BSI-CMOS
ISO Auto, 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200, 6400, 12800
Focal length (equiv.) 24–400 mm
Max aperture F3.3–5.9
Articulated LCD Fixed
Screen size 3
Screen dots 921,600
Max shutter speed 1/1600 sec
Format MPEG-4, AVCHD

 

Any help much appreciated. Thx. John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't believe images from your existing compact would pass QC mainly due to sensor size. I wouldn't go below a one inch sensor, although images from my, thankfully, long gone Canon G9 did pass I was never happy with them or the camera although I do miss the neutral density filter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Joe Gaul said:

I don't believe images from your existing compact would pass QC mainly due to sensor size. I wouldn't go below a one inch sensor, although images from my, thankfully, long gone Canon G9 did pass I was never happy with them or the camera although I do miss the neutral density filter.

Cheers Joe. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, wiskerke said:

Sony DSC HX10V

Sensor size    1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm)

 

So: simply no.

Maybe for news or archival.

 

wim

 

 

That and the super zoom 24-400mm lens is a definite no no.

 

Allan

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Colblimp said:

How is the RX100 mkI?  Is it still relevant?  SHould I try and pick one up or hold out for a newer version?  Thanks, in anticipation.

 

There has been some debate about that here as well. If money is the primary concern, find a used one.

From Mark2 on there's a tilting screen and wifi. Both are a big plus imho.

From Mark3 on the lens is wider 24 vs 28mm eq, but shorter 70 vs 100mm eq. However the aperture is 1.8-2.8 vs 1.8-4.9 for Mk1 and 2.

From Mark3 on there is an electronic viewfinder.

Only Mark 2 has a hotshoe.

The first is the lightest and smallest. (Differences are tiny.)

The underwater housing for a Mk2 will fit a Mk1 with extra rubber strips.

Quality does increase a tiny little bit over the iterations. Mainly to do with noise control, so lower light levels and/or higher ISO are acceptable.

In all cases: you do need good post skills for everything more than the regular snap shot.

However it has some tricks upon it's sleeve (all models): the night and low light level modes. That will mostly give you only a jpg. These are normally usable though.

 

wim

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, wiskerke said:

 

There has been some debate about that here as well. If money is the primary concern, find a used one.

From Mark2 on there's a tilting screen and wifi. Both are a big plus imho.

From Mark3 on the lens is wider 24 vs 28mm eq, but shorter 70 vs 100mm eq. However the aperture is 1.8-2.8 vs 1.8-4.9 for Mk1 and 2.

From Mark3 on there is an electronic viewfinder.

Only Mark 2 has a hotshoe.

The first is the lightest and smallest. (Differences are tiny.)

The underwater housing for a Mk2 will fit a Mk1 with extra rubber strips.

Quality does increase a tiny little bit over the iterations. Mainly to do with noise control, so lower light levels and/or higher ISO are acceptable.

In all cases: you do need good post skills for everything more than the regular snap shot.

However it has some tricks upon it's sleeve (all models): the night and low light level modes. That will mostly give you only a jpg. These are normally usable though.

 

wim

 

 

Looking at that, I should look at the MKIII.  Thanks Wim. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.