Sony RX1R vs RX1R II vs RX1R III hands on with the latest rip off

[Andrew Reid]

Here at a camera store in Berlin we have the 3 musketeers.

2012 vintage RX1R OG, the one without the AA filter.

It's very nice and I can't understand why it only goes for $900 used. Because it's got a much better lens than the Leica Q.

No red dot though.

RX1R II, the one with the tilt screen, phase-detect AF and pop-up EVF. It also shoots 120p, albeit no 4K. It also has a further innovation - the AA filter can be switched on and off.

This was Sony when they felt they needed to catch up with Canon and Nikon by really pushing the boat out. 2014-2015 vintage Sony. The $2000 mint condition used RX1R II is reasonably rare but when you do find one, it's still cheaper than the Leica Q OG and closer to the Leica Q2 in terms of image quality.

The pop-up EVF is mechanically a thing of beauty and offers a big field of view. Although without a rubberised eye cup, it isn't the most ergonomic or comfortable.

So to the new one, the one with the 10 year gap.

Sony have made sure to price it so that nobody buys one, which is good because they want you all to buy E mount lenses.

Just to summarise the street prices:

RX1R: $800-900 used

RX1R II: $2k used

RX1R III: $5100 / 4900 euro

The lens is identical to the previous cameras.

Which is fine to be honest, but I had more issues with the AF in macro mode on the RX1R III vs II. Weird.

I also dislike the finish and build quality, doesn't feel as premium. It feels a bit like the A7CR. Not great and nowhere near a Leica and the RX1R II also feels more premium. I do prefer the buttons though on the new camera, they are raised for a more tactile feel.

Gone is the pop-up EVF, in place of it a smaller standard one. The resolution of the live-view feed is better, but the overall optic is worse and more pokey.

Gone is the articulated screen. Which is a really weird one.

In comes a fatter battery - very welcome.

4K is there with no crop in 24p/25p... However, there's no IBIS or even OIS, which is a downer.

The AEL button has changed to an AF-ON... Again a welcome change, because the first two models had no back-button AF at all. Well done Sony.

So if you're looking for a full frame compact, the first two models are a steal.

I got the RX1R II again.

I regretted selling it the first time out!

[MrSMW]

I’m not sure what Sony are thinking lately after the FX2 and now this, but neither have been very well received.

We still seem to be in an era where camera companies are only partially listening…and then sticking two fingers up at their customers.

They will probably turn it all around in a few months with their next couple of launches and all those who hopped over to Nikon or Lumix recently, will lurch back to Sony.

Or maybe in our community we only see things from our relatively small bubble and the greater consumer mass couldn’t care less?

[eatstoomuchjam]

I think that the elephant in the room at this point, at least in the US, is that camera vendors were already overcharging for the newest models - and now tariffs are pushing them to the point of just plain unaffordable.  Fuji's price increases hit today - the GFX 100 II went from $7,500 to $8,300.  GFX 100RF just went from $4,900 to $5,400 - making it now more expensive than the RX100 III, though still not by a lot.

It seems likely that a bunch of manufacturers will boost prices all over the world to maintain some consistency and to force the rest of the world to at least partially finance the US tariffs (which is probably one of the reasons that the Sony is so expensive everywhere).

If so, I wouldn't be surprised if that's a thing that reduces camera system changes and greatly decreases new camera purchases...  also since the US economy is already starting to show signs of distress due to poor management from the current administration.

[MrSMW]

Without being too flippant, tariffs etc aside, I wouldn't buy this new Sony at above 2.5k and even then, I'd rather have the older 'middle' one.

Is anybody actually seriously interested in this camera?

I know there are people out there, (about 3 of them), stating, "I don't want no stinking floppy screen or IBIS, just give me a photo camera", but surely even they, and dentists, will baulk at 5k for one of these?

It's a tiny bit bigger and a little heavier, but a used Leica Q3 can be had for the same money. 8k, flip screen, IBIS, wider and faster lens, is a Leica not a Sony...

[MrSMW]

Speaking of Q3's, there are 5x 28mm and 11x 43mm  for sale on MPB.eu, so obviously a lot of folks have bought and off-loaded them.

I *might* be tempted myself with a used 43 next season...

I will have been in the industry 26 years and only owned one Leica, a crop TL and it stopped working so I sent it back for a refund, but the 43 ticks pretty much every box for me other than what it costs.

I might just treat myself if I can make the business case for it stick...

[Django]

10 hours ago, MrSMW said:

I’m not sure what Sony are thinking lately after the FX2 and now this, but neither have been very well received.

We still seem to be in an era where camera companies are only partially listening…and then sticking two fingers up at their customers.

They will probably turn it all around in a few months with their next couple of launches and all those who hopped over to Nikon or Lumix recently, will lurch back to Sony.

Or maybe in our community we only see things from our relatively small bubble and the greater consumer mass couldn’t care less?

I don't think neither this RX or FX2 is aimed at consumer mass. RX has always been compact premium even if you can now find the ageing models at bargain pricing. I think the negative reception is actually from seeing things in a vacuum of saturated camera releases. Not trying to defend Sony here, they are clearly stagnating with incremental releases and recycled tech.. and the pricing doesn't match the expectations. That said I think the online reception has been bit unfair with FX2 dismissing it completely because it crops 4K60p etc. Also strangely to me, the tilt EVF has been redeemed by some as useless! Oddly videographers and even photographers (including yourself I believe) have abandoned EVF shooting in favour of display shooting. To each their own and clearly that's become the norm maybe thanks to smartphone habits, but for me, and I guess I'm a minority, that tilt EVF is brilliant and something unique and missing in the mirrorless world. So for that alone I give Sony a round of applause. Now if they could gives us open gate, internal RAW etc across the FX line, now that would be serious game changer..

[MrSMW]

I quite like the FX2 myself and but for a couple of things, came close to buildings system around it, but when it came down to it, for my needs, L Mount just had more for me at this time.

I’m pretty sure that by the end of the year they (Sony) will have redeemed themselves plus if Nikon make some of the rumored moves with RED as some expect, the momentum will shift once again, as it always does.

Canon seem to be the quiet one right now…

[Django]

5 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

I quite like the FX2 myself and but for a couple of things, came close to buildings system around it, but when it came down to it, for my needs, L Mount just had more for me at this time.

I’m pretty sure that by the end of the year they (Sony) will have redeemed themselves plus if Nikon make some of the rumored moves with RED as some expect, the momentum will shift once again, as it always does.

Canon seem to be the quiet one right now…

Canon's quietly building a full spectrum system: RF hybrids, Cinema EOS, bridging bodies like the R5C, and now smart hybrid lenses + the V line. Less hype, more ecosystem thinking.

Nikon is I indeed in the strongest position since acquiring RED to really blow our socks off with whatever is coming.

The one brand I’d like to see step up in video is Fuji. The XH2S was a strong start, would love to see that concept pushed further. I know they’ve got that Eterna GFX high end cine cam, but something in between would hit a sweet spot. 

[Snowfun]

There is a tendency here to equate “I can’t afford it” or “it’s not what I need” or  “I don’t like it” to  “it’s too expensive” or “it’s useless” or “why?”. These are very different. This camera will sell - to those who can afford it and for whom it does what is wanted and who are attracted to the form factor, build and features.  Notice how it is already being mentioned in the same sentence as the Q. That is already a win for Sony. Maybe not for “us” but I suspect that buyers are certainly out there. Including potential Q buyers. I’d have been a bit tempted but I’ve recently streamlined into a non-Sony system (more on this later when the rest of the new kit arrives!). 

[eatstoomuchjam]

6 hours ago, Snowfun said:

There is a tendency here to equate “I can’t afford it” or “it’s not what I need” or  “I don’t like it” to  “it’s too expensive” or “it’s useless” or “why?”. These are very different. This camera will sell - to those who can afford it and for whom it does what is wanted and who are attracted to the form factor, build and features.  Notice how it is already being mentioned in the same sentence as the Q. That is already a win for Sony. Maybe not for “us” but I suspect that buyers are certainly out there. Including potential Q buyers. I’d have been a bit tempted but I’ve recently streamlined into a non-Sony system (more on this later when the rest of the new kit arrives!). 

This whole thing is a really silly take.

I can absolutely afford the RX1R Mark III and I can also say it's too expensive and there's no way I'd buy it at that price.

And being mentioned in the same sentence as the Q is not a win when the sentence is "this damn thing is nearly as expensive as the Q, but isn't even a Leica."  Otherwise, Fuji could just kick up the price on the X Half to $6,500 and enjoy that sweet victory.

Obviously some people are going to buy the RX1R III.  That was never in doubt.  There are always some people who will pay any price for something they want.  That's not to say that it's priceworthy.

[MrSMW]

14 hours ago, eatstoomuchjam said:

And being mentioned in the same sentence as the Q is not a win when the sentence is "this damn thing is nearly as expensive as the Q, but isn't even a Leica."

Same as VW pricing a Golf the same as a Porsche and calling that a win. Err no, you have simply over-priced something massively that is not at the same level.

This is not a pissing contest and I only used the Q3 as context, but IMO the Sony only beats the Leica in 3 areas which are; it is smaller and lighter, it has a higher res LCD and it’s AF will be better.

Having said that, the Leica is over-priced IMO, but then you expect that with Leicas.

It’s more a case of when you compare the RX1Riii against the A7CR and the A7RV it really shows how nuts the price is.

Sony have a ton of small lenses and IMO the A7CR at half the price is a MUCH better option. 

The only thing about the A7CR that really bothered me wss they cheaped out on the LCD and tipped me towards the A7RV.

And yes, the A7RV and anything with an interchangeable lens is a slightly different prospect, but still very realistic competitive options.

I hope Lumix bring out something similar, - a rangefinderesque type body, either fixed lens or interchangeable because within L Mount we ‘only’ have manual focus M’s or e:shutter only FP/L’s and the massively expensive Q’s.

S1Rii spec in an FP/Q3 body for around 3k?

As long as they don’t do anything stupid like drop IBIS and preferably has the fully articulated LCD, done deal and dream camera for me.