Thursday, July 31, 2014

15% Off All onOne Software Store Products until August 31, 2014

Thanks for attending my onOne Software webinar today!

Click here and enter the coupon code ronmart15 to save 15% off all products in the store including presets and eBooks, so load up your cart!

Here’s an example of how to use the code:

Click to see a full-size version

Conclusion

The video for the webinar will be here soon, so stay tuned! In the meantime, download a free trial to play around with the software or purchase using the links above today!

Other articles you may enjoy

If you enjoyed this article, you may also enjoy these:

Disclosure

If you make a purchase using links found in this article, I may make a commission. It doesn’t cost you a penny more, but it does help to support future articles like this.

NOTE: This site requires cookies and uses affiliate linking to sites that use cookies.

If you enjoyed this article, please support future articles like this by making a donation or saving money by using my discount coupon codes. Either way, your support is greatly appreciated!

This blog is intended for freelance writing and sharing of opinions and is not a representative of any of the companies whose links are provided on this site.

The opinions provided are of Ron Martinsen alone and do not reflect the view of any other entity

COMPARISON: Canon 16-35mm f/4L IS vs 16-35mm f/2.8L II


Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM Lens

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Lens

The Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM Lens gives users a sharp lens optimized for digital and image stabilization, so that might be enough for some to upgrade. I’d certainly do that if I had a 17-40mm f/4L, but would this new 16-35mm make me want to sell my 16-35mm f/2.8?

I’ve owned the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Lens for quite some time and I’ve always loved it. Not only was I pleased with the wide angle reach, I was always impressed with the in-camera color/contrast I got from this lens over any of my other lenses. While it wasn’t the sharpest lens I ever owned, it was plenty sharp enough and never let me down. However, all of Canon’s new L lenses that they’ve released since the 200mm f/2L was released have been razor sharp, so I had very high expectations about the quality of this lens.

Hands On Observations

Physically the biggest differences between the the newer f/4 and older 2.8 are the smaller filter size (77mm instead of 82mm for the 2.8) and a slightly less bulge at the end of the lens. Beyond that they are physically very similar.

The addition of IS on the f/4 is nice, but wide angle lenses rarely suffer from camera shake so unless you are dropping below 1/35 sec at 35mm or 1/16 sec at 16mm this isn’t going to be a super important feature. As a result, the addition of IS seems to be more motivated by marketing than necessity, but it’s nice to have there for slower handheld exposures. In my testing it worked fine both handheld and on at tripod for long exposures, so all is well. However, I can’t recall ever having a single shot with my old 2.8 that was blurry due to camera shake.

I did notice that the magical warm bias that was prevalent in the f/2.8 is gone from the f/4, so I’d describe this newer model as having a more neutral to cool color bias. RAW only shooters aren’t going to be impacted by this much, but those pros who count on getting things right in camera will have to spend a little time setting their white balance to match the warm magic of the old f/2.8.

Sharpness-wise, there’s no doubt that the new f/4 is super sharp when you pixel peep with test charts. In real world testing the sharpness at the edges of the frame when wide open on the older f/2.8 lens seems sharper at 16mm and softer at 35mm. Ironically, the inverse is the case for the f/4 which seems to be sharper in the center of the frame but softer at the edges at 16mm than the f/2.8, yet much better than the f/2.8 lens at 35mm. At f/11 both felt pretty evenly matched at the center, so my conclusion is that YES the new f/4 is sharper but not significantly enough to make it super obvious in real world usage.

Unedited Sample Snapshots

The following snapshots were taken during a casual walk with my family of 5 where I had a few seconds to snap some shots with this lens before I had to go back to being dad. What’s shown here are completely unedited in-camera JPEG’s (without in-camera peripheral illumination and distortion correction). These were all taken with a Canon 5D Mark III using the 16-35mm f/4L IS USM only.


f/5.6 @ 35 mm, 1/400, ISO 500, No Flash


f/5.6 @ 18 mm, 1/200, ISO 6400, No Flash

This was one of many cases where I shot into the sun and was pleased to see that the flare was under control. While some may prefer the flare highlights that were more common to the 16-35mm f/2.8L II, I prefer the flare to be contained as I saw here with the side of my lens getting a lot of direct sunlight.


f/22 @ 20 mm, 2s, ISO 100, No Flash

f/22 is totally usable on this lens. Yes you’ll get some diffraction issues from the camera, but people walking into your shot will more likely bother you than the results you get out of camera from this lens.


f/8 @ 35 mm, 1/200, ISO 100, No Flash

If you get up high as I did here (in a tour bus) you can avoid massive distortion by just keeping your camera parallel to the objects that you want to appear straight up and down.


f/7.1 @ 16 mm, 1/200, ISO 100, No Flash

Of course keeping parallel is often hard to do, so you’ll get some whacked out edges if you shoot at an angle. This is true of all wide angles, but full frame sensors definitely emphasize this problem.


f/8 @ 35 mm, 0.8s, ISO 100, No Flash

This was a shot taken with a manual focus on the building in the background. This was taken from a rooftop pool filled with kids where a longer lens was obviously needed, but I forced myself to only use the 16-35mm f/4 on this trip. I couldn’t resist taking a shot of such a cool with a crescent moon next to it.
f/9 @ 35 mm, 10s, ISO 100, No Flash

f/9 is still plenty sharp and 35mm gets rid of most of the distortion


f/9 @ 24 mm, 13s, ISO 100, No Flash

Like its predecessor, 24mm is the sweet spot in the zoom range from what I saw in my testing


f/10 @ 35 mm, 1/100, ISO 8000, No Flash

This is a sharp lens so even when the image starts to soften at higher ISO’s, there’s tons of detail left because this lens is so sharp


f/4 @ 35 mm, 1/200, ISO 1600, No Flash

You won’t get the same low depth of field shots with the f/4 like you will with the f/2.8, but I didn’t really find myself missing f/2.8 for this focal range.


f/11 @ 16 mm, 1/400, ISO 100, No Flash

The great thing about 16mm on a full frame is that you can get lot in the shot.
I was also pleased here that we didn’t get any flare.


f/11 @ 24 mm, 1/500, ISO 1000, No Flash

Wide angles are fun for portraits to get the subject and environment in the same shot. This lens really shines when photographing people. Notice the detail in the hair and shirt.

Visit http://photos.ronmartblog.com/lens/canon/16-35mmf4l for more sample photos.

Bookshelf

When placed on a tripod with mirror lockup and a timer release some of the real world observations I’ve previously made are more apparent. You can see a full gallery of bookshelf images to compare at http://photos.ronmartblog.com/lens/canon/16-35mm28vs4. However, I’ve pulled a couple aside here to discuss. Click the images to see the full-size unedited in-camera JPEG. The lenses were so close in size that I didn’t have to move the camera when switching lenses.


16-35mm f/4L IS at f/5.6 @ 16 mm, 8s, ISO 100, No Flash

Click the image above to see the full size version of the f/4 shown on the left below.

f/4 (left) is no doubt sharper than the f/2.8 (right)
100% crop of the two bookshelf shots in this section
f/4 (left) is no doubt sharper than the f/2.8 (right),
but notice how the f/2.8 has a more natural warm tone in-camera

Click the image below to see the full size version of the f/2.8 shown on the right above.


16-35mm f/2.8L at f/5.6 @ 16 mm, 8s, ISO 100, No Flash

Feel free to download all of the bookshelf comparison images at http://photos.ronmartblog.com/lens/canon/16-35mm28vs4 for your pixel peeping pleasure, but please delete them when you are done viewing.

Conclusion

If I was a 17-40mm f/4L owner I’d probably upgrade to this lens because I’ve always preferred the 16-35mm range over the 17-40mm range. More importantly though, the 17-40 is a great lens, but it’s not a razor sharp lens like the new 16-35mm f/4L IS, so it’s certainly going to be a compelling option. In this article I focused more on the 16-35mm f/2.8L II vs the new f/4 because that’s the audience that will have a harder time deciding if they give up f/2.8 for a sharper f/4 version with IS. For me the answer will be no, simply because I prefer the color I get from the 2.8 and the sharpness difference isn’t enough to warrant a change. If I were buying my first wide angle zoom then I’d definitely go for the new 16-35mm f/4L IS over the more expensive yet softer 16-35mm f/2.8L.

Where to order

Click here to learn more or order the Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM Lens on the B&H web site. Click here to learn more or order the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Lens.

Other articles you may enjoy

If you enjoyed this article, you may also enjoy these:

Disclosure

If you make a purchase using links found in this article, I may make a commission. It doesn’t cost you a penny more, but it does help to support future articles like this.

NOTE: This site requires cookies and uses affiliate linking to sites that use cookies.

If you enjoyed this article, please support future articles like this by making a donation or saving money by using my discount coupon codes. Either way, your support is greatly appreciated!

This blog is intended for freelance writing and sharing of opinions and is not a representative of any of the companies whose links are provided on this site.

The opinions provided are of Ron Martinsen alone and do not reflect the view of any other entity

Tuesday, July 22, 2014

Sony RX100 III - The Best Quality Point and Shoot I’ve Ever Tested (Review Part II of II)

Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100 III Digital Camera - Selfie Mode
Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100 III Digital Camera - Selfie Mode

This is my third time reviewing a Sony RX100 series camera and I’ve reviewed quite a few Sony’s over the years. I always fall in love with the size and sexiness of the RX100’s, yet I always find myself at the end of the review feeling a bit underwhelmed thinking – is that it?

Don’t get me wrong, this is an excellent camera, but I immediately ask myself “for nearly $800 price tag (at the time this was originally written), is this really the best bang for the buck?” With that in mind, I did a search on B&H on July 21, 2014 to see what else is out there for the $800 – $900 USD range:

Canon EOS Rebel SL1 DSLR Camera with 18-55mm Lens Deluxe Kit
Canon EOS Rebel SL1 DSLR Camera with 18-55mm Lens Deluxe Kit

Probably a better video camera, but bulky and only native ISO 6400

Nikon D5300 DSLR Camera with 18-55mm Lens
Nikon D5300 DSLR Camera with 18-55mm Lens

Good camera with great features, but it’s bulky and this is definitely no Zeiss lens

Nikon 1 J4 Mirrorless Digital Camera with 10-30mm and 30-110mm Lenses
Nikon 1 J4 Mirrorless Digital Camera with 10-30mm and 30-110mm Lenses

While these always underwhelm me too, at least you get decent interchangeable lenses

Nikon 1 V2 Mirrorless Digital Camera with 1 NIKKOR VR 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens Kit
Nikon 1 V2 Mirrorless Digital Camera with 1 NIKKOR VR 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens Kit

Definitely more my style than he J4, but bulky and last gen technology

Canon EOS Rebel T5i DSLR Camera Kit with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 and 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III Lenses
Canon EOS Rebel T5i DSLR Camera Kit with EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 and 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6 III Lenses
This is a pretty good camera with great video performance, but alas still bulky

Leica D-Lux 6 Edition 100 Digital Camera
Leica D-Lux 6 Edition 100 Digital Camera

Sexy, small and a Leica – hum, do we have a contender?

Fujifilm X-E2 Mirrorless Camera Body Only
Fujifilm X-E2 Mirrorless Camera Body Only

Definitely better than the Sony, but you still need lenses and they aren’t cheap!

In this search, I definitely felt that only the Leica 100 stood a chance at really comparing well against all the things that make the Sony RX100’s great – including size. I haven’t reviewed that one yet, so I could be wrong, but it’s clear that this Sony is Leica priced!

The answer is that if you start comparing size and features, there’s a lot of great choices that are significantly less than the RX100 III. This begs the question that when you ignore price, what else is really a viable alternative to the Sony RX100 III, and funny enough one of the best answer is the previous generation Sony RX100 series which are now much more affordable!

RX100 ($498 on July 21, 2014)
RX100 ($498 on July 21, 2014)

See my RX100 Review

RX100 II ($649 on July 21, 2014)
RX100 II ($649 on July 21, 2014)

See my RX100 II Review

There’s also other great cameras like the Fujifilm X20, Canon G16, Canon s120, and so much more in the sub $800 price range. So this begs the question – is the Sony RX100 III really worth nearly $800 when even it’s own predecessors are so similar and cheaper?

Image Quality

Now that I’ve beaten the price issue to death, let’s talk about the RX100 III vs its predecessors and the competition when it comes to image quality.

The image quality of this sensor is excellent for its size, but like its predecessors the in-camera noise reduction is pretty aggressive. At higher ISO’s it does a much better job than previous versions but I still I felt compelled to disable it for most (not all) of my bookshelf tests so you can see detail captured by the sensor.

The gallery contains a sample of images with and without noise reduction so you can better assess the image quality. For me, I prefer to do my own noise reduction with a product like Noiseware and then sharpen the images myself afterwards. Naturally, if you only process the RAW images you’ll do something similar too (even if it is just Lightroom/ACR only noise reduction).

With that said, here’s a close up of an image with noise reduction at ISO 125 that shows that this is a pretty decent point and shoot:

image
Click here for the full-size original

That’s pretty darn good for a camera that can easily fit in a top pocket or purse, so the next question becomes – how about high ISO performance? Well here’s what you get with noise reduction turned on at ISO 6400 (12,800 is pretty gnarly):

 f/2.8 @ 8.8 mm, 1/15, ISO 6400, Noise Reduction On - Click for full size original
 f/2.8 @ 8.8 mm, 1/15, ISO 6400, Noise Reduction On - Click for full size original

f/2.8 @ 8.8 mm, 1/15, ISO 6400, Noise Reduction OFF - Click for full size original
f/2.8 @ 8.8 mm, 1/15, ISO 6400, Noise Reduction OFF - Click for full size original


At web sites like 580x387 above or click to see 800x533,
you'll certainly be pleased with the results
ISO 6400 f/2.8 @8.8 mm, 1/15, ISO 640, Noise Reduction ON

However, pixel peepers will probably feel like ISO 3200 is as high as they want to go. That’s pretty good for a point and shoot, so I feel confident that most will be pleased with the image quality of this camera. The Zeiss lens is good too, so if that’s important to you then perhaps it’s worth the price.

To see more real world images, please be sure to see the first part of this review here.

Compared to the RX100 II and RX100

In my pixel peeping of all of my files on these three cameras I’ve noticed that the RX100 III has a much brighter and sharper lens which results in shorter exposure times and much more crisp images. This becomes significantly noticeable at full zoomed in, so the RX100 III is without question the sharpness king of the three.

I definitely think that the RX100 III is the best “all things considered” version of the RX100’s yet. Sony keeps taking a great formula and refining it with customer feedback to make it even better. Improvements like the full tilt display that allows selfies and a battery saving electronic viewfinder are sure to please to RX100 fans, and the image quality is definitely impressive for its size.

Conclusion

While I do struggle with the price, you are getting best of class performance for the premium price. If you just can’t get yourself to spend that much money, but love the compact size then consider now more affordable previous generation Sony RX100’s. They were great cameras that were overpriced at the time that I reviewed them, but now they are much more inline with the competition. In real world usage scenarios (i.e., small prints and mostly web size usage) I think some will have rather saved the extra $200 – $400, but for the pixel peepers the RX100 III will be your best bet. 

I will say that the image quality is certainly significantly better than my x20, the LF1, XQ1 or G16. If you are trying to decide between those then know that the RX100 III is the hands down image quality winner. It’s also much SIGNIFICANTLY better than the competition at video too. It’s no DSLR or mirrorless camera killer, but it is very good.

For those who also can stomach a larger form factor, I think you’ll be much happier with a mirrorless or fixed lens big sensor camera when you do image overall quality comparisons.

In the end Sony has created something that is outstanding for the size – if you can afford it. As a result, I have to recommend it as the best compact camera I’ve reviewed at the time this article was written.

Where to order

Click here to learn more or order on the B&H web site. You can also save some money by ordering the cheaper Sony RX100 or RX100 II and still get a great camera.

Other articles you may enjoy

If you enjoyed this article, you may also enjoy these articles:

Disclosure

If you make a purchase using links found in this article, I may make a commission. It doesn’t cost you a penny more, but it does help to support future articles like this.

NOTE: This site requires cookies and uses affiliate linking to sites that use cookies.

If you enjoyed this article, please support future articles like this by making a donation or saving money by using my discount coupon codes. Either way, your support is greatly appreciated!

This blog is intended for freelance writing and sharing of opinions and is not a representative of any of the companies whose links are provided on this site.

The opinions provided are of Ron Martinsen alone and do not reflect the view of any other entity

Thursday, July 17, 2014

Topaz Remask 50% Off Only $34.99 til July 31st!

Click here and use the coupon code julyremask to save 50%! To learn more, check out my Remask review.

Disclosure

If you make a purchase using links found in this article, I may make a commission. It doesn’t cost you a penny more, but it does help to support future articles like this.

NOTE: This site requires cookies and uses affiliate linking to sites that use cookies.

If you enjoyed this article, please support future articles like this by making a donation or saving money by using my discount coupon codes. Either way, your support is greatly appreciated!

This blog is intended for freelance writing and sharing of opinions and is not a representative of any of the companies whose links are provided on this site.

The opinions provided are of Ron Martinsen alone and do not reflect the view of any other entity

REVIEW: Sony RX100 III–Part I (includes Real World Shots)

Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100 III Digital Camera
Sony Cybershot DSC-RX100 III Digital Camera

I’ve reviewed the first Sony RX100 and the Sony RX100 II, and I liked both of them – but not enough to buy one. While the form factor was excellent, I struggled with the price and was frustrated by its default shutter speed choices (which often were too long to get a crisp shot). In the end, they were both a camera I loved but couldn’t bring myself to buy. Would the third time be a charm? Would this be the one that made me bite the bullet and get one? Read on to find out.

What’s new at a glance

There’s other sites that get into all of the details, but fundamentally there’s tome minor improvements in the sensor and the lens which in theory improve quality. As you read my review you can refer to my earlier reviews and see if you agree. Yes, this camera takes nice images, but I never got that “on my gosh, this is waaaay better” feeling. Perhaps my bookshelf tests in the next installment might make me feel different.

What I did like right off the bat was the improvement to the tilt feature of the LCD which now allows for 180 degree tilt which means selfie’s are now possible while looking at a live LCD preview. While I’m not a big selfie person, young couples and mom’s shared their frustration with me that the previous RX 100 models didn’t allow this functionality. Now mom can get her shot with the baby when dad’s at work, and best friends at the night club can get selfies complete with live previews of any attempted photo bombs.

Beyond this there’s some video performance improves and the inclusion of an integrated ND filter, but the thing that will get the most attention is the new pop up electronic viewfinder shown in illustration format here:

0.39" 1,440k-dot SVGA OLED Tru-Finder has Zeiss T*-coated optics
0.39" 1,440k-dot SVGA OLED Tru-Finder has Zeiss T*-coated optics

This actually works well thanks to a diopter which allows you to fine tune it for your vision. The quality is quite good and feels as natural as the rear LCD. What’s more, it uses a lot less battery life so it makes a great option when the battery starts getting low (which was a problem I never had in normal usage).

First Thoughts

While the menus haven’t improved to my liking, it was good to see that they are very familiar from other models like the a7/a7R. Features like zebra pattern and focus peaking work the same way, so people committed to the Sony platform will love this camera.

Of all of the camera systems I’ve tested, my least favorite user interface design comes from Sony. Sadly that opinion wasn’t changed here, but with the flexibility to program buttons to do what you want results in a camera that’s usable. I’d still like a “Q” menu that more closely mirrors what Canon, Nikon and Fujifilm do with their quick menus, but Sony does try with their mini version.

I still found focus point and mode adjustments cumbersome, but programming quick access to these helped. I also saw the classic Sony problem of the camera having a love affair with 1/30 sec (which if you shoot anything that moves then odds are it will be blurry). Sadly manual mode is the only solution as Sony still hasn’t implemented a minimum shutter speed or alternate feature for Aperture Priority and Program Mode to prevent this annoying behavior.

The LCD screen is as you would expect from Sony – excellent. In fact, it is so good that often times your image will look so good on the screen that you think you’ve got a fantastic shot but when you get it on your computer you realize that it wasn’t as razor sharp as you thought. What’s more, Sony hasn’t done anything to improve its built-in noise reduction feature, so it will make a nasty mess doing noise reduction on higher ISO images. As a result, I still strongly recommend users turn OFF noise reduction when using this camera and save that process for external products like Noiseware for the best results. I didn’t do that for the images below, but for any personal images I care about the in-camera noise reduction here gets turned off.

The weight and size of this camera have increased, but it isn’t going to be very noticeable to most people. It’s still an outstanding size and not unreasonably heavy in my opinion, but it’s a few ounces heavier than some of the competition so if you put it in your shorts pocket you better wear a belt!

Overall there’s lots of great photography features and geek features like the ability to install apps, do wireless image transfer and NFC. This and above average image quality and fast performance make this a camera that is very capable and enjoyable to use, which is why I’ve really enjoyed its predecessors as well as this latest version. If you bought or were tempted by previous versions of the RX100, you’ll most certainly appreciate this version which is without question the best version yet.

Real World Sample Images (Part I of II)

As always, these images ALL RIGHTS RESERVED (yes, even the lame ones <g>). You may not save, edit, print, redistribute or otherwise use them without expressed written permission.

The full set of images are available at http://photos.ronmartblog.com/sony/rx100iii, but below are a few that I wanted to bring to your attention. Click the image for the original in-camera JPEG version and view using the gallery to see EXIF information. All major settings were camera defaults unless otherwise mentioned. In most cases I’m using Aperture Priority or Intelligent Auto modes with camera defaults and Auto White Balance (except the more orange looking cave shots below where I chose Cloudy White Balance).


f/2.2 @ 8.8 mm, 1/30, ISO 125, No Flash

Definitely take the time to click the image above for the full size original so you can appreciate the level of detail this sensor will capture. The detail and dynamic range are outstanding from this camera at lower ISO’s.


f/2.8 @ 8.8 mm, 1/100, ISO 400, No Flash

While it’s tough to get a good shot of my son who bounces around like Tigger, I thought this shot had beautiful color and skin tones with great detail and bokeh for a camera of this size. Shots like this quickly reminded me why I loved the previous RX100’s I reviewed so much.


f/4 @ 8.82 mm, 1/160, ISO 125, No Flash

In this tough mixed light shot, this camera does a very admirable job of retaining detail in the shadows without blowing out the whites too bad.


f/2 @ 8.8 mm, 1/30, ISO 125, No Flash

This is a great example of one of those shots that the viewfinder made look so good that I thought I nailed the shot, but upon closer inspection I blew it. I quickly was reminded how important it is to zoom in on your shots with the camera before calling a shot “done”.


f/2.8 @ 25.7 mm, 1/80, ISO 250, No Flash

Despite being back lit, my wife was happy with how this camera handled those situations. Even the shadow areas of my oldest sons left eye under his hat turned out okay in the “Superior Auto” mode we used here. Unfortunately though, the focus and sharpness aren’t that great when you zoom in.


f/2.8 @ 15.31 mm, 1/125, ISO 640, No Flash

Thanks to the small sensor you get a lot of depth of field even at f/2.8


f/2.5 @ 10.51 mm, 1/125, ISO 800, No Flash

In-camera color is very accurate with only a small tasteful amount of color enhancements


f/1.8 @ 8.8 mm, 1/320, ISO 125, No Flash

The shadow detail is extremely impressive from this camera, so the Dynamic Range Optimizer feature did a great job with this difficult lighting condition


f/2.8 @ 21.79 mm, 1/125, ISO 125, No Flash

From the texture of the skin, to the detail in the eyelashes, I was very impressed with the Zeiss lens on this camera. The bokeh was also very good for this size sensor at f/2.8.


f/2.8 @ 14.3 mm, 1/40, ISO 4000, No Flash

Shooting handheld in a cave using my wife’s iPhone 5s gave us lots of blurry and poorly exposed images with terrible color, but I was impressed with how well the Sony did. The in-camera noise reduction made the camera look worse than it really was but shooting RAW+JPEG gave me the option to fix that using the raw image.


f/1.8 @ 8.8 mm, 1/500, ISO 3200, No Flash

Panos haven’t changed from the predecessor, but my test unit frequently gave me a grey bar at the end of the pano no matter how slow or fast I went when shooting.


f/1.8 @ 8.8 mm, 1/13, ISO 800, No Flash

The color is different for this shot because I used the Hand held twilight SCN mode feature which reverted back to AWB. It did an okay job and managed to stay at ISO 800 for this shot.


f/2.8 @ 23.53 mm, 1/20, ISO 6400, No Flash

While the noise reduction really destroyed a lot of detail in this shot, this camera did an admirable job (for a handheld shot(with the camera resting on a round pipe-like railing)

I’ll have more images in the next installment, but hopefully you can see that this is certainly better than your average cell phone or point and shoot. Yes, there’s a reason why this camera is expensive, despite its size, but will that be enough to convince me to ditch my x20?

Conclusion

See part II - Sony RX100 III - The Best Quality Point and Shoot I’ve Ever Tested (Review Part II of II).

Where to order

Click here to learn more or order the Sony RX100 III on the B&H web site.

Other articles you may enjoy

If you enjoyed this article, you may also enjoy these:

Disclosure

If you make a purchase using links found in this article, I may make a commission. It doesn’t cost you a penny more, but it does help to support future articles like this.

NOTE: This site requires cookies and uses affiliate linking to sites that use cookies.

If you enjoyed this article, please support future articles like this by making a donation or saving money by using my discount coupon codes. Either way, your support is greatly appreciated!

This blog is intended for freelance writing and sharing of opinions and is not a representative of any of the companies whose links are provided on this site.

The opinions provided are of Ron Martinsen alone and do not reflect the view of any other entity