Sony RX100 III First Impressions

A street photographer’s take on the new Sony RX100 III

Zeiss Ikon ZI with Leica lens and Sony RX100 III with Zeiss lens

by David Lykes Keenan

Wow, is it ever tiny.

That was my first impression of Sony's new RX100 III point-and-shoot camera. Even the box it came in is small. "The camera is inside this?" I thought when first seeing it.

I ordered the camera sight-unseen from my hometown camera store, Precision Camera & Video in Austin, Texas. I had seen pictures of it online and the fact that it has a built-in electronic viewfinder (EVF) sold me. I had never handled either of the model’s predecessors either so I really didn't know what to expect when the UPS package arrived.

Prior to the Sony, my go-to point-and-shoot had been a Samsung EX2F which I bought for its fast ƒ/1.4 lens. I'm a big fan of very shallow depth-of-field, which is very difficult to achieve in small sensor cameras. Photographing with this camera at or near wide-open helped to produce results closer to what I like.

The RX100 III comes in at ƒ/1.8 at the widest focal length (24mm-e) and at ƒ/2.8 at the longest (70mm-e), so it doesn't sacrifice much in that regard when compared to the Samsung.

I'm primarily a rangefinder street photographer and, as such, I demand a viewfinder. With no viewfinder, the Samsung EX2F was useless on the street in my opinion. Not so the Sony RX100 III. When I photograph with a digital Leica rangefinder, the LCD remains off 95% of the time. Now, I have a very compact camera that can be used exactly the same way.

Samsung EX2F and Sony RX100 III

I'd like to relate my impressions of the Sony RX100 III after owning it for a few days and carrying it for the first time today in place of the rangefinder that is usually attached to my right hand.

These will be purely usability impressions—I will leave the image-quality comparisons to those relish comparing technical specs. Personally, I am of the opinion that if Sony (or any other modern, major camera manufacturer) has gotten to the point of releasing a new camera into the market, its IQ is going to be completely satisfying for my needs when it is used within its known limitations.

Okay, here we go.

Did I mention the Sony RX100 III is tiny? Not iPhone tiny but just about, except for the hump that is the lens housing. Frankly, the camera is smaller than I like, much smaller than my hand. I've ordered an accessory grip that affixes to the front which I think will help me to not accidentally drop it!

When the camera is on, the lens extends further out than I would have expected for a camera of its size—considerably further than the Samsung. Actually this not a bad thing, all things considered. This extension does improve the handling a bit by giving my fingers something more to wrap around.

The build quality is excellent, as I have come to expect from Sony. I own an Alpha 99 and had an a7 for awhile before deciding it was redundant in my collection of cameras. The pop-up EVF is perfectly positioned and, very smartly, opening and closing the viewfinder housing acts as an on/off switch—and when the camera is turned on this way, the LCD stays off. I love it. When the EVF is extended, it feels very solid.

On the other hand, the fact that I rarely use a flash may be a good thing when considering the long-term reliability of the Sony RX100 III. Unlike the EVF, the pop-up flash unit, while not filmsy, does not fill me with confidence that an accidental bump won't cause some serious damage. One word of caution: do not leave the flash extended when carrying the camera.

In use, the EVF is superb. It totally suited me during the time I was walking and photographing with the camera. I did not use the LCD at all. The EVF makes the Sony RX100 III useable in all lighting conditions, even bright sun. Not sure that this can be said for many other point-and-shoot cameras.

When photographing on the street, the camera is very responsive. I have it set to issue a very satisfying shutter click on each exposure. The auto-focus is faster than I am and always seems to lock on by the time I press the shutter.

I have the camera set for aperture-priority exposure (just like my Leica M9) and the nicely knurled accessory ring on the lens is a perfect substitute for the aperture ring on my Leica lenses (minus the click stops). There is a nice visual display of the f-stop setting in the EVF, so it's easily adjustable with the camera at eye-level.

The menu system is easy to navigate especially for users of other Sony cameras. The control buttons, etc. on the camera are all familiar to anyone who has used a digital camera. I did not find it necessary to consult the user's guide at all.

One gripe is that Sony did not include an external battery charger in the box. I bought one separately for about $30 on Amazon. This is certainly not a deal killer, but I think it reflects badly on Sony (and any other similarly guilty camera manufacturer) as being cheapskates.

My friend Jerry Sullivan is the owner of Precision Camera & Video. Jerry sold me the Sony RX100 III. Having been in the camera business for a long time and running the largest camera store in Texas, he's in a position to know what he's talking about. He tells me that that Sony has it sights set squarely on Canon and Nikon with the goal of becoming #1. It certainly seems to me that the recent string of innovative products, of which he RX1000 III is clearly one, indicates that Sony is up to offering a serious challenge to the big boys.

No point-and-shoot camera will ever replace my rangefinder. But as a pocket digital,  the new Sony RX100 III will be a perfect companion, especially when I'm using a film camera. In this street photographer's opinion, Sony has hit a grand slam with the RX100 III.

Dave

RX100 III at B&H Photo
(Out of current stock at Amazon)

David Lykes Keenan is photographer now living in Brooklyn, New York. He recently moved from Austin, Texas where he was both a software entrepreneur and the founder of the Austin Center for Photography. Presently, he is managing a Kickstarter campaign to publish his book Fair Witness: Street Photography for the 21st Century. The project has gotten support from Eli Reed, Elliott Erwitt, Mary Ellen Mark, and many other significant figures of contemporary photography. You can pre-order a copy of Fair Witness and/or support the Kickstarter campaign at the link.

(I liked the writeup for the project as well, especially the comments about voyeurism and the part that begins "What is a Fair Witness, really?" although the latter might not come as news to sci-fi fans. —MJ)

©2014 by David Lykes Keenan, all rights reserved

Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.

TOP's links!

(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:

Kenneth Tanaka: "I understand your delight, David. To use a terrible cliché, these RX100s can punch way, WAY above their weight class. My RX100II is so good that I began wondering just why the hell I have all the rest of this other camera gear.

"But I'll be sticking to my RX100II for several reasons. It's already tricked-out with an essential Franiec grip. I actually greatly prefer the II's removable and articulating evf to the III's pop-up evf. I also prefer the II's longer focal length reach to the III's slightly wider view. But, most importantly, operating my RX100 II has become as second-nature to me as any camera. But enjoy your RX100 III! It won't be long before you stare at that old rangefinder and ask yourself...."

Ann: "The best way I found to hold the RX100 is to put the wrist strap on the left. Turn the camera on, wrap thumb and first finger around the lens from underneath, and sit the base of the camera on the palm. It takes two hands to shoot that way, but it's much more comfortable and stable than trying to pinch the thing with the fingers of my right hand."

Roy: "What I fail to understand about this camera is why incorporate a pop-up VF, with all the fragility and potential for damage and malfunction that implies, when they could have made it integral? The answer I guess is that there's an obsession with ever bigger and better screens on the back of these things and to make the VF integral would have restricted the screen's size. Now that we have live histograms, apart from set-up I only use the screen occasionally for a quick review. If I want to be certain about focus etc I just zoom to the area in question. Still, this class of product is now almost to be regarded as 'disposable' so perhaps durability no longer matters."

Kevin Purcell responds to Roy: "The reason for going to popup, I suspect, has more to do with getting an optical path in the EVF that is longer than the camera is thick. It's similar to the way 'tough shapshot cameras' use folded zoom lens optics to contain the lens inside the sealed body.

"A significant issue with EVF design when you have larger display panels (as we have in newer high(er)-res EVFs) is you need larger optics for the EVF and they end up needing longer optical paths. You can see this trend in mirrorless ILCs with the return of the 'SLR-like hump' for the EVF. The hump is there to give more space for the EVF (and has a secondary marketing advantage of looking like a 'real' camera). Fuji takes a slightly different approach to keep the 'rangefinder style' but they put their EVF optics at right angles to the VF port in the top deck.

"Optically large EVFs (with large apparent field of view) and thin camera bodies are opposing parameters in camera design."

Comments

[Steve Jacobs]

I've long had very negative feelings about Sony and a corporation and have thus refused to by any Sony produ7ct for years. I feel my reluctance slipping...

[Russ]

So is the flash "filmsy" or flimsy! I know some would prefer the former ;)

[John Brewton]

As a native West Texan I naturally distrust anyone from Austin. From what I can see of this project this provides no exception.

[jean-louis salvignol]

DLK shows us photographs that are very convincing about the quality of that cute Sony. Thank you.

[Speed]

Thinking back to the early days of the EVF ... they were a signal that the world as we knew it was soon to end. The luddites were wrong. Again.

[Jock Elliott]

I was at an event a couple of weeks ago when a gentleman next to me whipped out one of the predecessors to the RX100 III. It was, indeed, astonishingly small, small enough that I wondered where I would put my left hand. A Canon G series is probably as small as I would care to go, but perhaps I could adapt.

Nevertheless, kudos to Keenan for an informative and highly readable first impression.

[Eric Perlberg]

I have an RX100 M2 with the add on viewfinder. I really enjoy using this camera, it's mix of strengths for street based work of any kind is compelling. I'd add the following to Dave's report.

The lens has a snap function, if you set it up in the menu the MK2 will zoom directly from 28mm to 35mm then 50mm, 70mm and then 100mm with a light twist of the lens ring. I assume the MK3 snaps from 24 to 28, 35, 50 and 70mm as the new lens is 24-70mm in field of view replacing the earlier 28-100.

I find the tiny wrist strip very useful, so far I haven't felt the need for the grip. I wrap the wrist strap a few times around my wrist and cup this sub 300gm camera in my palm. I can comfortably walk with it discreetly in my one hand for hours. I tend to shoot with it two handed though I can also shoot with it Dido Moriyama style, one handed, with the wrist strap without worries of it slipping from my grip.

The so called crop factor for a 1" sensor is 2.7 thus a 10mm lens has the field of view of a 27mm lens on a camera with a so called full frame chip. It also means (correct me if I'm wrong) that the depth of field at f8 on a full frame camera is obtained at roughly f3 on a 1" sensor camera and f1.8 on a 1" sensor camera has the depth of field of almost f5.6 in 35mm equivalency.

Street photographers like lots of depth of field in their shots hence the mantra of the street photographer for setting up their camera "f8 and be there". I think 1" sensors change this logic since even wide open they have lots of death of field. It's no longer necessary to use an aperture of f5.6 or f8 to get sufficient depth of field and suffer the potential of shooting at too slow a shutter speed to get a usable image. For me the preference for aperture priority is in question. I'm currently shooting my RX100 in shutter priority mode set to 100th of a second and set ISO to auto when I want relatively sharp shots. Essentially the desired f8 depth of field is always there (with a few exceptions). When I want to shoot are-bure-boke style I set the shutter speed appropriately slower.

I often team the RX100 with my 400gm Sigma dp2 Merrill for what for me is a powerhouse of light weight shooting options My understanding is that both Panasonic and Fuji will shortly be announcing 1" sensor cameras to compete with the RX100 M3. I

[Luke]

Mr Keenan says: "I will leave the image-quality comparisons to those relish comparing technical specs."

This is simply wrong.

Image quality matters to those who relish Seeing Photographs.

I understand that for some, the taking of the photograph is the pleasurable part of photography, and the photographs themselves need not ever be viewed.

I like Seeing Photographs, printed or otherwise. I see image quality. I do not see technical specs.

Like Mike says, no one cares how hard you worked to get the photo (or how usable the camera was). It's the photo that matters.

[GH]

I thought it should be pointed at that the RX100iii's lens extends out longer than the EX2F's lens because the sensor is much larger.

The Samsung's lens may be f1.4-2.7, but, to reach equivalently shallow depth of field as the RX100iii, the Samsung's lens would have to be much faster at f1.1-1.6, because of the sensor size differences.

In other words, the RX100iii is capable of shallower depth of field across the entire zoom range.

[V. Roma]

I have the original RX100, which really is an amazing camera for the size. The lack of viewfinder is one of the few issues I have with the camera, though it can be a significant one if shooting outside in sunlight even with Sony's white magic LCD. That said, if I were in the market for another compact or semi-compact camera at this point, I would wait to see what the Panasonic LX8 and Fuji X30 will look like, both of which are expected to have viewfinders. A Fuji X30 with a good EVF would be very appealing to me, even if it is not necessarily that compact.

[V. Roma]

** Meant to say above that both the Panasonic LX8 and the Fuji X30 are expected to have viewfinders AND 1" sensors.

[Mark]

Hi,
I have a question: Does this little camera also suffer from the "F4 in shutter priority" default?
What I mean is this: In recent cameras, Sony has set the shutter priority to give you an aperture of F4 and raise the ISO... I hate that! I found that true for the NEX 6 and the A7 I looked at.
I hope it's clear what I mean... e.g. I set shutter priority with 1/125 sec. to make sure nothing is blurred. Every camera would normally use the lowest possible ISO and also the lowest possible aperture - not the NEX 6 and the A7! They would try to set an aperture of F4 and would even raise the ISO to get there. Can you please test the Rx100 MkIII and tell us if Sony also implemented that "feature" here?
Thanks,
Mark

[jim]

Hi David, have you ever used the Ricoh RG? If so, how do you compare it to the Sony.

[Steve G]

Thanks for an excellent non-pixelpeepian assesment of the RX100 III !

I agree with Mr. Sullivan that Sony does indeed have its sights set squarely on the Canon/Nikon Nikon/Canon duoopoly, and furthermore is doing it the right way - with design innovation and top-notch products.

Before buying my current camera, I rented 3 Sonys from the good folks at lens rentals, having decided renting for evaluation was cheaper than making a purchase decision based solely on net reviews - I live in a village on the far Northern California coast and the closest hand-on camera stores are a day's drive to the Bay Area.

The cameras were the A7 full framer with the Zeiss 35mm, the RX100 II and the RX10, rented in that order. All are fine cameras capable of top-notch results.

The A7 was underwhelming for me. Yes, the full frame and Zeiss 35mm delivered fine results, but just not the kind of OMG, blown away, gotta have it quality I had hoped foor. In the end, the limited lens selection and cost of a system made me decide against it. Oh, and it does make a clunk when you take a shot - reminded me of an old Besler Topcon from back in the day.

Next was the RX100 II, rented with the clip-on EVF. First impression was "My Goodness, this thing is TINY" Great results - one shot wound up on the front page of the local paper. But despite the fact I love small cameras, it was just too small for me - the ergonomics didn't work. I also worried a bit about the clip-on EVF, although the view through it was excellent. Obviously the RX100 III has addressed this.

The weather gods were uncooperative for the time I had with the RX10, but I perservered. Size-wise, the RX10 is perhaps just a bit on the large side for me, but it makes up for that with excellent (for me) feel in the hand. The lens and sensor pairing is superb, and the range of 24-200 with a fixed f2.8 would cover almost every 'keeper' shot I've taken lifetime. The manual controls are perfect for me. I usually shoot in aperture priority and the aperture ring is just what I want. Oh, and once I figured out where the setting was, the camera can be virtually silent - just a tiny leaf shutter 'snick.'

So, I finally decided on the RX10, and once I started shopping B&H had a great deal - the camera at list price, but including an external charger, extra battery and flash, all Sony branded. I've been very happy with my purchase, which is now getting packed for a trip to Europe - I leave in a couple of days.

[Ed Richards]

I have the RX100 II. I thought the lack of an external charger would be a problem, but I did not buy one with the camera. What I have found is that the camera charges very quickly through the micro-USB port. Since that is most common phone charger port (sorry iPhonies), it is easy to plug the camera along with my phone. Then both are always ready to go.

[David Lykes Keenan]

To answer Jim -- I have owned several of the earlier Ricoh GR cameras, my last one, I think was the IV model. I've not ever seen nor used the new APS-C sensor model. Since the GR has a fixed 28mm lens, I'm not sure its a fair fight between it and the Sony. I was very happy with the Ricohs though. They are very well made and highly pocket-able. If the fixed wide-angle lens is your cup-of-tea, I cannot say anything to dissuade you!

[Dennis Ng]

Seems very different impression compared with Ming Thein's. Not sure why.

[Kenneth Tanaka]

@ Jim Re: Ricoh GR vs RX100: I have both and have followed along with the Ricoh GRx camera design since its film camera days.

David's answer is the correct short reply; they're not really comparable cameras beyond being small. The GR's APS-C sensor can produce a richer and somewhat more detailed image than the RX's sensor under the right circumstances. It's operational features and options also present a very unique user interface. But its lack of an active viewfinder (except for the use of a passive 3rd party model), a non-articulating lcd, and a prime 28mm lens make the Ricoh a more limited camera than the RX.

I greatly enjoy my GR and am often taken aback by the quality of image it can record. But the RX is my go-to carry camera when I don't know what I might encounter.