Looking at these two cameras on paper, the Sony RX100 III seems like the easy favorite. Yeah best camera in the world you trade $100, 30mm of zoom and a hot-shoe, but you gain a beautiful, high-resolution pop-up viewfinder and a much brighter lens at telephoto. It’s not the no-compromises, better-in-every-way difference between the RX100 and RX100 II, but it’s a big step up.
Fast Lens
We were blown away when Sony told us that they were able to drop the maximum aperture at 70mm from f/4.0 in the Mark I/II to f/2.8 in the Mark III while keeping the size of the lens constant. Even accounting for shaving off 30mm of zoom, this is a tough feat, and one that will give you the flexibility to better isolate your subject and shoot in lower light (f/2.8 will let you collect 2x as much light as at f/4.0). While we expected big tradeoffs in distortion or vignetting, we were happy to see Sony largely managed to maintain the optical quality of the RX line.
Faster processor
Sony also wowed us when they announced that the RX100 III would get the same BIONZ X processor found in Sony’s flagship mirrorless cameras, the A7 and A7R. This chip gives the RX100 III the processing power to offer cool features like a 120fps slow-motion video mode. Neither the Mark II nor the Mark III are speedy to turn on, but Sony boosted the RX100 III’s buffer significantly and Sony’s 10fps claims were supported in our testing: the Mark III is just a speedier camera overall. We also expected the beefier processor to improve noise levels while retaining detail in the out-of-camera JPEGs.
Similar image quality
Unfortunately, despite the $100 premium over the RX100 II, a refreshed sensor and the BIONZ X processor, we found no particular improvement in image quality. Instead, Sony appears to be applying more sharpening across the ISO range than it did on the Mark II, and manages to do so without the “halos” around high-contrast edges that sharpening usually creates. Overall there’s sharper detail but not without drawbacks.
It turns out that the RX100 III exhibits noticeably more noise at higher ISOs. Smooth areas that the RX100 II handled with aplomb become splotched and noisy, starting at ISO 1600, and deteriorating significantly at ISO 3200. This was a bit of a disappointment and tempered our RX100 III enthusiasm a bit. Call us spoiled, but we’ve come to expect big jumps in image quality from each new generation of Sony cameras.
Note, though, that the different noise/detail tradeoff Sony made with the RX100 III probably won’t be an issue if you’re a RAW shooter. We obviously can’t say for certain until RAW support is added to various programs for the RX100 III (for us, Adobe Camera Raw), but that’s a fairly safe prediction. And of course, the f/2.8 lens at telephoto means you should be able to shoot at ISO 1600 with the RX100 III when you’d need to push ISO to 3200 on the RX100 II to compensate for the slower f/4.0 aperture at that focal length.
Startlingly good electronic viewfinder
The single best feature of the camera was, for us, the built-in EVF. Not only is the RX100 III the smallest compact camera to offer a 1″ sensor, but it’s also one of the only compact cameras of its size to offer a built-in EVF. The image is bright and the resolution (at 1.44 million dots) is surprisingly high for such a small unit. Some photographers may lament the loss of a hot shoe, but we think the pop-up electronic viewfinder was a stroke of genius from Sony and well worth this compromise.
A video powerhouse, but with one big drawback
Sony impressed us with the RX10’s video prowess and we were happy to see the best of that camera filter down to the Mark III. One welcome addition to the Mark IIII that hasn’t gotten much attention is the built-in neutral density filter. Among other things, this can help you keep a large aperture when shooting video in direct sun, giving you a more cinematic subject isolation. Sony also added a fantastic stabilized video mode, giving your videos a professional, stabilized look, without having to crop in and reduce resolution in post. This is a big deal.
For us, though, the major coup was Sony’s addition of the XAVC S 50Mbps codec, which allows for incredibly clear, high quality video recording. Unfortunately, all these video features come with one giant drawback: that missing accessory hot-shoe means you can’t easily slap on an external mic. Even so, if you see yourself doing even a little bit of video work and you’re up in the air, the Mark III is the clear favorite.
Site Title 
Leave a comment