One of my trusted sources (Many Thanks!) just told me that the RX100M3 is indeed going to be announced next week on May 1. It will have a pop-up built-in viewfinder! It has a “different” lens. And indeed if you compare the two small images between the RX100/M2 and RX100M3 you will notice a small difference on the lens. Having a f/2.8 aperture at the tele end is really a huge improvement. And that pop up viewfinder is also an amazing addition. This two features alone will make it worth to upgrade from your current RX100!
Question to the source (and other sources): I know for certain there is more to come (beside the RX100M3 and A77II). Can you tell me more about that “other” stuff? Thanks 🙂
Follow the announcement live at SonyAlphaRumors!
– 2am (02:00) San Francisco
– 5am (05:00) New York time
– 10 am (10:00) London time
– 11 am (11:00) Berlin time
– 8 pm (20:00) Tokyo time
–
How to support SonyAlphaRumors:
Just use these link to purchase whatever product you planned to purchase today: [shopcountry 8454] (Once clicked jump to every product you want).
Make a one time donation I will directly use to pay the quite expensive bandwidth you consume in those rumor days:
Thanks!
———
Message to sources: You can send me more info anonymously by using the contact form you see on the very right of your browser. You can also contact me directly at sonyalpharumors@gmail.com.
For readers: Subscribe the RSS feed (Click here) and Twitter (Click here) stream and the Facebook fan page (Click here) in order to not miss any news!
——–
Reminder (SR = Sonyrumor):
SR1=probably fake rumor
SR2=rumor from unknown sources
SR3=50% chance it is correct
SR4=rumor from known sources
SR5=almost certainly correct!
0 Responses
Viewfinder resolution?
I will wait for the RX200. These little upgrades for which they will charge 699,- are not worth the entrance to me – but certainly welcomed by folks who are new to the RX- train.
Who says there will be a RX200?
Sorry that I scoffed in an earlier post where many dreamed the big announcement was going to be about a-mounts. But was it ever any doubt not?
There is the A77II coming too!!!
I was referring to the rumor something else big was coming with the a77II announcement.
I find it ironic a-mount rumors draw some of the biggest number of comments on SAR yet Sony marketing doesn’t see any interest in the system. The a77II is stacking up as Sony’s most boring update since the a3500.
That’s a tad premature.
Based on a 24MP sensor update that smells an awful lot like the disappointing one used in the a6000 and some other things.
Can you please pull you head out of you a s s for five minutes and stop making such ridicules statements. What’s disappointing is not the cameras it’s you dreary outlook on everything.
Yes, so disappointing that it’s still about as good as it gets for an APS-C sensor.
Yeah it’s absolutely terrible! Considering it has on Sensor PDAF (which usually kills performance a bit) it is only the best performing crop sensor ever made… Terrible!
I should add I hope I’m wrong because my a65 was acting up yesterday which may put an a77II in my future.
I guess it’s never premature to start complaining about cameras even before they are released and we know nothing about them.
All sounds good except the “Pop up” viewfinder. Electronic viewfinder popping up down might not last to long.
Well you easily win best avatar.
a popup viewfinder. that’s revolutionary. REALLY? is that what sony is working on?!???
just give us propper FE lenses!!!!
Us?
yes. us. professional photographers that take photography seriously and that need the correct equipment. not a retarded system with 5 lenses.
just sell the retarted system and get an A99
love the A99 but it’s hard to justify the price comparing it to a Nikon D600. Also I need remote live view and control.
but anyway I want a compact system like the A7 not a gignormous dslr and lenses. that I already have.
More like a professional complainer, stop now you’re embarrassing yourself.
Why would a professional photographer choose E mount over A mount
And why should sony make lots and lots of lenses that 3rd party manufacturerscan make better and cheaper.
You are not limited to only the lenses Sony makes.
Let Sony do what Sony does well…sensors…
And build cameras to put them in so they fully understand what the sen see ors need to do.
Build a reasonable line of lenses….ok ….but sony is not and should not be a lens company…
A real lens company makes lenses with differrent mounts for differrent systems..if Sony wants to do that yhen it would make sense to expand thier lensmaking capacity.
if you had read previous posts in this blog you would realise that sony actually makes it difficult for other manufacturers to make AF lenses for their cameras!!!! Sure, there are MF lenses but those are very easy to manufacture. it’s not like they are helping them or something. They do the opposite! Go read the posts.
Also, why? portability ofc. Not everyone likes to carry truck along to take the shitload of lenses and material. otherwise mirrorless cameras would have no sales. and apparentely their sales have been increasing a lot more than dslr ones.
As I have stated. On numerous ocasions
E mount is only fully compatable with native E mount lenses … nothing else will rapid focus and there is also no ibis.
A very inadequite system for anyone that reqiires a versatile system.
Its only advantage is compact size and PARTIAL com patability with other lenses via adaptors.
E mount is far more space efficient than the A mount. Plus, A mount lenses can be adapted to the E mount. It can’t be done the other way around. Lastly, A mount never competed at the same level with the Canikons of the world. It is basically a failed system, relatively speaking. That is why Sony is slowly divesting from it and focusing efforts toward the E mount.
E mount is only fully compatable with native E mount lenses.
Fast focus does not work on aything elsr and no IBIS.
E mpunt is well suited for sitting in your pocket but ill suited for professional level photography.
I am a professional photographer, working full time, often amongst other professional accredited press photographers. No one told me we elected you to speak for “us.” I have also yet to see any A7+FE lenses being used out there.
That said, Sony has done an impressive job releasing 5 FE lenses in 5 months covering the 24-200mm range. There are a massive amount of full frame a-mount lenses being produced by Sony for sale that will produce hi IQ on your a7 or inexpensive used minolta ones available.
care to share how you work interiors with your ultra wide zoom FE lens?
A professional in need of wide angle zooms and with half a brain would either/or:
– refrain from investing into a sytem for his professional work, that does not offer a wide angle zoom
– know that there are plenty of adapted wide angle options if needed
I photograph interiors on the side. I captured interiors for a designer & architect with an a7r and a Canon 17mm ts-e and 24mm ts-e a couple of weeks ago:
http://www.christophergalluzzo.com/Gva/Armonk-Residence/Armonk-Proofs/n-x8NdX/
I highly recommend the combination.
I said zoom.
I also brought a Sony zeiss 16-35, but didn’t bother taking it out of my bag since the 17 & the 24 meet pretty much all the needs for interiors.
that’s because you are not a serious photographer. no way it’s all that’s needed for interiors. otherwise they wouldn’t even make wide angle zooms. duh.
Lol, okay guy. You ignored the fact that the Sony zeiss 16-35 exists to make a lame attempt at insulting me. Unlike you I posted a link to my work. Where is your “serious work?” Let’s see it.
My non-serious photography is disseminated to news outlets 5 days a week. My interior clients pay serious money for my non-serious interior photos and love the results for their campaigns. They keep coming back.
Do you shoot serious real estate photos? Otherwise there is no better combination currently in 135 format than the a7r + canon tilt shifts for “serious” interiors.
“care to share how you work interiors with your ultra wide zoom FE lens?” – your question to me, which I answered.
I answered you – with the 16-35 (which is a great 16-35, btw). Simply because you cannot afford it does not mean it is a “piece of …..”
I asked you to share your “serious” work. Well? You criticize and insult and do it behind a veil of anonymity without any proof of quality work to back up your ignorant statements.
FE lens? please tell us where to buy.
no one ever heard of that FE lens. send sony rumors a message. we all want to know.
Still no link to your “serious” work – Nothing to show or ashamed to show it?
you want you pay for it.
Ashamed it is, but sure I’ll pay you what it’s worth: _____
tell you what, I’ll give you 2 hours free of charge of my work if you tell us where did you get your magic UWA FE lens.
I have the Nikon 14-24mm F2.8 probably the best uwa zoom ever made . along with the Distagon 21mm one of the very best uwa primes ever made and my Sigma 35mm F1.4 . All of which easily fit on an adapter and work on my A7R .AF is neither necessary nor all that useful for UWA shooting.
If you do not depend on AF for your “pro” work you can pretty well mount any lens ever made.With enough cash you could easily assemble the best lens available at every focal length you use.
that’s the point. it’s stupid to buy a camera and have to rely on adapters that are heavy expensive and degrade image quality and make it lose other features.
better just buy other camera.
OR
sony could make proper lenses.
do you mean Sony should drop all other developments and focuses on FE lenses to satisfy you?
yes,
Mommy I Need Lenses WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
sony makes babies cry.
Yes Sony should just stop developing things like PlayStations and phones and tablets and other cameras (good thing they ditched the TV section already) and rename themselves The Company That Only Makes FE Lenses For Proper Serious Photographers That Take Photography SeriouslyTM (and we do mean SERIOUSLY) Such As The Wonderful RISKINHOS
Because that will make them really successful.
spot on.
Ok guys you got your wish
My guess that this might be a superzoom as per my earlier guess was incorrect.
Perhaps Sony might as some of you have suggested still put a superzoom on an rx10 variation with 2000mm equivelent to compete with Nikon.
Well, the Nikon super-zoom is merely a rumor now and probably has caught Sony flat footed.
If you are corrrect and Nikon caught Sony sleeping yhen I am sure they are awake now an srambling to come up with a better 2000mm. 1″ superzoom ASAP.
My suggestion is
Concentrate on the long end..200pmm and eliminate sone wa capability.
A little faster lens
Bend the lightpath with mirror or prism to reduce size.
A really big plus would be CLOSE FOCUS AT LONGER FOCAL LENTHS.
Most superzooms have a macro function that allows very close focus at a short focal length..I suggest close focus at the tele end so we can approach the subject until 1″ to 2″ fills the frame.
I would not worry about the short focal lengths because any number of pocket cameras cover that and the user can just stick a second camera in thier pocket..the user of this camera will want the higher quality long lens and real close focus/ macro…not a macro setting at 1mm from the subject and 20mm focal length.
If they do want the 1mm wa macro..the tiny camera in thier other pocket has that.
It’s a fixed lens camera, who cares who makes it? If Nikon bring out the camera you want, go and buy it. It really is that easy.
Pretty bold Barry, stating what users of this camera will want.
Personally I’m more interested in 1mm focus at a 20mm focal length, and I would be interested in this type of camera. Nikon already makes a 1200mm equivalent crap lens, don’t they? If the cam is good enough, 1200mm is good enough, and anything more can be crop-zoomed. 2000mm, remember, is only a RUMOR. We would have to see if the implementation, if any, was any good at all, or was just junk to sell cameras to people who believe that BIGGER numbers are BETTER numbers.
What if instead they advertised by angle of view instead of focal length?
In any case, I would be interested in seeing what any P&S cam could do at 2000mm, it would be gobs of fun to do some warbler and offshore duck photography. It is more fun for me, however, to do macro mushroom photography at 20mm.
I am not saying that short focal lengths and 1mm macro function are not usefull.
I AM SAYING any number of pocket cameras have that capabilyty.
If you want that plus the 2000mm then the 2000mm zoom does not need them as you can easily put a second camera in your pocket.
You would buy this superzoom for the long focal length and if the long focal length does not appeal to you you would not be buying this big expensive heavy superzoom.
The wide angles and 1mm macro function will do nothing to improve the sales or functionality and leaving them out will allow Sony to put more quality into the more important features.
Do you hear yourself Barry?
You just said that including WA and macro functionality will do nothing to improve the functionality.
What you are arguing for is not more overall functionality, but more functionality AT THE TELE END at the expense of functionality at the short end, because it is your belief that will be a better response to market desires.
A super-zoom is just that, a super-ZOOM, meaning different focal lengths. The entire range is important. How about cutting it to 1000-2000mm, which would be a reasonable zoom range enabling consistent quality? Not likely. Where to draw the line is the question.
In their earlier model Nikon drew the line at 1200mm, not necessarily at the wide end. So did Canon in the SX-50, which is 24-1200mm equivalent.
The fact that you keep pushing for wa end indicates to me that you would not actually purchase a big 2000mm equivelent superzoom.
I think 100-2000mm equivelent with close focus tele would be ideal for wildlife, sports etc that really need the long reach.
Again I am not saying wa should not be available but a second pocket camera will do a better job for less money while allowing the long lens to better do what it is made for.
Do you hear yourself arguing for Sony to put wa on a camera that you clearly have no intention of buying.
If you were a wildlife or nature person who wants to use this than your statement would be mre valid…except that then you would agree with me ant not be making that statement.
Another option however would be to have a second built in lens or lens group that would be engaged and disengaged from flipping the same mirror used to bend the lightpath to shorten the lens.
This way your wa capability will not compromise the iq of the long tele zoom.
Well, this is where you are exactly wrong–I am seriously considering the 100M2 or M3, or the SX-50, to the point where I am 95% certain that I will purchase one of them. I currently don’t shoot distance wildlife, although I would love to be able to, because I don’t want to lug around the equipment needed to do so. Sometimes I help others schlep their stuff, but I’m not into it. I do a lot of canoeing in the northwoods.
While there, I do shoot macro stuff on the forest floor and elsewhere, and lots of it. That is also wildlife photography. I would argue that there is a much larger universe of wildlife at the macro level than at the distance level. Serious distance stuff is much more specialized, and much more niche, than WA, or possibly even modest macro capability. There are great landscapes out in nature as well, for which you can keep 100mm, it is useless, and don’t talk to me about sweep panorama or I will meet that with crop zoom.
And as far as SERIOUS distance photography is concerned, this camera will be junk, as you know–however, as far as SERIOUS macro photography is concerned, it could acquit itself quite well.
It is probably correct, however, to say that the average perv will want 2000mm over anything, but that would necessitate a C-POL to reduce the reflections from the intervening windows.
So you already have your pocketable wa before you purchase the supertele…you have proven my point.
To put it another way..here is a reasonable rsal life com poo arison.
Sigma makes a reasonably good 150–500mm lea reasonably good 50- 500mm.
Tamron just released a better 150-600mm
And. Canon has a really really good and expensive 600mm lens.
I am sure you are familiar with these lenses.
Just for porposes of comparison lets ignore the fact that Canon has a differrent mount.
Pease rank these lenses in the order you would want them and explain your reasons.
Personally I would put the 150- 600 first for value quality and long reach plus versatility..but lets hear your spin on it.
Barry, usually you’re pretty articulate, but this time you’re off the mark.
“So you already have your pocketable wa before you purchase the supertele…you have proven my point.”
The POINT is that I am CHOOSING to NOT purchase a 2000mm.
The critical thing you’re not understanding is that I WILL NOT HAVE both decent WA and macro capability, and 2000mm capability, in 2 different cameras. I WILL NOT PURCHASE the 2000mm capability, UNLESS the WA and macro functionality is maintained.
There isn’t any need to address your hypothetical, when the ACTUAL situation can be analyzed well on its own.
edit: I WILL NOT PURCHASE the 2000mm capability in a different body, UNLESS the WA and macro functionality are maintained in that body.
The choice is 2000 zoom no wa
Or wa to 2000 with poorer guality.
You would buy niether..as per my earlier statement that you disagreed with
So since you do not intend to purchase one why do you argue so hard about what features it should have.
I actually would like such a camera and these are the features I would actually preffer to purchase.
“The choice is 2000 zoom no wa
Or wa to 2000 with poorer guality.”
Really? You know this for sure? You know the exact implementation? You know that it isn’t worse in the middle of the range instead? How much poorer? What is the actual performance at 2000mm?
You’re talking out your azz. Usually I find you pretty good, but with this exchange, I understand why many other posters can’t stand you–you treat your poorly-articulated opinions and biases as though they are fact.
Which they are not.
Oddly enough in daylight the Nikon V models deliver excellent AF using any Nikon lens on the adapter.While some are obviously huge , considering the 2.7x crop factor the like of the 180mm F2.8 will get you to near 500mm equiv. The 300mm F4 gives you an effective focal length of 810mm it may not be tiny but it is a fraction the size of achieving 800mm in APS or FF
While it sounds all great a 1″ sensor super-zoom with a crazy long lens, the quality of the segment is not targeting serious photographers. Maybe it’s a niche Nikon will try to fill but I suspect not. Why? Because I was shocked at how bad the Nikon 1 V series of 1″ sensor bodies are and they’re quite expensive. On paper, they look grand but IQ really sucks to the point I wouldn’t own one a 1/3 the price.
The choice currenly avalable is 1/2.5″ superzoom or C.
This is basicall in betwee the current bridge camera and a real system camers.
The 1″ sensor is 5x what the 1/2.3″ is.
This is no substitute for a ” real” camera but I think it would be usefull to carry when a real camera with a long lens is not possible.
This os why I would want one and also why I would prefer it as good as it can be at the long end.
I doubt makers are lining up to give that rumored camera competition at 1.3KG, probably larger than even the RX10 by quite a margin (lens mostly) and a super slow lens which makes it only really useful in good daylight and especially compromised for moving subjects, which IMHO is the prime purpose that superzooms should cover.
Nice thing with the view finder and bright lens. May be they can even add xavc codec and full sensor readout for video? I will wait a bit before getting the rx100 ii.
I wish for this too 😀
I wonder how big and heavy this is going to be. If this gets too big to fit easily into a pocket other options start to look more appealing. I find my original RX100 is on the upper end of what is comfortable to carry in a pocket.
This camera is probably going to cost about the same as an A6000, has a much smaller sensor and a fixed lens. A popup viewfinder small enough to fit into an RX100 style camera is probably going to be much worse than the one in the A6000. The 4 times larger sensor in the A6000 makes up for the slower kit lens.
Size is everything for the RX100. It could be this camera is designed to compete with the Canon GX1 and not be a continuation of the RX100 series which would be a shame.
I think Sony realizes that they need to keep it compact – it’s what has made the rx100 a success. The 2.8 lens is a big upgrade if the size remains the same.
Popup viewfinder, again?
http://photorumors.com/2013/05/05/rumors-sony-rx200-coming-in-june-with-a-built-in-pop-up-viewfinder/
Cut / paste / shameless self promotion? Sure! I’ll take two please!
maybe it won’t be an EVF just a rangefinder type one.. I don’t know, I would rather have 24-70 with similar apertures as rumored, and a selfie lcd just like on the nex-3n. The full sensor readout is a sure thing, PDAF would be a nice addition too.
+1 for 24-70 !!!
There’s no 1″ compact camera to have such a wide lens.
At least an ultra wide converter (x0,75) to adapt on 28-100 would be nice…
a converter would kill the compactness of the thing, all I want to carry around is a camera and a small flash (also the f20m flash should use the same lithium battery as the camera does 🙂
It’s nice to have… carry it or leave it is your option.
It sounds like an absolute dream camera and a really big upgrade to those who already have one. EVF was actually the thing I missed on the RX100MkI.
Yet most people in the comments are whining because not this or that and it’s no a-mount and not an FE lens not 2000mm blablabla.
RX100 is already No1 and in future it’s gonna be like the ultimate camera some people will ever need…
I love the RX100M2 I bought for my son, and it sounds like M3 might be the next travel camera I buy :-). It is so nice to have a small camera with decent quality and so much UI in common with my A77. Just a simple thing like being able to do manual focus with focus peeking with a pocket camera is gold (even though DOF is rather big). It is a super pocket camera for Sony DSLR/SLT-users.
The addition of a pop-up viewfinder will be a great and needed improvement to an already great camera. I already own the RX100M2 and opted to buy the optional snap-on viewfinder. It’s a bit clumsy sticking on top of the camera. The viewfinder was a very expensive option, so having it built justifies a big bump in price.
It does not really justify a big bump in price. The old addon EVF is overpriced, propably because they released it for the RX1
Granted the “snap-on” EVF was expensive! It was a MUST HAVE for me because I compose with a viewfinder to my eye, not holding a camera up in front of me at arms length.
Lets hope that EVF does not add as much to the price that I had to pay. I also hope that it is as good.
I doubt that I’ll buy one anyway, because I very happy with my current RX100M2 with it’s snap-on EVF. I do have the option/advantage of being able to take the EVF off and slipping the camera into my pocket. I suspect that including EVF will increase the size of the camera a bit. It will be interesting to see. I attach a recent photo that was cropped out a larger photo original taken in the landscape mode, taken with the RX100M2.
I agree about composing with an EVF/OVF the old holding the camera like a mobile phone school of composing , will never be my choice. I would not consider a camera without either a built in EVF/OVF or the ability to add one on { preferably built-in} .
Though the RX100 is a much smaller camera looking at the Panasonic GX7 and GX1 which I own there is no real difference in size. I think that without the external housing an EVF is not anywhere near as bulky. I would happily exchange a 10-20% gain in size for the advantage of an EVF.
http://camerasize.com/compact/#183,472,467,ha,f
This camera is a POS.
Is that you, daido moriyama?
pop up viewfinder?! — presumably EVF? wonder how this pop up VF will work? why pop up, sure its to keep it compact, but sounds like the size compared to Mk2 will be compromised.. i hope not.
Size may be a concern with this new camera. The battery may have to be bigger to power an EVF. If the battery is going to be bigger, I just hope there will be a GPS. You need that on a travel camera nowadays.
Uhm, the MkII can take an EVF. Same battery is used in the RX1 and that can take an EVF… just saying.
Good point.
EVF doesn’t usually such more power on a LV camera, normally because it either uses EVF or LCD, both of which seem to have roughly similar power drain.
But that’s an extra $450 and you lose pocketability.
I bet 100$ no gps.
Oh dear… ‘pop up’ shouts LF1 level EVF quality. Handy in a pinch but not a drastic advantage. Ok if they can shoe-horn the RX10 EVF in there (very, VERY doubtful) then that would really be something.
But pop up EVF could mean we see the same in the RX1 II… Now that ‘could’ be interesting.
It’s like Sony are trying to work out what is the most expensive compact camera they could sell! It’s great news that they are pushing the technology. I suspect this is not going to be cheap. The RX100 Mk2 was >£200 more at launch than the RX100 Mk1, So the Mk3 could easily be another £200-300 (probably the latter if that’s a good EVF)…
So RX100 Mk3 launch price of £799?
Bring it. If Sony can fit a really excellent ‘pop up’ EVF, with the faster lens ALL in the same size as the Mk2 then I would pay the premium. It would be worth it. Every penny.
I’m waiting for the RX10 Mk2 with 4K and XAVC-S codec. Plz.
That would be great. For now the RX10 does quite a decent job
A pop-up EVF inside the current RX100II would lose the built-in flash.
The only way to keep both as I see it would be to make the camera longer/wider to accomodate the EVF part on the left side (looking at the back-/LCD-side of the camera) of the LCD and flash. Extending the camera from the already short 102mm to for exemple 120mm, like A6000, would still make it shirt pocketable. For deep coat pockets the the extra length would be an advantage, still shorter than a typical smartphone like the 137mm of the Samsung Galaxy S4.
The EVF would in its retracted position be completely inside the camera, maybe even behind a door, on top of the camera like the built-in flash avoiding the construction of a fixed EVF sticking outside the camera body.
Pulled out, similar to the Samsung NX30, it could even be 90 degrees swivable like the finder in Panasonic GX7.
If only Sony use a good enough EVF like the one in A6000 and not the worst kind used in A3000 this could be the perfect pocketable large sensor compact!
“A pop-up EVF inside the current RX100II would lose the built-in flash.”
Or they could just change to a smaller X100 style flash, rather than the pop-up one.
I hope we don’t lose the pop-up flash.
Hopefully the evf can be added above the lens with a minimal increase in body height.
No, they could not. The Sony RX100/II is a much smaller camera than the Fujifilm X100: http://camerasize.com/compact/#133,332,ha,f
Did you even take a look at the cameras before writing?
There are many cameras smaller than the RX100 that have a flash. Did you consider that before writing? Did you look at the style of built-in flash on the X100 and consider that before writing?
Yes I did. All those cameras use a much smaller sensor and therefore also have much thinner lenses. No matter where a flash is mounted on the front on the RX100/II it will be obscured by the fat zoom lens and cast a shadow on the object when used at close range. That is the reason Sony used a pop-up flash. Did you think about that?
Yes. There are positions it would work, many small zoom cameras use them. There are many that would consider the addition of an EVF worthy of the loss of the pop-up flash and an acceptable in-built type chosen. Maybe you just aren’t one of them?
I already wrote ´such cameras, like a small Canon compact I have myself, have thinner and also shorter lenses. It’s not the same thing. That doesn’t make it possible to use that solution on RX100. Is that too hard for you to understand?
Given that the RX100II has a hot shoe. Another possible solution could be to replace the current flash with a pop-up EVF and supply the camera with a small external flash like with some older NEX cameras. But that would not be as practical as a built-in flash.
“Is that too hard for you to understand?”
Not at all. I understand that you think you are right, and that my views are ill considered. You’ve made that quite plain. I’ll leave you to your pedantry and return to my photography.
Or they could just put a slimmer flash on the front of the pop-up EVF (if such a thing exists). You know, thinner like exist on many other devices thinner than the RX100Mx. Wouldn’t want to consider using that new technology though, would we …
It’s also only one of the possible reasons for the pop-up flash. There are multiple ways to solve the shadow problem.
It is the MAIN reason for RX100. Not with a flash mounted on front like on X100. So NO and NO.
Admin, what about next RX1 rumors? Nothing at all?
RX2 will have pop-up EVF. Where have heard that before? And it will have a f1.8 or f1.4 lens. It will likely have the A7S high ISO sensor but with 24MP. Flip out LCD. Is that good enough for you?
I doubt you can have a7S high ISOs with 24 megapickles.. 🙂 f1.4 would make the lens fatter. About the pop up EVF, in this case, rx100, and in your wished rx2, I think its quality would be too low and good just for composition, not for a 10x magnified use or to be useful in low light.
If an RX2 is on the way, I wonder what Sony threw in this time. Perhaps they add a nice EVF. Or changed the focal lenght of the lens.
So I don’t get it. You express the focal range in terms of 35mm equivelency. But not the aperature? Why be so deceptive? Its really f4.86-f7.56 in 35mm equivelent terms. Why not say so.
Because that only applies to depth of field. Who cares about subject separation on a 1″ sensor? You’re not getting crazy bokeh anyway.
f/1.8- f/2.8 is relevant because its light gathering capability is f/1.8 – f/2.8
At the long end, the lens will be 37mm actual focal length. With an aperture of f2.8, this make the entrance pupil ~13mm. Now, if I have a full frame 100mm lens with a entrance pupil of ~13mm, that gives me an aperture of … wait for it … f7.56. A full frame 100mm f2.8 lens will have a entrance pupil of 35mm, and gather much more light than this lens.
A 37mm f2.8 lens on a 1″ sensor will gather as much light as a 100mm f7.56 on a full frame sensor. You do need to adjust the aperture by the crop factor as well as the focal length to compare apples to apples.
There is no free lunch; there is no substitute for big glass.
However, the is no substitute for the compactness smaller sensors allow as well.
However, because the sensor is smaller, it doesn’t require the same ‘volume’ of light so-to-speak. So you will be get the same shutter speed as a 100mm at f2.8 on a larger full frame.
Exposure — light/mm^2 — will be the same; however, the total light falling on the smaller sensor will be less, so you will end up with (a lot) more noise than a full frame image.
Plus, your DOF will be different, so you really can’t compare the results directly since you pictures wouldn’t be the same even if the cameras captured them perfectly.
To properly compare across formats, you need to set the same DOF, shutter speed and angle of view. This means you need to apply the crop factor to both the focal length and aperture. If you do this, and set the same shutter speed, the two formats will have different ISO settings that result in a properly exposed picture, with FF requiring the higher ISO. Which picture is “better” — less noise — will depend on the relative efficiency of the sensors and supporting hardware.
See http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/#1 for details and why f2.8 is not always equivalent to f2.8 when comparing across formats.
—f is always f—
after you read all that crap…did you test it?
cause i did, and its full of lies, facts and reality dont agree with all that bullshit
you say “To properly compare across formats, you need to set the same DOF, shutter speed and angle of view”
simple…YOU CANNOT GET EQUIVALENT PICTURES
the lens is what give you the image, not the sensor or film, and unless you are putting a FF lens on a smaller sensor, you will always had different images because lenses are different made for each sensor size.
“Exposure — light/mm^2 — will be the same; however, the total light falling on the smaller sensor will be less, so you will end up with (a lot) more noise than a full frame image”
lol
thats the first thing a tried after i read that bullshit equivalence site and its a loud NO
You actually get more noise from a FF sensor with that “equivalence aperture” than with a smaller sensor
Instead of repeating some lies you read somewhere, try it first yourself
You tested it wrong. Proper tests reveal it to be true, for as long as sensors are about as efficient per area (QE) of course. But then again, did you factor that in yourself?
Simple physics really.
Zohee35, alas my friend , physics are never simple to some people lol
You have mixed up “light gathering” with “rate of flow of photons”. If we use a pipe analogy, one is the amount of liquid moved and the other is like how fast the flow is.
It applies to DOF and most critically to total light gathering it is idiotic to keep posting such nonsense. If the nominal aperture was all that mattered a fz200 with its 25-600mm F2.8 would be beyond amazing.F2.8 on the tiny 1″ sensor is not the same as on mFT which is not the same as on APS which is not the same as on FF.
Though it is incredibly simply equivalence seems to challenge the mind of many small sensor users. Here is how it works in three simple steps .To be equivalent to a larger format theimage must have:
1.The same AOV
2.The same DOF
3.The same total light.
READ AND REPEAT TILL IT SINKS IN
Lenses give you the picture
Not the sensor or film behind it
YOU CANNOT GET EQUIVALENT IMAGES from diferent sensor formats
simple beacuse each lense is made different for each size
— f is always f —
total light gatering lol thats the idiotic idea lol
tell me please…
how the speed booster fit in that equivalence crap theory
why dont you talk about Transsmision, or light/mm2
please, first try it for yourself, you will see its all crap, and all that theory fall apart at first test
YOU CANNOT GET EQUIVALENT IMAGES
read and repeat till it sinks in
Great another village idiot. You made so many incorrect statements that I don’t know where to start . Here are just a couple then perhaps you can go read a book or do a little study to find the rest.
“YOU CANNOT GET EQUIVALENT IMAGES from different sensor formats”
Of course you can , a 3200ISO image at F4 on FF with a 50mm lens, will be equivalent to a 800ISO image at F2 on mFT with a 25mm lens. Equivalent means , same effective AOV, same DOF and critically same total light which will give the same noise .
“total light gathering lol that’s the idiotic idea lol”
Total light is all that matters it is a fundamental .There is even a nice simple equation to explain it { that might give you a fighting chance of understanding it, or maybe not}
Total Light = Exposure x Effective Sensor Area.
There are numerous scientific resources that explain this very comprehensively .Just a hint forums filled with small sensor fanboys are typically not a very good source of information
Because aperture is independent of sensor size?
written like this, apperture is relative to focale lenth. So, if you give an equivalent for focale lenth, you have to keep it for apperture,.. unless you want to express apperture in absolute value.
For now, the concept of a pop-up VF is just a pure wishful thinking. Seriously, it’s not even practical. Small pop-up VF(PVF)? What about using iron sight instead? Come on, good VF needs space. Take Fuji T1 or Sony A7 as an example.
But I’ll be really glad to be proven wrong this time.
Great news for fans of the 1″ sensor format (such as myself!)
This could however be bad new for Nikon who is trying to get the Nikon1 System off the ground in North America.
Although 2 very different cameras, the RX100 and V3 are now more competitive than before.
The big advantage of the RX100 (apart from the great sensor) is of course its ‘pocketability’
The Nikon1 V series has typically had 5 advantages:
1) EVF
2) SPEED – focus and shooting speed
3) ULTRA-WIDE – ability to shoot ultra-wide with interchangeable lenses
4) SUPER-TELE – ability to shoot ultra-long with interchangeable lenses
5) BOKEH – the ability to create nice bokeh with fast, interchangeable lenses
How does the RX100 III compete in these areas?
1) EVF has been added (doesn’t need to be great – just ‘workable’ when needed)
2) SPEED – still a win for the Nikon
3) ULTRA-WIDE – can be mitigated somewhat through the use of sweep panorama, and add-on 3rd party conversion lenses (Sony – please give us a Sony conversion lens)
4) SUPER-TELE – still a win for the Nikon but with 100mm and 20MP to work with in post/crop, certainly enough for many people
5) BOKEH – the Nikon 50mm (equiv) f1.8 produces *very* nice bokeh renderings. How will the new RX100 lens compare at 50mm and other FoVs in terms of rendering? It *could* be a win for Sony, but is a ‘wait and see’ at the moment.
With an ‘overlap’ in more areas now then ever, competitive pricing of course becomes even more important.
Sony has been very reasonable/aggressive with their pricing strategy recently.
Nikon continues to have their head in the sand (when it comes to pricing). If Nikon doesn’t start lowering their prices on new Nikon1 products I can see Sony beginning to dominate this (1″) market. I don’t think the Samsung appeals to the same (photo enthusiast) market so right now it’s just Sony and Nikon.
Well, you forgot a major point: SIZE.
I’m only a “fan” of 1″ sensors because they provide the best size/quality ratio at the moment. The RX100M3 should still be shirt pocketable (though given the rumoured features, that may no longer be the case) whilst the Nikons are not.
And for many, that is a decisive factor.
Well, I was specifically discussing the Nikon 1 system. They use a different 1″ sensor than Sony and comparing them it’s clear the Sony has a edge.
Part of Nikon’s reasoning for going 1″ in their compact line clearly is compactness. However, it’s equally clear they want a format that doesn’t compete head-on with their cash cow DSLRs.
On a slightly different note, the pocketable compact fixed lens camera, IMHO, doesn’t have a huge future. Obviously, on the low-end cellphones are eating compact cameras’ lunches. But as cellphone cameras get better and better the argument for filling another pocket with an expensive upper-end fixed lens compact will shrink as well.
That’s why I just don’t get the short-sightedness of Sony’s Alpha strategy. But then nothing gets me worked up quicker than pondering the incompetence of nearly bankrupt Sony’s marketing department. ;^)
Well, this is precisely why everyone should up their game and target the higher end:
Nikon should stop trying to force their entry-level DSLRs, and let that space to the 1 system. The latter which, in turn, should start being expensive *for a reason*.
Sony, IIRC, has reduced its offering on beginner compact cameras. At the same time, it came up with a really good offering in the form of the RX100 (minus the firmware upadtes that won’t come, which is retarded). That’s a good way.
As long as smartphones do not provide appropriate grips, buttons and rings… there will be a market for expert compacts. And with all these slick designs being churned out by phone manufacturers, I don’t see RX-type cameras being dethroned.
Even a heavily customised set of Ara modules might not be enough to claim supremacy.
The bottom line on the Nikon 1 V series is the IQ sucks. This makes the entire system grossly overpriced. On paper it all looks wonderful though.
It is nonsense to suggest that the Nikon 1 series IQ “sucks”. There are spectacular images being made with all interchangeable lens cameras of all formats. The Nikon 1 system being no different.
https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=nikon%20v3&sort=interestingness-desc
Obviously there are almost always better technical image quality options regardless of what you shoot. But beyond some specific scenarios just about every interchangeable lens camera is more than capable of deliver excellent results.
Though I have not yet purchased any 1″ sensor camera. I am intrigued by the possibilities that they hold.Considering that the 1″ sensor is in its infancy between Sony & Nikon ,there are already underwater cameras, ILC , an F1.2 lens, high quality pocket-able cameras and the excellent do-it all RX10. I have used the Nikon v2+3 they offer performance that in some areas make high end pro DSLR’s blush. Sensors always move forward and even though the absolute IQ gap between sensors of different size will always remain. However eventually the smaller formats will be good enough for nearly all situations with larger format cameras being increasingly of real value only in specific niche shooting.
One thing I can agree on is the cost of the Nikon 1 cameras .I don’t know if there was a lot of R&D costs or the sensor was more pricey as only Nikon use , or if they just made a cock up in pricing. But there is little doubt that the price has seriously impacted the uptake of the cameras.
12MP sensor 1″ XAVC-S 50mbps and XAVC-S 4k 100mbps are nowadays indispensable for a product of this range
Sony, please include XAVC S and SLOG2. We want decent dynamic range in our video!
It must do so if Sony does not want to be swallowed up by Panasonic. Now the GH4 is going like hot cakes even among professional filmmakers, photographers, film and stage.
Sony wake up!
LOL , you sound like a delusional mFT fan … don’t worry about it there are a lot of them .For video users the GH4 is very attractive for stills photography not so much , the GH4 has the same old same old mediocre image quality of every other 16mp mFT . Terrible high ISO, poor shadow noise and low resolution.
Other than Panasonic saying that they will up production { maybe the sold 100 units lol} where exactly do you have any proof of the GH4 selling like hotcakes .
Maybe :
Japan { nope , in fact there are no mFT cameras in the top 30 in what is the home of mirrorless}
http://dslrphoto.com/dslr/space.php?do=jranking
Maybe :
UK: { nope, afraid not } even amongst mirrorless cameras it is nowhere to be seen}
http://www.amazon.co.uk/s/ref=lp_430660031_pg_2?rh=n%3A560798%2Cn%3A!560800%2Cn%3A560834%2Cn%3A560836%2Cn%3A430660031&page=2&ie=UTF8&qid=1398531507
USA { not , likely was it ?]
http://www.amazon.com/b/ref=cpv_lv_csc?ie=UTF8&node=3109924011&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=merchandised-search-leftnav&pf_rd_r=1NNCR13V8WVDYPBJN08H&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=1779962262&pf_rd_i=502394
The truth is that high-end prosumer cameras like the GH4, E-M1, X-T1 and the A7 models are low volume products compared to consumer models. They simply don’t sell “like hot cakes”. That Panasonic sells more GH4:s than expected shouldn’t be interpreted as meaning that it sells in high volume; it just means that they underestimated demand.
Wouldn’t the 2.8 tele end make this way larger? Hard to believe this will be a pocket camera with that lens. I’d love to see an even smaller 1″ sensor cam with a fixed 28 or 35mm lens instead of the zoom
Its about the time of year to announce a Sony VG30 replacement with 4k.
This should be the true GH4 killer. If Sony can pull off full pixel readout from a 16mp APSC sensor with onboard XAVCS 30p 100mbps ….they should steal a good chunk of GH4 sales.
For kill GH4 lacks an advanced camera… cilelike DR, full control con image NR, color, saturation, shadows ecc, master pedestal settings eccc eccc
GH4 is a king for years from now
Sounds great, this would be my perfect 2nd camera, hopefully its available before summer…
a pop up VF? how can that fit without sacrificing the flash? From the drawings in the manual that was posted it doesn’t look like there is a pop-up VF if the flash remains…
minipixels.net | Automotive Photography + Design
Sorry, it seems you noticed the same discrepancy before I did. I just said the same thing you did prior to reading your post.
Clearly the first published picture showing the RX100MkI was such confusing for some, who didn’t recognize that and thought it was the MkIII we don’t know how it looks yet, that the admin replaced it with the more detailed picture only showing the lens difference between MkI and II versus MkIII.
how big is the sensor ? 🙂
i want to upgrade from NEX7 to RX100III. is it ok? or is ok only if you upgrade from RX100?
It has a 1″ sensor. You will gain portability over your NEX7, but will lose in high ISO capability. While NEX7 can go up to about 1000 without much noise, a 1″ sensor can go to about 400-500 before it begins to become noisy. If you take 18-55 lens for nex7 into account, then RX100 is a win/win in low light. Translating into NEX7 numbers with both lenses taken into account, at 18mm, setting ISO to 400 on RX100mIII is like setting ISO to ~1600 on NEX7 with a stock lens. Same for the long end, But RX100 goes to 100mm equiv, while NEX7 would be 78mm equiv.
Nex7 is interchangeable though and can mount more expensive, faster/larger lenses. RX100 is not.
Keep in mind, this is RX100mIII i’m talking about. Lenses in the first two versions are much slower at the telephoto end.
I don’t need an EVF but I would like to see GPS (as mentioned by others), touch screen and A6000 like pdaf (even if this means lower pixel count). These and the new lens makes it an amazing upgrade and I would finally buy one. And please keep the multi hotshoe.
@ Touch Screen no need for that …
@ GPS would be very useful …
@ New lens with f/2.8 all the way, Hmmm that is very nice …
@ Pop up VF, Awesome ….
@ Let’s see how many MP this beauty is going to have …
touch screen is needed, at least for focus point selection.
waterproof????
please sony… nikon did it, you can do it… dont you?
at least make/sell me a waterproof case for it, like the one the action cam had
I don’t understand the picture shown though. The current hand grip fits around the lens of the Mk1 perfectly.
Examining the drawing in prior leaked drawing from the RX100M3 manual, I can not see a line that would indicate where a “Pop up” EVF would come from. It’s a wonderful idea but….
So, did i get the math correct: This is a 10-37mm f1.8-2.8 zoom designed for the one inch sensor? As a comparison, the 10-20 f3.5 sigma for APS-c i huge. (I know, it’s sigma, but still.) I don’t know what to think.
You’ll have to convert these numbers to FF format equivalency by applying the crop factor. The 10mm of a 1 inch sensor means a wide ange of 28mm (2.8x crop) while the 10mm on an APS-C sensor means 15mm equivalent FOV (1.5x crop). The latter is thus much wider.
Conclusion: don’t compare similar numbers between cameras with different sensor sizes, but convert them to 35mm FF standard to make proper comparisons.
As an aps-c user, to me this is like an approximately 28-100 f3.2/5.0 aps-c lens dof-wise. Plus the evf and that’s almost like being able to fit my NEX 6 with extra 25mm reach in my jeans pocket I was seriously considering getting mk2 for travel but now this one sounds perfect. I just hope the price isn’t much more than rx100.
looks good
how can you say, have ya seen it yet?
A pop-up EVF on the RX100M3 … no way ! Would be too perfect. If ever, the flash would have to go.
They added a flash mount on the rx100 m2 which allowed the attachment of an expensive detachable EVF so maybe it’s more logical to take the pop up flash out altogether and put a pop up EVF there and use the flash mount actually for a detachable flash?
Getting a flash photo right is hard work. I usually pull it back and bounce it off the ceiling if using it at all. The rx100 has so many options for nice photos in low light without the flash maybe the % of people a swap would annoy is less than the advantages.
Announcement due for the 1 May so not long to find out.
While this should be a great update, I myself was hoping for more zoom range. IMO, 3.6x zoom is WAY too limiting, esp. when you’re shooting video. Bad low-light performance means you lose a lot of great shots. So does having practically no zoom…
I think there is one camera from sony that have more zoom range, it’s called RX10
But completely different type of camera. Why not make 2 versions of RX100, each with different lens type.
I am guessing physics wasn’t your strong suit
@Trev Ok internet optics expert, now demonstrate that a slightly longer (but slower) zoom, maybe 5 or 6x, isn’t possible in rx100 form factor. Even if it’s a tiny bit larger is also ok – as it’s suggested this new mk3 is. I like how people shoot down reasonable ideas with meaningless objections, as all of these replies are so far.
Anything is possible! Practical, however, is another issue entirely. The main issue is the 1″ sensor. The bigger the sensor, the longer the lens required for the same “reach” (angle of view, technically). A little compact with a 1/2.3″ sensor only needs 35mm of lens to get a 200mm FF equivalent. The 1″ sensor on the RX100, however, needs 74mm of lens. That’s just under 3 inches, which is a lot to pack into that small of a space.
It would end up looking comical and would have an unusably slow aperture (keeping in mind that each of section that has to be folded into there will make the opening smaller and smaller).
There’s actually really good reasons why the RX10 is the size that it is. It has to be to get the reach required to have 200mm equivalence and to cast a big enough circle of light for the 1″ sensor. (even without the f/2.8 aperture, it would be pretty huge)
I understand this. But I didn’t ask for an RX10 lens. Just *some* increase, even slight, in zoom range. At the expense of speed.
yes, why not making a 16-2000mm f2 in the same rx200 format?
I do not think that the pop up viewfinder and the new lens are a reason to upgrade to this camera if the price will remain as excessive as the 2 first ones. As long as this camera exceeds 450$ in pricing, it is and remains too expensive, and here I simply compare the NEX3-N as a reasonable priced ILS system that can all and more than any RX100.
The RX100 models are very well built come with a 28-100mm lens and are genuinely pocket sized. The NEX3-N was a very low end body stripped of many useful features including basics such as the ability to add an external flash or EVF,pretty slow performance { boot up time. AF, shot to shot time etc}. Though from a purely image quality perspective the NEX3-N was a lot of bang for the buck.
When comparing prices between fixed-lens cameras and ILCs, you have to couple the ILC body with a lens of roughly similar FL range, max aperture and optical quality, otherwise the comparison isn’t really fair. The RX100 lens isn’t perfect, but surely it’s optically better than the NEX kit zooms.
I easily think that the RX100 models are worth the asking price, and with a viewfinder and a better lens, I wouldn’t hesitate to pay even more for one. I live in Sweden, and here the RX100 Mk II costs 5 690 SEK, which is roughly $860! The $450 you speak of is basically what we pay for a regular travel zoom compact, and it would be an absolute bargain for an RX100. I guess we’re used to different prices depending on where we live.
interesting to read here that the coming RX100 M3 CANNOT have TWO pop-up things in the same body (flash and EVF). Let´s see about that…….
Sony has developed a hybrid flash/EVF. Point it forwards and use it as a flash, or point it backwards and use it as viewfinder. From what I’ve heard, several Sony workers became blind after accidentally looking into it when in flash mode.
Sounds cool, but honestly speaking, but I rather mk3 has touch screen for focus and shutter but not Pop-up finder.
What’s the normal amount of time between announcements and release availability?
1 to 2 months
EVF is wrong direction in 100 series – RX100 has to be small – no EVF but definitely touch screen. I do not understand why some of Sony’s cameras are so well designed – A7, NEX-7, RX-1, RX-10, and some seem to be designed just to be worse – rest of the NEX series, now A5000, A6000
Please not bigger or heavier, please not bigger or heavier, please, please, pease….
Having low end EVF is a very stupid decision. Any high quality LCD is a better option than low end EVF on a compact.
Any spec on the flash recycle speed ? If they stay with 5-7sec, everything else doesn’t matter – it’ll be another crap from sony.
Waiting to see the lens reviews – hopefully it won’t be some pocketable crap again – f2.8 at 70mm in 40mm of thickness – doesn’t look promising