RX100 M3 still worth it in 2016?

nerwin

Been spending a lot of time on here!
Joined
Jan 31, 2015
Messages
3,790
Reaction score
2,066
Location
Vermont
Website
nickerwin.com
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
So I've been thinking about getting a compact camera to compliment my DSLR. I have thought about getting the X100s, but the video mode is useless and I want decent video with stabilization.

The RX100 M3 came out in mid 2014 and people are telling me to not bother and to get the Mark 4 instead...but its nearly double in price. I can get the RX100 M3 barely used on eBay for around $500! From what I can tell, the only real difference is that the M4 shoots in 4K video which I don't really care about right now. But other than that, they seem to be pretty much equal in terms of image quality.

So is the M3 still worth to get in 2016 or is there a better alternative? Or am I missing something?
 
Of all the different versions, 3 and 4 are the most similar. As you pointed out, the 4K is the biggest difference. There's also a small increase in ISO performance, frames per second (10 vs 16), faster shutter speed, and slower slow motion. But the M3 is already very good at all these things and can meet most people's needs. It's a great bargain.
 
The only other thing I see better is the viewfinder which is much more higher res than the RX100 M3. But probably not worth all the extra amount of money.
 
I have the M3 & M4. I purchased the M4 for the higher frame rate of 1080p 120fps and the 4K. The super slow motion of 1000fps was disappointing. It only records a few seconds and the quality is not there. But, the 1080p 120fps slowed to 10% is butter smooth. I have a bird slo-mo test on Flickr and a slo-mo dogs on Flickr & Vimeo. My last Mexico video was shot on the M3 with some GoPro time-lapse.

The M3 shoots great video and the photo quality is good too. The M4 does focus faster. I have not tested everything out on the M4 yet. I plan on taking video with it next trip to Mexico and will use the M3 for time-lapse. The battery will give you about 300 photos with time-lapse and surprising I shot video over 3 days and still had battery power.

I don't use the view finder. Actually I forget it is there because of shooting video blind in the bright sun and couldn't see the LCD screen on the GoPro or D70.

I got my M4 as an open box at Best Buy, a few hundred off. They sell this camera online only and people return to the stores. From what the clerk told me the store is penalized for having them in inventory so they price to sell. Check online for the camera and then check for Available Open Box. It will show if a store near you has one. I just kept checking every few days. You have 10 days to test it out for a full refund or 30 days depending on your membership status.
 
I think I might just go with the Nikon DL 24-85 instead of the RX100 M3. But who knows.
 
why? If you dont mind me asking?
 
why? If you dont mind me asking?

Well its only $646 and I was going to spend around $575 on the Sony RX100 M3. For a little bit more money, I get a new 2016 camera with better specs, 4K video, more dedicated controls and I'm sure it will have faster autofocus. Yes, it doesn't have a viewfinder, but its something I'll have deal with and I could always get the optional EVF because it has a hot shoe too!

Oh...don't forget the 1:1 macro mode!
 
why? If you dont mind me asking?

Well its only $646 and I was going to spend around $575 on the Sony RX100 M3. For a little bit more money, I get a new 2016 camera with better specs, 4K video, more dedicated controls and I'm sure it will have faster autofocus. Yes, it doesn't have a viewfinder, but its something I'll have deal with and I could always get the optional EVF because it has a hot shoe too!

Oh...don't forget the 1:1 macro mode!
hmm . i'd say take a look at the pics people took from each camera maybe you can find some unprocessed ones. See what you think of the color etc etc
 
why? If you dont mind me asking?

Well its only $646 and I was going to spend around $575 on the Sony RX100 M3. For a little bit more money, I get a new 2016 camera with better specs, 4K video, more dedicated controls and I'm sure it will have faster autofocus. Yes, it doesn't have a viewfinder, but its something I'll have deal with and I could always get the optional EVF because it has a hot shoe too!

Oh...don't forget the 1:1 macro mode!
hmm . i'd say take a look at the pics people took from each camera maybe you can find some unprocessed ones. See what you think of the color etc etc

Well nothing on the DL 24-85 yet since its so new. But its Nikon and so I expect the colors to be similar to my D610.

I have downloaded many raw files from the RX100 M3 and I am very pleased with them. Lightroom does a very nice job at processing those raw files, the fuji ones..not so much lol.
 
nerwin said:
why? If you dont mind me asking?

Well its only $646 and I was going to spend around $575 on the Sony RX100 M3. For a little bit more money, I get a new 2016 camera with better specs, 4K video, more dedicated controls and I'm sure it will have faster autofocus. Yes, it doesn't have a viewfinder, but its something I'll have deal with and I could always get the optional EVF because it has a hot shoe too!

Oh...don't forget the 1:1 macro mode!

One thing I learned over a decsde ago with a Canon PowerShot G3: once you hook up a POWERFUL flash unit to a smallish, compact camera that can shoot in RAW capture mode--that camera becomes infinitely, infinitely more capable. The ability to hook a speedlight, like your Canon 580EX-II, or your Nikon SB 800, to a compact camera's hotshoe opens a LOT of new doors. Having a hotshoe makes even a 15 year-old PowerShot a very capable camera.

The difference in how photos "look" when using off-camera flash is startling...there's no other way to put it. Built-in flash always looks like built-in flas-because that is exactly what it is. In the early 2000's, before d-slr's had dropped to below $1599, there was a period of a few years where people were using small, compact 2.5 to 4 MP digital P&S cameras with hotshoes, and off-camera lighting, and getting very nice images.

I'm not advocating any specific camera because I'm not really up on what model X offers over Model Y. Buying the "earlier gen_ model is always a money-saver, as is the refurbished (or returned) route.BestBuy is actually a pretty large camera retailer, with a good return/trial period policy, and one you can probably access even in rural Vermont within a 45-60 min. drive.
 
well, they both have a 1" sensor, so thats a wash.
the focal ranges are almost the same...a little longer on the nikon, but nothing significant.
you would have to compare other specs and see what fits you better.
I dont really care about the final numbers snapsort assigns the cameras they review, but I do like being able to see many of the features compared.
Compare the Nikon DL24-85 vs the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III
 
well, they both have a 1" sensor, so thats a wash.
the focal ranges are almost the same...a little longer on the nikon, but nothing significant.
you would have to compare other specs and see what fits you better.
I dont really care about the final numbers snapsort assigns the cameras they review, but I do like being able to see many of the features compared.
Compare the Nikon DL24-85 vs the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III

When I have the money to buy, then the decision will be made. But I don't have the money as of right now so I'm just going to save in the meantime and hopefully I can sell my macro lens. Who knows...my needs may change by then and I could end up getting something different haha.
 
well, they both have a 1" sensor, so thats a wash.
the focal ranges are almost the same...a little longer on the nikon, but nothing significant.
you would have to compare other specs and see what fits you better.
I dont really care about the final numbers snapsort assigns the cameras they review, but I do like being able to see many of the features compared.
Compare the Nikon DL24-85 vs the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III

When I have the money to buy, then the decision will be made. But I don't have the money as of right now so I'm just going to save in the meantime and hopefully I can sell my macro lens. Who knows...my needs may change by then and I could end up getting something different haha.
so you wasted all our time on this thread for nothing? Geez man money talks b.s. walks LMAO
 
I COULD HAVE had something important i could be doing.. OH wait, never mind. I got nothn
 
they both look really nice.
personally, for similar money I would opt for the Nikon just because its newer.
then again, Sony has proven they can really squeeze some quality out of smaller cameras.
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top