Ok, I'm liking this big time. 24-600mm f2.4-4 lens, 1" 24mp sensor, 4k, mic input.

.
.
.
And only $1500
(official link to be updated)
Temp link:
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 III puts emphasis on lens reach and video capabilities: Digital Photography Review (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0414918604/sony-cyber-shot-dsc-rx10-iii-puts-emphasis-on-lens-reach-and-video-capabilities)

Seems like the MkII was just released yesterday.... New lens with 3 rings looks nice, not sure how often that long zoom will be usable, I'm not THAT steady! Overall, another nice addition to the RX line...

No built-in ND's. Maybe, maybe not; not listed in the Specs at DPReview however the previous versions were so equipped. Whatever, at that price and that lens it might be worth a look.

Ah, yes to ND's according to B&H. As with the original RX10 I imagine one needs to be aware that in strong winds the telescoping lens is susceptible to slight image degrading movement.

First Look: Sony DSC-RX10 III - YouTube

It's got SLOG-2 and SLOG-3. I wonder how they mapped the minimum ISO for that sensor. On the A7S-II they dropped the minimum ISO from 3200 to 1600. Currently the RX10-II is set for 800 ISO.

That 1 inch-type sensor is fairly noisy on SLOG-2 but for SLOG-3, it's probably going to look like a snow storm.

I dunno, looks interesting.

CT

The lens reach is 680mm in 4K video mode. There is 13.77-MP of the 17.7-MP in the 16/9 sector of the sensor, that is used to derive the 8.1-MP for 4K. It's not quite a full sensor readout. This leaves almost 4-MP of pixels unused around the margins. The smaller effective sensing size gives a greater magnification effect, than when shooting photos.It works out to about 71% of the 16:9 sector of the sensor being used for 4K. And that would be about 62.5% of the total 3:2-aspect sensor surface.

I don't see much problem in holding it steady at full zoom, as this is less than half as much reach as I'm accustomed to using in the Intelligent-Active video mode on my current camera. I always use a shoulder-mount or a monopod when shooting and many people would use a tripod. Even a short gripping-rod would make a big difference in steadiness.The Intelligent-Active image stabilization mode, that combines EIS progressively as the zoom goes out, with OIS, is not available for 4K. The hybrid EIS/OIS stabilization works only with 1080 or lesser frame sizes. When shooting 1080, you'd get 846mm of reach, due to the 1.41X magnification effect of the EIS, which makes the active sensor size less when zoomed-in.

So this camera when loaded, will weigh 2.33 lbs. There's some people in photo forums talking about how it's too heavy for them. Those who used (or still do) full-sized camcorders, at about 16 lbs., must be amused by this. When I had a Beta camcorder on a counter-weighted shoulder rig, it totaled 23 lbs. I remember shooting a trade union meeting with it, that lasted 2 hrs. & 15 min., with constant panning between the podium and audience. The next day, I got the needed parts and turned it into a standalone setup, with the 7 lbs. of the VTR in a wired bag on the floor or a chair.

So it's basically a rx10II but with a lens that has a longer reach? I still have the mark 1 and it's one of my favorite camera's to shoot run and gun style with during weddings, I only don't like the limited DR and the fact that the footage false apart in darker venues, it might be able to shoot at 12800iso but it's not a camera to shoot at those high iso's. Not sure who this camera is aimed at, considering they just released the mark 2 that already has a very usable focal length at a constant f-stop.

Woah!....just read on "Imaging-resource" that this RX10 does NOT have a video record time limit! ("in full HD mode")

What about 4k? If so, that's big bold game changer.

Waiting for confirmation of this.....

This capability in a bigger camcorder body with a fan for better cooling so that the processor can do UHD60P and it would be great and capable competitor to the Panasonic DVX200. As Cliff says not going to happen because of the impact on the FS5, PXW Z150 and X70

Ron Evans

I also wonder about the target market given that it is a relatively large heavy beast. At 1100 g for many, me included, it's hardly a handy walk-around cam. And the price is getting up there. I shan't be rushing to place an order as I did for the original RX10.

The other good news is that there is more and more competition in the smaller 4k capable consumer camera market. The recently announced Nikon 24-500 at nearly half the weight and price of the RX10 III looks much more interesting to me even though it has a little less reach. Performance, image quality, might be the deciding factor although thus far footage I have viewed from all the 4k cams looks just fine. I have yet to see anything better than I get out of my ancient, no fuss no bother, AX100. However the lighter Nikon with almost 50% more reach is appealing (on paper that is).

Great to see the competition increasing markedly for 4k capable cams and the performance convergence. Soon the customer will really be able to nitpick precisely what he/she wants based on ergonomics and suchlike knowing that 4k performance wise they are now becoming a very good pretty much of a muchness.

@John - yeah, the price starts to look a bit high, but it comes back to the lens - that's a lot of lens for the money, IF you want a long reach camera (and if not, there's the Mk2, which might come down a bit now). I've already picked 3-4 cameras that mostly sit around that would potentially be replaced by one of these, so it will be on my "hit list" to pick up when I find a deal.

Yep, it's "bigger" and "heavier", but it's livable - I've found I'm "wobbly" regardless of how much a cam weighs, though my preference is for lighter cameras! I'm sure I'll be able to stabilize this one just fine. Sony SHOULD have taken the opportunity to step up to the FM500 battery of the Alphas though, IMO. I actually think the taller "grip" will be easier to hold than the earlier models (my pinky passes right under the current grip).

Looked at the Nikon, and clearly the M3 is a shot across the bow on that model.... the only video I found of that model is a VERY sad low resolution promo, no actual output... would need to see actual output. I normally am not a photo snob, but the bokeh in the 6 "sample photos" was actually quite awful, and detracted from the pix, again, IMO, but seeing as typically I don't even care that much about "bokeh", it immediately stood out in a bad way. Competition is still a good thing!


@Cliff - we probably will need to wait for the manual to be online (if it's not already, I didn't find it in a quick search). If they take the record limit off, I'd probably move from the AX100, however reluctantly, but it would make the camera even more attractive!


@Ron - getting consistent reliable 60p 4K is likely another year or two - been fiddling with trying to get 4K 60p going for gaming, it's hit and miss at best. When it works, it's glorious, but not too many "whens" - if it's not the hardware, it's the software, most aggrivating! Once I started using lower shutter speeds with 30p, I've been happy with the results, even if I'd love to see the needed horsepower and bandwidth for 60p.... I'm sure we will see it, but the tech is not there yet - will also probably mean newer faster bigger memory too!


@Noa - I had the same reaction, but I also sometimes want a long reach zoom... this fits that "want". And provides a good reason to finally give up my "Mark1", which has been and remains a "favorite" camera... the Mark2 will remain as a lighter smaller "backup", or maybe it'll still get more use when I don't need "super" zoom! I do think this later generation sensor as introduced in the RX10II and RX100IV is a bit better than the first generation.... You'd probably find the Mark2 to be very comfortable and usable, and now the price should drop a bit <wink>.

I believe that the target market includes pros and advanced amateurs that shoot both stills and video, particularly for travel, and specifically where it is useful to avoid changing lenses in mirrorless cameras in outdoor environments.

Versions 1 and 2 of this camera had stills capabilities that camcorders did not have.

Versions 2 and now 3 have exceptional slow motion and ultra slow motion capabilities.

Bob Krist is arguably one of the finest travel photographers ever. Ever. For decades he specialized in stills for travel photography for some of the best travel magazines around. He used Nikon gear. He evolved into a hybrid photographer / videographer, again specializing in travel. He ended up switching to Sony mirrorless gear. Bob is evangelical about the RX10 in versions 1 and 2. You can see his beautiful video work on Vimeo.

I shoot more stills than video. A bit over a year ago, I traded / sold a very large pile of Canon gear for Sony gear. I currently have an A7S, a brand new A7R II, and I am in the process of selling my a6000 for an a6300. I now have all Sony native FE lenses, including the 16-35, the 70-200, the 24-70, the 16-70, and the exquisite Zeiss 55.

I seriously considered an RX10 II, but did not follow through because of the lens wobble during zooming issue. I have little need for the long reach of the RX10 III but would consider it if the lens wobble during zooming issue was solved in version 3.

Much angst has been expressed about poor battery life of Sony cameras. What is missed in this "tempest in a teapot" is the fact that the W batteries are small and cheap, and they work in all of these cameras:

RX10 (all versions)
A7 (all versions)
A7S (all versions)
A7R (all versions)
A6000 and A6300

Interesting point, Richard, about Bob Krist and his 'conversion' to Sony. I do have a somewhat different point of view, and I shall share it here. In my skeptical old age I avoid evangelists like the plague, especially if I suspect their back pocket is benefiting one way or another from their proselytizing. And I'm not saying Bob Krist is being rewarded, one way or another; I have no idea. Based on a quick look at his web site he is clearly not a bad photographer, presumably successful business-wise, though his thing is not my thing, and it doesn't matter does it; as always beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I do believe many of us here, and at other similar gathering places of gear-heads and suchlike, derive a measure of delight in selecting new gear. The process of buying a new camera - searching out specifications, what is said and what is not said, evaluating the hype both deserved and outrageous, justifying, fantasying, testing, comparing, and of course just good old talking about it as we do here, is rewarding in and of itself. If the process became like a visit to the medic who tells us 'you have such and such, here's a prescription, take one in the morning and one at night - next', and likewise if a Bob Krist type of expert told me after assessing my 'symptoms' you need such and such camera and such and such lens - I would feel just a little dismayed. I enjoy all the hoopla of selecting gear, weighing up the pros and cons, always knowing that the Noa's, Dave's, and all the other good fellows here (not too many females eh) needs will be different from mine, and vice versa. But the product information they share, and perhaps one might include Bob Krist in the mix, is generally very helpful but seldom sufficient partly because we all have different and evolving needs, and thankfully going back and forward, around and around, on and off about a piece of gear is par for the course, and we love it that way.

Even Peter Jackson enjoys fooling about with various bits of kit, so I'm told.

While my gear list is decidedly Sony heavy I am delighted to note the increasing competition, or should I say my new-found awareness of the competition. I absolutely don't need a new camera but I want one, again. And as well as Sony and their RX10 III this time Nikon and Panasonic are truly in the mix. I may well end up with the RX10 III (right now I think not) but not before thoroughly, deliberately and with great delight sizing up the non-Sony offering out there.

And I shall jolly well take my time about it too, no doubt repeatedly change my mind, and savor every moment.

All good fun for a retired layabout; keeps me off the streets.

Perhaps "evangelical" was not the best term to use. Perhaps you can skip the gear advice and just enjoy Bob Krist's work on Vimeo.

There are certainly many good camera choices these days, and one brand is not always best for everyone. I tend to stay with one brand as it simplifies my life (lenses, batteries, accessories). My progression was from Nikon (film) to Canon (digital), then adding Canon camcorders, and now to Sony (for both stills and video).

Everyone's mileage may vary.

I should add that the RX10 II and III have good audio features. Mic and headphone jacks and XLR capability with the shoe mounted Sony adaptor.

I seriously considered an RX10 II, but did not follow through because of the lens wobble during zooming issue.

I don't only have that issue on my mark 1 but also the following; the lens has gone back to it's previous position after I shutdown and restart the camera, it slowly lost focus while in manual focus over a period of 10 minute recording, the speed of general operation of any function has gone from normal to a crawling speed, I have had changes to image preset and white balance settings without me touching anything.

The most frustrating part of it all is that all these behaviors randomly appear and disappear so no way to claim warranty because when I send it back there is a high chance it will operate normally.

The rx10 is my most unreliable camera I have but yet I still like shooting with it :)

Noa - sounds frustrating. On the B&H Explora blog, they did an overview of version 3. In the comments section, I posed the question about lens wobble while zooming. Their answer was that they were hopeful, but that they did not yet have a physical sample to test. They will report when they do, presumably in the comments section.

@Noa - time to hunt up a lightly used M2, and leave the "haunted" M1 behind! I've held onto the "Mark1" as a backup, but I think it will now go towards a Mark3...

@Richard - you're correct that the smaller capacity battery is simply a matter of collecting a few more batteries, but one can dream of having a "little" more juice than the W series provides, especially for video (and doubly so if the clip limits are finally off!).

Also right on about the sort of user the RX's appeal to - if you shoot a mix of stills and video, like to "travel light", and yet want high quality images to work with, a lightly accessorized RX10 is a pretty potent package. I'm happy that a small sling bag holds an RX10, an RX100, batteries, circular polarizers and a basic flash diffuser (for the on camera flash on the RX10), plus a small folding bracket for stabilization.... I can drag along a Sirui footed monopod if I think I need it. A slightly larger bag, and I can add the AX100 and accessories.

With 4K all around, I'm good for most things I want, and adding in a couple smaller LED lights, and even low light doesn't worry me!

I seriously considered an RX10 II, but did not follow through because of the lens wobble during zooming issue. I have little need for the long reach of the RX10 III but would consider it if the lens wobble during zooming issue was solved in version 3.



I expect worst wobble zooming issue with the RX10III cause of the new size of the lens.

Wow, V3 I still use mine V1, however next to my A7s it's starting to look dated. Who can keep up any more with new cameras every other week now, I can't.

Cheers

Dave:

For W battery management, I use several of the Think Tank Photo battery cases for Canon batteries. I mark cases with a silver Sharpie with text "Charged" and "Spent". In the heat of battle, this helps me keep organized. I have attached photos.

For W battery management, I use several of the Think Tank Photo battery cases for Canon batteries. I mark cases with a silver Sharpie with text "Charged" and "Spent". In the heat of battle, this helps me keep organized.

I have all my W batteries numbered (Sony) or lettered (off-brand) and then I just go through the series, alternating between counting up and down depending on the day. They go into pockets of my camera bags with the labels up, then when they are spent they go in label down.

Matt:

My batteries are numbered also, but because I have so many batteries and because I am using them in three different cameras (possibly four in the future), I still need the "charged" and "spent" cases to keep things straight. Whatever works!

I use a similar system, one pocket in the sling bag is for "charged", another is where the empties go! It's all in having a system that keeps you on top of which is which.

For the smaller Sony batteries like the BX (RX100+ others), I try to use the plastic cases with the batteries placed one direction in relation to the hinge, and reversed when the battery is spent.


Since the lens design is all NEW, we will have to see if there is any wobble (I'd expect some, just because of the way still cam lenses are built). I know that seemed to traumatize some reviewers, but to me it's pretty much a non issue. Certainly not a "deal killer" on an otherwise highly useful "tool". People have differing expectations, I suppose.

People have differing expectations, I suppose.
The only ones I can imagine that don't have a issue with a wobbly zoom are the ones that only zoom to reframe and cut the zoom out in post. If you need a zoom t follow the action at a danceperfomance or some other sport, then this camera is not what you should be using, unless ofcourse they managed to take out the wobble but that I doubt.

...........unless ofcourse they managed to take out the wobble but that I doubt. Could it be that OIS takes care of the wobble so it doesn't have any effect on the video? I'm not suggesting for one minute it's a good state of affairs if that's the case!

Dave

The mark 2 also has OIS and that doesn't help either, I think the lens design makes it impossible to take away any play, I even think if you would use this camera in windy conditions with the lens all zoomed out that wind pushing against the lens would make the image shake. But I guess we have to wait until someone proves me wrong. :)

I expect worst wobble zooming issue with the RX10III cause of the new size of the lens.

I was doing a little testing with the RX10II (seeing how well the AX53 keeps up), and was taking a closer look at the "wobbling"....

Noticed that it seems to happen at specific points in the zoom range, repeatably, meaning it's mechanical. Having taken a few lenses apart, I realized that these little "jerks" are where the various internal elements are transitioning - where one element set stops moving, and the next one starts. It's a property of a typical "still" lens design where a small hiccup in the framing won't make much difference to the output. Of course it's a teensy bit noticeable (and annoying) to those who are taking 30-60 pictures a second....

SO, the thought came to me that these are predictable, and perhaps COULD be addressed in firmware to remove or reduce the effect at those points.... sort of an artificial enhancement of the image stabilization at known "problem" points.... This is speculative, but I'm pretty sure if there were sufficient complaints, Sony could address this using this approach.


That leaves the questions as to the RX10III lens - it's an entirely NEW design, so there is a chance that they might have worked the mechanical "kinks" out of the design, we will have to wait and see. If it does have the same "jerks", again, perhaps a bit of pressure on Sony to revise future lens designs to eliminate the mechanical "play" in the zoom mechs would be in order. OR a firmware fix.... either approach SHOULD be viable.


The wind related wobble, well, that might be a little trickier.... I've had weddings where there were high winds, and there was camera shake even with a stout tripod (that and horrible nearly unusable audio...). Can't fix "mother nature"....

as much as i'd be tempted to jump back into an RX, i'm even more curious what panasonic will supersede the FZ1000 with.

i've loved both the rx10 and fz1000, but leaned toward the fz for its longer reach and swivel screen. one thing is clear, my wallet is not safe this time of year

If the RX10III can zoom in and out wobble-free as most camcorders lenses do that would probably be the first I can think of for a stills camera lens of this zoom range.

True camcorders have inherent advantage in that their lenses are non-extending. The entire mass of optical elements of the lenses move, either in a circular hellicoid guided or straight rail action, on a fixed and solid support which is part of the structure of the camcorders' bodies themselves.

First thing I will try when this interesting camera comes out is to check if there's any wobble. Been fed up with those on all hybrid stills/video P&Ss and DSLR lenses for a long time now.

If the RX10III can zoom in and out wobble-free as most camcorders lenses do that would probably be the first I can think of for a stills camera lens of this zoom range.

True camcorders have inherent advantage in that their lenses are non-extending. The entire mass of optical elements of the lenses move, either in a circular hellicoid guided or straight rail action, on a fixed and solid support which is part of the structure of the camcorders' bodies themselves.

First thing I will try when this interesting camera comes out is to check if there's any wobble. Been fed up with those on all hybrid stills/video P&Ss and DSLR lenses for a long time now.

A main advantage of this type of lens action, is that the whole works is enclosed in a sealed, volume-neutral housing, that doesn't draw in dust-laden air from the outside. My first digital photo camera, the Olympus C-2100UZ, was built this way and avoided getting an ever-increasing amount of internal dust.

I was doing a little testing with the RX10II (seeing how well the AX53 keeps up), and was taking a closer look at the "wobbling"....

Noticed that it seems to happen at specific points in the zoom range, repeatably, meaning it's mechanical. Having taken a few lenses apart, I realized that these little "jerks" are where the various internal elements are transitioning - where one element set stops moving, and the next one starts. It's a property of a typical "still" lens design where a small hiccup in the framing won't make much difference to the output. Of course it's a teensy bit noticeable (and annoying) to those who are taking 30-60 pictures a second....

SO, the thought came to me that these are predictable, and perhaps COULD be addressed in firmware to remove or reduce the effect at those points.... sort of an artificial enhancement of the image stabilization at known "problem" points.... This is speculative, but I'm pretty sure if there were sufficient complaints, Sony could address this using this approach.


That leaves the questions as to the RX10III lens - it's an entirely NEW design, so there is a chance that they might have worked the mechanical "kinks" out of the design, we will have to wait and see. If it does have the same "jerks", again, perhaps a bit of pressure on Sony to revise future lens designs to eliminate the mechanical "play" in the zoom mechs would be in order. OR a firmware fix.... either approach SHOULD be viable.


The wind related wobble, well, that might be a little trickier.... I've had weddings where there were high winds, and there was camera shake even with a stout tripod (that and horrible nearly unusable audio...). Can't fix "mother nature"....

Dave, I can tell you that Sony has solved the lens wobble issue with the RX10III. There is no wobble anywhere in the new extended range from one end to the other. :)

The other thing that surprises me is how close in overall PQ the RX10III is to my A6300. I haven't tested outdoors in the sun yet where DR will be stressed, but thus far in the persistent cloudy/rainy weather we've had in N.Y., it's been very good.

Ken -

Good to hear! I suspected this was a "blank sheet" design that while in the same "family" as the earlier RX10's, might hold some surprises. Sounds like that is the case... I'll be selling off a few cameras I don't need and waiting patiently for a deal on a M3! Will be interested to hear more as you get to play with the new toy, good or bad! With the 30 minute limit hack (which I presume will work for the M3), this should be a very versatile camera alongside the good old AX100 and RX10II...

Yes, good to hear that Sony have finally achieved this no wobble holy grail on super zoom (or mid-range, depending how you look at it. Peole who own the likes of Nikon P900, Canon SX60 or Sony HX400V probably want to call it mid-range.) cameras. Now I'd be curious to know if when you are in the video mode and the AF set to continuous, does the lens hold focus throughout the zoom range? The lens doesn't have to be technically parfocal but the camera does have to have a very good and very responsive AF algorithm to use the AF system to instantaneously keep track of the focus to compensate for the shift due to the non-parfocal construction of the lens while you are zooming.

Most of my Sony consumer camcorders do well with respect to holding focus while zooming. And I also believe most or all of them don't have a parfocal zoom lens. That would be too costly and make the lenses a lot larger.

Ken posted a quick sample of the zoom range that might be helpful in answering that question - looks fairly good, and I'm guessing that once one adds "clear zoom", you'd have enough zoom range for most "superzoom" needs.... 1200mm effectively is probably enough for many people?

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-rx-cybershots-cx-series-camcorders/531797-rx10iii-demo-zoom-range-4k.html

Here is a test I did of the RX10 III 50x (1200mm eqiv) clear zoom in 4K UHD :
Quick 4K UHD Sony RX10 III 50x clear zoom test on Vimeo

Yes, good to hear that Sony have finally achieved this no wobble holy grail on super zoom (or mid-range, depending how you look at it. Peole who own the likes of Nikon P900, Canon SX60 or Sony HX400V probably want to call it mid-range.) cameras. Now I'd be curious to know if when you are in the video mode and the AF set to continuous, does the lens hold focus throughout the zoom range? The lens doesn't have to be technically parfocal but the camera does have to have a very good and very responsive AF algorithm to use the AF system to instantaneously keep track of the focus to compensate for the shift due to the non-parfocal construction of the lens while you are zooming.

Most of my Sony consumer camcorders do well with respect to holding focus while zooming. And I also believe most or all of them don't have a parfocal zoom lens. That would be too costly and make the lenses a lot larger.

Wacharapong, you nailed it! Although the camera is not advertised as 'parfocal', the RX10III holds focus very well throughout the zoom range. This actually surprised me a bit as I thought there would be some wonkiness as you approached the 400-600mm range. However that didn't happen.

Ken posted a quick sample of the zoom range that might be helpful in answering that question - looks fairly good, and I'm guessing that once one adds "clear zoom", you'd have enough zoom range for most "superzoom" needs.... 1200mm effectively is probably enough for many people?

http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/sony-rx-cybershots-cx-series-camcorders/531797-rx10iii-demo-zoom-range-4k.html

Thanks for reposting that Dave. Yes, with 'clear zoom', which is essentially visually transparent, you have an effective focal length of 1200mm. That's pretty nuts. Of course hand-holding at that focal length is an entirely different story.

Today was the first sunny day we've had in N.Y. since I bought the camera. I had my A6300 with me too and found the RX10III was extremely competitive. There was no discernible difference in resolution & sharpness on either my 5K iMac or 75" UHD TV.

What was more surprising to me was the focusing of the RX10III. I never expected it to keep up with the A6300, which has the best AF I've ever used in video mode. There were even a couple of shots where the focus hunted on the A6300 (an exceedingly rare event!!) and the RX10III was rock steady.

So far I'm very impressed with this camera, but we're still in the 'Honeymoon' period. :)

Ken, do you know what the f-stop is if it's wide open when the lens reaches 200mm? Just as a comparison with the mark 2 which keeps a constant f2.8 until that point
Also, when you keep the lens wide open at f2.4 and start to zoom, what is the focal length as soon as the f-stop reaches F4.0?
And one last, how much time does it take at the fastest zoom from wide open to tele?

I'm sure this camera will live long or die quickly solely because of its lens. If you go only by the specs, none in the market comes close when focal length, effective aperture (actual sensor size translated into % of FF 35mm equivalent) and size all come into consideration. The slow-mo feature is identical to what the Mk2 and the RX100IV have. So is the IQ in 4K. I used to shoot with the RX10 Mk1 (1st version, non 4K) awhile back and remember the 1080/25 as well as 1080/50p files out of the camera looking nice and clean if certain picture profile parameters were set right for the scenes. The 1080p for whatever reasons was superior to the 1080ps from the AX100E I have. Since the pocketable RX100IV shoots great 1080ps, both HFRs and regular frame rates, there's no reason this RX10Mk3 couldn't do the same.

Not sure it would sell well in the market since there have usually been 2 distinct groups of video or stills shooters who buy superzoom cameras. The real pros who use DSLRs with mega-buck super telephoto or long-zoom lenses e.g. 300mm f2.8, 400mm f2.8 up to 800mm f5.6 or 100-400mm, 200-500mm etc. and people like me who have the Sony HX400V (25-1200mm optical) and use any of the superzoom compacts in this category mostly just for the fun of getting the image the eyes can barely see.

The RX10Mk3 appears to fit neither of those groups price-wise. The price alone would probably turn off a lot of just-for-fun or even enthusiast shooters. The size and weight are another problem. Though any camera that had the Mk3's lens specs would not be considered too large or too heavy, the weight and size still bother me. 2 lbs 7oz vs 1 lbs 7oz for my smaller sensor and longer range HX400V, for instance. This one-lbs difference could buy me an additional CX760E camcorder I regularly use or an RX100IV in my backpack on my hiking or walking trips in remote locations. YMMV.

Allthough the IQ of these camera's can look really good under the right conditions my experience with the mark 1 is that the image falls apart when it gets darker which is why I never use the rx10 in a venue at weddings, here my panasonic GH camera's still outperform my rx10, not sure how much low light performance has been improved in the rx10 successors though.

Ken, do you know what the f-stop is if it's wide open when the lens reaches 200mm? Just as a comparison with the mark 2 which keeps a constant f2.8 until that point
Also, when you keep the lens wide open at f2.4 and start to zoom, what is the focal length as soon as the f-stop reaches F4.0?
And one last, how much time does it take at the fastest zoom from wide open to tele?

Noa, at 200mm the lens is at f4. However keep in mind that the low light is improved since the RX10 (at least as I recall my old RX10). So I suspect this improved low light has compensated at least to some degree, for the lack of a constant aperture lens. I can tell you the low light is very good. In fact the low light is definitely in the same ballpark as my A6300 with a comparable Sony f3.5-6.3 18-200mm lens attached.

In terms of zoom speed, when you are not recording, the lens goes to a full 600mm in about 2 seconds. While recording, that same travel to 600mm takes 6 seconds.

Hope that helps.

I'm sure this camera will live long or die quickly solely because of its lens. If you go only by the specs, none in the market comes close when focal length, effective aperture (actual sensor size translated into % of FF 35mm equivalent) and size all come into consideration. The slow-mo feature is identical to what the Mk2 and the RX100IV have. So is the IQ in 4K. I used to shoot with the RX10 Mk1 (1st version, non 4K) awhile back and remember the 1080/25 as well as 1080/50p files out of the camera looking nice and clean if certain picture profile parameters were set right for the scenes. The 1080p for whatever reasons was superior to the 1080ps from the AX100E I have. Since the pocketable RX100IV shoots great 1080ps, both HFRs and regular frame rates, there's no reason this RX10Mk3 couldn't do the same.

Not sure it would sell well in the market since there have usually been 2 distinct groups of video or stills shooters who buy superzoom cameras. The real pros who use DSLRs with mega-buck super telephoto or long-zoom lenses e.g. 300mm f2.8, 400mm f2.8 up to 800mm f5.6 or 100-400mm, 200-500mm etc. and people like me who have the Sony HX400V (25-1200mm optical) and use any of the superzoom compacts in this category mostly just for the fun of getting the image the eyes can barely see.

The RX10Mk3 appears to fit neither of those groups price-wise. The price alone would probably turn off a lot of just-for-fun or even enthusiast shooters. The size and weight are another problem. Though any camera that had the Mk3's lens specs would not be considered too large or too heavy, the weight and size still bother me. 2 lbs 7oz vs 1 lbs 7oz for my smaller sensor and longer range HX400V, for instance. This one-lbs difference could buy me an additional CX760E camcorder I regularly use or an RX100IV in my backpack on my hiking or walking trips in remote locations. YMMV.

Wacharapong, I think you're leaving out shooters like me, enthusiasts. We're not using this professionally, but we want excellent quality together with a really nice zoom, even if not generally taking advantage of that zoom. As I've said, I've compared 4K image quality to my A6300 and, surprisingly, it's extremely close in image quality. In fact, I have a hard time telling which 4K clip was shot from which camera...even on my 75" Sony UHD TV.

So even when not taking advantage of the really long reach of the lens, I'm enjoying some truly excellent 4K picture quality. Although the camera certainly is not light, I find it's very well balanced and ergonomically pleasurable to use.

Thx a lot Ken for this info, my rx10 mark 1 takes about 13 seconds from 200mm to 24mm which is almost useless and has been the cause of frustration and missed shots, even with this shortcoming and with the small jitters in the image when shooting handheld and at 200mm it was one of my main camera's used at weddings last year.

When I look at your zoom shot it also looks there are no small jitters in the image at full tele when shooting handheld, have you noticed these mini vibrations on a big screen? This would indicate they also have improved the stabilization.

When the RX10 mkIII is in video mode does the autofocus behave the same as the autofocus on camcorder. Yes I know it sounds like a stupid question however my last attempt with video was with my old Nikon DSLR which needed the shutter button pressed to change focus. I live in the Canadian Arctic and I am a couple thousand kilometers away from a camera store so laying my hands on cameras before buying is impossible. I have been a photographer for many many years and I am now wanting to attempt video once again.

My eyes are getting older so auto focus is really important in choosing a new camera. I am considering the RX 10 mkII and the Sony AX53 for mostly nature and wildlife photography/video.

Thanks in advance... living in a very remote location I find this forum to be a big help and it is where I get a lot of my camera information.

Thx a lot Ken for this info, my rx10 mark 1 takes about 13 seconds from 200mm to 24mm which is almost useless and has been the cause of frustration and missed shots, even with this shortcoming and with the small jitters in the image when shooting handheld and at 200mm it was one of my main camera's used at weddings last year.

When I look at your zoom shot it also looks there are no small jitters in the image at full tele when shooting handheld, have you noticed these mini vibrations on a big screen? This would indicate they also have improved the stabilization.

Noa, I do find it much improved over the prior RX models. About the only frustration I've ever had with my A6300, is the jitters at long focal lengths. That was one of the major motivations for buying the RX10III.

It's definitely more stable, even when watching on my 75" UHD screen. It's not 100% stable, but it's certainly better than the OIS in my 18-200 lens.

When the RX10 mkIII is in video mode does the autofocus behave the same as the autofocus on camcorder. Yes I know it sounds like a stupid question however my last attempt with video was with my old Nikon DSLR which needed the shutter button pressed to change focus. I live in the Canadian Arctic and I am a couple thousand kilometers away from a camera store so laying my hands on cameras before buying is impossible. I have been a photographer for many many years and I am now wanting to attempt video once again.

My eyes are getting older so auto focus is really important in choosing a new camera. I am considering the RX 10 mkII and the Sony AX53 for mostly nature and wildlife photography/video.

Thanks in advance... living in a very remote location I find this forum to be a big help and it is where I get a lot of my camera information.

Peter, it does behave like a camcorder in that sense. The AF is continuous and adjusts quite quickly to changes in subjects or subject distance. At the extreme end of the telephoto, 600mm, response is a bit slower, but still certainly acceptible.

Did I read correctly that this does 960fps at 1080???
Is that actual 1080 or some sort of half SD resolution scaled up to a 1080 output?

Scaled up, not looking very good at that frame rate but usable for, let's say 720p or 480p viewing.

When testing the AX53, it was good, but ultimately the 1" class sensors are just sharper.... so for me, the RX10M3 makes sense, and will fit with the other RX's and AX100. The new generation sensor seems to be better than the 1st gen one, never really sat down to try to get an exact comparison.

Yep, the RX10M3 will be heavier, but still lighter than a comparable DSLR, I have the RX100M4 if I need small and light, and probably will keep the RX10M2 around as a backup or when weight is a factor. Odds are good that my trusty old HX300 will be retired, the bottom line being image quality, presuming that the optics and 1200mm zoom (+digital) will cover most anything in the "extreme zoom" department..

I don't know if the jitters I got with the AX53 I was testing were a glitch, they seemed to be intermittent (maybe just got a bad sample?), but long zooms are ALWAYS going to be tough to stabilize. It is encouraging that it looks like Sony fine tuned the lens with the M3 to smooth it out.

On another note, is the fast/slow zoom setting still in the menus? I know that allows the M2 to zoom at full speed while recording, rather than being locked into the slow setting.