24mm is a blessing. 28 at times can be a bit tight. Sure its only 4mm but that is a good starting point for a point and shoot. Wonder how much it will cost. The M1 was 650, the M2 was 750. Hopefully this one is not 800+ but it just might be....

Admin,

You mentioned below that you have the full specs. That was 12 hours ago. Why don't you just post it?

WTF? yeah, spill the beans man. You mean we've been sitting waiting for news and you know stuff?

4 and a half hours to go -- I hope it's announced on time!

no no . it will be on 1 may , so about 28 hours to go

Ah right, dam I'm one day ahead of myself -- Doh!

I dont know but the GX1 Mk II has a sensor that is 2x the area of 1" sensors (1 stop), 24-120mm equiv. with an actual f/2-3.9...

So that's like having f/1.4-2.8 on a rx100 series with the lens going from 24-120 instead of 70.

Any reasons why the rx100 iii is worth this much excitement over the gx1 mk ii?

moreover, RX100 iii is supposed to have builtin EVF, whereas for G1X II they have additional one which is looks like tumor and significantly reduces its pocketability.

The Sony is considerably smaller , and though the Canon sensor is larger it is of an older design with almost 2 stops poorer DR and only a third of a stop better high ISO. The equivalence argument while true ,only works if the larger sensor has a large enough advantage at high ISO to allow for the use of increased high ISO to for example maintain a shutterspeed etc.

http://camerasize.com/compa...

Smaller. I have a DSLR with a bunch of lenses that cover 24-120 range too, if size doesn't matter.

The GX1 is F'ugly in comparison.

Half the size, about only a third loss in high iso performance. Quite a different category.

I'm very glad to see Sony add 24mm - the FoV just has so much more impact than 28mm. More that you might think, given the difference is only 4mm.

And I don't mind loosing 30mm from the far end. Again, despite the number (30), it's far *less* significant than you might think.

For example, set your RX100 to the 100mm FoV. Look at what is in the frame. Now, set the RX100 to 70mm. Take 3 large steps forward, and look what is in the frame.

I fell off a cliff last time I took 3 large steps forward steps , never again lol

Yeah, the 4mm make a big difference. Can't imagine my RX10 starting at 28mm, too restrictive in tight spaces.

True, Wide angle is better for this awesome camera to become potential landscape camera, which I wanted to be on my RX100M2. for 100mm? no problem.. just shoot 70mm @ 2.8 which is better and then crop abit. (only slight quality lose and more DOF)

So it's 11 p.m. on the east coast, 6 hours from a really big launch and there isn't a leaked photo? even some grainy fuzzy shot taken by a cell phone to show that stuff actually is coming, I'm going to sleep

If its on May 1st, as Admin says, then its in 29 hours, not 5... Today is still 29th in USA, 30th morning in London. Announcement is on May 1st, 10am London time

Seems like a worthy upgrade to my RX100. Faster lens. Wider angle. Wifi. EVF. Tilt LCD. A bit of crop/digital zoom for tele.

A77II I'm very curious about. Will I be able to shoot videos with audio levels? Without the extra crop? Will settings work in different modes? A77 was a very good camera with bugs. Same thing with bugs fixed... might be worth an upgrade. A bit more shooting speed and DR? Not so much.

Does the current a77 not show audio levels? The a99 does (they can be adjusted with the silent wheel while recording), I'd be surprised if the a77II does not.

Then you'd be surprised.

Sadly, it does not. And they cannot be adjusted.

"I'll be surprised if the a77II does not." Sony has since learned something and fixed it in the a99, so...we'll see soon enough.

Its a BIG mistake if the lens stops at 70mm. Especially for what they are probably going to charge for the camera.

Well 70mm/f2.8 is not that revolutionary though... But it's fine for a 1 Year cycle upgrade.

I think I'll be selling my RX100Mk2. Nah, it's still a great camera. I do want the Mark III though. Sony is doing wonders in the RX line.

Awesome. Really hoping this camera has XAVCs and SLOG2. No longer buying a camera unless there is legitimate improvement in the video capabilities, not some silly marginal alleged improvement that most people can't see unless looking at the image at 100%. A better codec and dramatically more dynamic range would represent real improvement.

Hidden EVF?

Out'ta sight man!

This is just bad news to me, if true. Even more reason to have 2 versions of RX100 - each with different lens types. I'd choose slower + more/longer zoom range.

Then do so. Go buy the RX100/ii (likely at a discount when this comes out).

Yeah and who wants a mk2 when the 3 is out? Anyway it would be a good way for them to measure demand too - see which lens version sells better.

"Yeah and who wants a mk2 when the 3 is out?"

You do. Or are you only interesting in having the latest gadget and not the correct lens on it that you want?

I want both, just as those that prefer a wider, faster range get with the Mk3. My point is more choice would be better...why not? If mk3 really is a 24-70 lens then the already low-versatility rx100 becomes even less so and my argument gets stronger.

see my post above about the gx1 mk ii

Whew I am really happy to hear this. I was KICKING myself for buying an M2 this weekend then learning that the M3 is just around the corner. Now it looks like the M3 is not really a big upgrade over the M2 given the shorter lens range. That 2.8 doesn't seem as impressive considering it's at 70mm. If they managed 1.8-2.8 from 28-100 I would've returned the M2 I just bought and held off for the M3. As it stands now I feel like I have the better camera for my needs.

Personally I'd much rather have the extra 30 on the long end than an extra 4 on the wide.

The other thing is, You can easily crop/digital zoom to get that reach. You can't make a wider image (well, I suppose you COULD stitch/pano).

What is the RX100ii at 70mm? I'm guessing within the same range, the M3 will be faster at every focal length.

It is 3.2

On my RX100 it shows F4 at that zoom setting. So the M3 would be 1 stop better.

As Stan points out, f/4. Once this thing is out, we will see for sure if it's faster through their shared range. I would guess that is the case, though.

No it is not. Its F4 on both M1 and M2 versions
http://www.dpreview.com/rev...
http://www.dpreview.com/rev...

About the different rumors : 24-70 or 28-100, you know the trick : saying different things to different people, and waiting to see which information leaks, in order to identify who talked too much...

so smart thinking of u

you got it! :)

What are these numbers that keep being posted? What actually appears on the front of the lens? On the RX100 it is F1.8-4.9 10.4-37.1 If posting the FF equivilent that means nothing to me.

You are some weird kind of troll. Ever head of standards?

Nah, trolling a troll isn't really trolling.

since there are a lot of cameras with diffrent sensor size the FF equivalent give you a consistent FOV number to compare without needing to do the math of the crop factor .

overall it's a good thing , and you always can didvide the FF eq by the crop factor to get the original lens mm

Which you are going to volunteer to do if it's so easy, right?

Of course, it is easy. It is primary school stuff. Arithmetics.